Album Rating: 3.5

You're too nice Eric. You wrote a good review, stand by it.

BigHans- to be honest I think this is one of the best reviews I've ever written (coming from a guy who knows he's ridiculously overrated as a reviewer by many of the userbase... which can actually spur problems like these but that's a different story). I stand by that. I think it's very strong. Though, I also see where some of these guys are coming from, and I'd like to address their complaints, because I think I can explain them.

Here's my bits, man - so you don't have to go back and forth. The second quote was basically a quaification of the first, and is a defense of my CTtS review and your latest.

something that does confuse me... you vehemently criticised my last review for 'not backing up it's points', but then you take a similar generalised look at this album. I think my arguments were at least as realised as yours.

I don't understand that particular criticism (about backing points up). There seems to be a trend on here that says you must give an exhaustive breakdown of an album; effectively a track-by-track - just one that pretends not to be. I read a lot of professional reviews and they're always generalised with just flashes of detail. I think that allows a writer to more fully describe the feel of an album, which is infinitely better than 'The riff at 2.04 is fucking amazing!!!'

If this was the only review then it might not be that useful, but as an addition to the existing ones, and for people familiar with the album (which it seems aimed towards) it does what it sets out to do perfectly well.

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

My points of contention:



The namedropping seems elitist, but it's not a huge detractor from the review.



Your hypocrisy about criticizing both my review (and it seems Jewel's too) for not having enough examples of our problems with the album in question (CTTS for myself and Jewel) when you yourself omit talking about the album almost entirely. If I was an Emery newb, I would have no idea what this album sounds like, especially if I didn't know any of the semi-obscure bands you cited.

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

Hey look! Another Emery thread!

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

Stop that.

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

OK sorry, I'll be nice... no more humping...

Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off

You're still doing it, damnit.

Album Rating: 3.0 | Sound Off

Well excuse me for having a strong-moving pelvis! It's not my fault my father is Duffman!

i'm taking a pic of this shit.

ok I'll get to you two first, with similar complaints... first ConsiderPhelbas:

first of all, I wouldn't say I 'vehemently' criticized your review, I really didn't hate your review, it was the whole CTTS movement that I found so annoying. I mistakenly took out some of my gripes with the CTTS thing on your review and Emim's. No, they weren't badly written reviews. What I disliked was that they were piggy-backing on the movement thing... like there were already, due to a million pg thread, these set things that people decided to hate on CTTS for and really drove it into the ground. don't get me wrong, I'm not saying your or their observations are incorrect at all, they were just annoying. and in that sense, im sorry, I was a bit misguided. CP, I just re-read your review and you backed up your points fairly well, which I feel I did here too. I know it seems I'm back-tracking here because it's convenient , but I hope you'll accept a little apology for misplacing my annoyances. The things I really didn't like about the review were more so the timing and the fact that I felt it brought very very little new to the table (except that 'In Drew's world...' part, that was honestly gold I loved that), but either way, it was a fair review, and I'm sorry I went off a little on you and got bitter, it wasn't deserved-- it was the CTTS movement I really found kinda idiotic, but your review should not have been my scapegoat for that.

Also, thanks for clarifying earlier about the 'few points but strong points' thing in my review, I appreciated that.

And now Emim...

Album Rating: 4.5

it was the CTTS movement I really found kinda idiotic



I feel ya. This as well as the "TMF OMG WE'RE AN INTERNET MOB" is pretty fucking annoying and is only contributing to spam on here.

Emim:

first point))

If you think the name-dropping is 'elitist' then I feel you're missing one of my main points. I'm not trying to patronize you, sorry if it sounds like I am, but I thought it was obvious why they're there-- they're critical to my point of Emery being a dumbed-down version of its predecessors, hence the predecessors are important to the review. The fact that so many of the people here complaining about the review (not all, but most) haven't heard these and are big Emery fans proves my point a little, as elitist as it may seem. Of course Emery doesn't seem watered down to you, because you haven't heard much of what came before it. Sorry for the huge generalization, but refer to the review for a more complete point there.

second point...

Emim: I explained most of the misunderstanding in Jewel's answer, and I re-read your review too. Honestly, I still feel like the whole '"it's just not good because I don't like it or I don't get it" argument doesn't really cut it, which is evident in your review but not Jewel's. We already went through this through shoutboxes, and I feel we were at an understanding. By calling my name-dropping 'elitist,' it tells me that you probably didn't pick up on one of my main points, which I feel I backed up pretty well in the review.

If I were an Emery newb...

well, this review wasn't written as a way for people to find out about Emery. It was written as a response to the unwarranted hype that surrounds this band while bands like Hawthorne Heights get berated endlessly. It was written as an alternative to the other reviews, which I feel, for the most part, aren't very fair.

Album Rating: 4.5

Emery is much less of a cliche then Hawthorne Heights.

ALSO:


haha seriously guys?! 14 pages, and not one person (excluding maybe chan) has tried to counter my points about the quality of the music, but instead make personal attacks or, more prevalently, attacks on my intentions behind the review or the way in which I made my points???!!!


that's pretty ridiculous, or did I miss some?

I mean seriously. guys. c'mon.

this is Sputnik

not a single comment on the music. not one. I mean maybe my review was super-dooper contentious but NO Emery fans could stick up for the band by saying something good about the music or dispute my points in a way that doesn't include personal attacks or regarding my intentions, etc. ok il stop talking.

to people saying I did this for attention: I wrote this no more for attention than I write random new release reviews for attention. stop trying to guess my intentions without any basis, please. I can't make any of you believe me, but if you really have to know, here's a few reasons I wrote the review...

1. It had a few '5' reviews, and another '4' one. I have a differing point of view that many on the site share, and I wanted to write a review to personify these feelings that many have. (probably biggest reason)
2. I genuinely enjoy writing negative reviews every once in a while. AND, I never try to write negatives (anymore) for unknown bands (just a little thing of mine) so I usually end up writing negatives for bands that are well-regarded on Sputnik that I don't feel deserve it. (Margot, BTS's one album, Bat For Lashes, a few others). Negative reviews here and there, I feel, make me a better writer, kinda keep writing sharp.
3. It's a different, more interesting analyzation process than, say, a '4' review which are relatively easy to write.
4. I feel I had some good points to be made that aren't usually brought up.
5. For attention (because everyone who posts a review on a website is looking for some kind of attention), but just as much as everyone else is looking for. not trying to be an attention whore.
6. some of the other reviews, besides my disagreements, I felt weren't all that well-written.
7. Emery sucks.

these are kinda in order. hope that clears a few things up maybe.

Looking back at my thread I see that your criticism of backing my points up was brief and it was in fact the timing that you reacted to strongly, so I was wrong to say that. So much got said in that thread it got muddled in my mind. I'd been planning to do the review after reappraising the record but the timing came about on a whim - I did intend to needle the album's fanboys by having another front page review but it went beyond that demographic and I regretted it eventually, as the argument was enveloped by the timing. I'm glad you can see some quality in the points I make in it, and I agree that your review makes its points well - very well, in fact. I don't hold even the slightest grudge about you venting your frustrations on my review, as I got caught up in the whole timing thing too, and I wrote the damn thing!

I feel ya. This as well as the "TMF OMG WE'RE AN INTERNET MOB" is pretty fucking annoying and is only contributing to spam on here.