PDA

View Full Version : New Rules/Criteria for Reviews: Suggestion thread. [contribute!]


sting-ray
11-27-2003, 06:33 PM
I want to make the rules more clear for everyone, and also make some new suggestions/criteria for review-making. We want to get the most out of our reviews since we cant make two threads of the same CD. So just post what you look for in a review or some rules that people, in your mind, should follow. I will only pick the most appropriate ones and enforce them.

Thank-you.

Zappa
11-27-2003, 07:37 PM
I think that reviewers could save a lot of time if they would consider how helpful reviewing individual tracks actually is. I think that a lot of albums have a similar sound throughout, and describing the minute details of each song doesn't really give any better an idea to readers as to whether they would like it or not. For many albums a basic idea of the album's sound is sufficient. I just don't think anyone is reading and saying "I don't usually like thrash metal, but they said that this one song has a bass intro, so I think I'll buy it just for that." On the other side of the coin, if an album has some tracks that are in stark contrast with each other, and one description won't apply to the entire album, individual song reviews is really nice. I think the basic focus of this forum should be to share with others your opinions on albums that the people HAVEN'T heard before. If someone already has an album, a review doesn't do much for them. Basically, I think that all reviews should be written as if the audience has no previous idea of what the band or album is like, not as a means of showing off how many obscure trivia facts you know about an album that is new to no one.

Agrotath
11-27-2003, 08:50 PM
:wave: You should make an announcement, saying,"Follow the rules or leave; read now" ANd tell anyone who makes a violation to (re)read the rules.

JAStewart
11-28-2003, 01:50 AM
Although its good that were getting so many reviews I think that people should focus on more underground bands that people haven't heard of (because I'm guessing that most people have heard Green Day CD's).

Quite a few of my reviews are of bands unknown (Consumed etc) and I think that it helps to promote your favourite underground bands.

I think that, like Zappa said, Ttrack reviews for the CD is great! Thy Troopers "Alice In Chains - Dirt" review was excellent because he put in the track...however...some people may argue that this is too long and boring to type out, so I dont know..

robnathanson
11-28-2003, 07:47 AM
Originally posted by JAStewart
Although its good that were getting so many reviews I think that people should focus on more underground bands that people haven't heard of (because I'm guessing that most people have heard Green Day CD's).

Quite a few of my reviews are of bands unknown (Consumed etc) and I think that it helps to promote your favourite underground bands.

I think that, like Zappa said, Ttrack reviews for the CD is great! Thy Troopers "Alice In Chains - Dirt" review was excellent because he put in the track...however...some people may argue that this is too long and boring to type out, so I dont know..


very true, however, some people may be iffy about buying certain cd's from certain bands, and may want to hear what other people have to say. I think you are right, in the sense that YES we do need underground CDs being reviewed, but we also need the mainstream ones too.

And track by track is annoying to type out and read, but it helps get a better fuller understanding of the track. If it's like my RATM review, which is long and repetitive, then the track by track can be cut in lieu of some other form of musicial description for the whole album.

-Rob

Scythe404
11-28-2003, 11:49 AM
We should measure an albums quality by x/10 instead of x/5.

Mekkalayakay
11-28-2003, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by JAStewart


I think that, like Zappa said, Ttrack reviews for the CD is great! Thy Troopers "Alice In Chains - Dirt" review was excellent because he put in the track...however...some people may argue that this is too long and boring to type out, so I dont know..

I agree. When reviewing a CD, you should do track reviews also. It gives you a better perspective of what you are going to be listening to.

And if people feel that it is too long to type out, then they simply shouldn't do the review at all. Since we can only do one thread for each album, we need good reviews, and I feel that good reviews should be long and informative.

JmE
11-28-2003, 07:59 PM
It wasn't that bad, I did MCIS, which has 28 tracks, as a full-length track review. If you actually know what you are talking about, it's not a problem. I agree, track by track reviews should be done. It allows someone to get a better feel for the atmosphere of an album, and whether or not they just want to download a song or two off of it.

Bartender
11-28-2003, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by Scythe404
We should measure an albums quality by x/10 instead of x/5.

I'll second that - I think x/10 gives more flexibility to the reviewer in what they can award (awarding 4.5/5 just seems strange to me, whereas 9/10 just seems more "right").

I personally like track by track...it should be left up to the reviewer's choice, but if tracks are very simlar, then apart from noting that they are separate tracks, nothing much needs to be written separately for the later track.

As for mainstream vs underground...I think lesser known reviews is probably the better way to go, but mainstream/better known reviews shouldn't be excluded - for example, I always thought Lateralus was fairly well known, and I only wrote the review because it was requested, I liked the album, and Kaden was gonna do a review of NIN for me, but theres been 2 people gone to the trouble of posting that now they're considering buying the CD, when they hadn't before, even though they'd been (presumably) aware that it existed.

sting-ray
11-28-2003, 08:53 PM
I thoroughly agree with the track-by-track and/or notable tracks; it will soon become an official criterian of reviewing. After all more in-depth info. = more valuable review.

- bartender has the right idea... I will not encourage to keep mainstream albims out of this.

RollerQueen
11-28-2003, 08:55 PM
I think people should be much more thorough on their examinations and harsher on rating an album. I mentioned this in my SDRE review, but giving an album a 5/5 should mean the album is essential for music, that it's changed music and can stand the test of time without sounding too dated. I have nothing against most of the bands reviewed, but most of the ones given a 5/5 by the reviewer aren't deserving. I feel that if a cd has a 5/5, it's for a damn good reason, that the album can be bought by anyone without hearing anything off it and enjoy it. Blink's new album is certainly good and a step up from their other material, both musically and lyrically, but it's far from a classic or essential (even with Robert Smith singing a track :)) or deserving of a 4.75. A 4, maybe, but not 4.75. Less Than Jake's Hello Rockview wasn't groundbreaking. It deserved maybe a 3/5. Black Sabbath's Paranoid deserved the 5/5 as they are the fathers of a large musical genre.

Reviews are far too subjective. Albeit music is very subjective, not everyone is into ska, and Hello Rockview isn't going to change their minds, let alone change music. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm ranting, but I think people are being misled by personal opinions and relative measures in music. It's understandable if you want to rate individual songs relatively, like the best song on the album getting a 10 and the rest of the cd graded according to that, but it's misleading to give out a 5/5 or even a 4/5 on albums that simply don't deserve them.

And that's all I have to say about that.

sting-ray
11-28-2003, 08:59 PM
^ yes, I'm working to improve the rating system.




- i'll unstick this thread, maybe more people will read it.

Bartender
11-28-2003, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by RollerQueen


Reviews are far too subjective. Albeit music is very subjective, not everyone is into ska, and Hello Rockview isn't going to change their minds, let alone change music. I'm sorry if it seems like I'm ranting, but I think people are being misled by personal opinions and relative measures in music. It's understandable if you want to rate individual songs relatively, like the best song on the album getting a 10 and the rest of the cd graded according to that, but it's misleading to give out a 5/5 or even a 4/5 on albums that simply don't deserve them.

And that's all I have to say about that.

I agree with the point of people over-rating albums, but at the same time its totally impossible to have a review that isn't subjective - thats practically the point of reviews.

On a related kind of note, I don't like (for example) too much ska-punk. I could listen to a ska punk band, and recognise that they have talent (eg the drummer/guitarist is competent etc), but I wouldn't really be able to rate the album, as regardless of the talent, the music does nothing for me. Reviews need to be written by people who like the type of music on the album, otherwise you get uninformed reviews. At the same time though, the reviewer needs to be sensible (as you said) and not give an album just because they like, or its got their favourite songs on it, etc.

Kithkin
11-28-2003, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by RollerQueen
Everything about the rating.

I agree entirly

If it has a 5/5 it had better be mindblowingly good. A must own... even outside of the genre. Something that could change the opinion of someone who didnt like the genre(Still going with ska, Streetlight Manifesto's Everything Went Numb and Catch 22's Keasby Nights)

A 4/5 would be Exceptional within the Genre. Something good for introducing someone to the genre but probably wouldnt change their mind about it. (Operation Ivy, Bosstones)

3/5 would be something someone who likes the genre should probably pick up (Less than Jake, Reel Big Fish)

2/5 would be something someone who is diehard for the genre should at least know about (Potshot, Assorted Jellybeans)

1/5 terrible terrible stuff. (No Ca$h)

sting-ray
12-01-2003, 03:23 PM
i was away for 2 days. I will post the new criteria and possibly make a new "rules" thread shortly.

sweboy
12-01-2003, 03:33 PM
The best form of rating system is a scale from 1-100. (mostly used with a % sign after... :cool: ). But i dont think that that would work here, becouse of different reasons, so i'll say a 1-5 system. (even though 1-10 would be a bit better... ;))

And also, i think it needs to be more known that you actually can review a cd even though someone already did it. I mean, the purpose of this forum is to get different people's views on cd, and the more reviews a cd gets (in the same thread, of course) the better.

sting-ray
12-01-2003, 05:37 PM
1. The rating system will stay as is (out of 5). Kithkin has a very good scale posted, and i will prolly use it.

2. Multiple reviews will be accepted as long as they're in the same thread.

thats all that i have decided on..... for now

- any problems with the rules, reviews, etc. should be posted in this thread.

robnathanson
12-01-2003, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by sting-ray
2. Multiple reviews will be accepted as long as they're in the same thread.




that is a very good idea, but what upsets me is when people make a new thread. I know this cannot be stopped, and my complaining is useless, but hey, It's my opinion, and I want to state it!

Kithkin
12-02-2003, 11:13 AM
When i see something that shouldnt be here I delete it

In other forums I close things usually.

But here there is no reason to keep it around.

sting-ray
12-02-2003, 11:50 AM
thats right, i put an announcement (if anybody read it) that explained that posts and threads will be deleted if they dont follow the criteria/rules.


- something else: if the review is not formated properly (eg. no genre, no album name, etc.), it will be deleted; the rules = not
very flexible.

- i might not be on here as often as i usually am for the next couple of days (i'll still be on everyday), since my home internet is going to be upgraded (to high-speed).

- So thats that. Thread closed.