Album Rating: 3.5

This and I Killed The Prom Queens new album are good fun. The year of generic metalcore at its finest.

Album Rating: 2.5

Yeah fair enough guys, first time i've really written about anything musically wise but I was pretty good at English in school so I guess i've just gotta learn how to not make novice mistakes :p

Will change up the first paragraph, cheers for the help!



Sorry if that part sounded like your review Chuckles, didn't even realize man

Album Rating: 2.5

There, what do y'all think?

Album Rating: 2.0

gay album

Album Rating: 3.5

Oh wow, you really did change it quite a bit. It's much better, but there's still quite a bit of glaring stuff. more "first review" type issues than just really horrid stuff like before haha, but I'll give you some feedback.



The first paragraph is serving exactly the purpose it needs to now. Architects has indeed been quite the diverse band, and giving the context in which this album is appearing is important. Aside from some wordings that are pretty awkward (and that really doesn't matter so much, you'll learn with time how to word things better), the main thing is that you end it on "with mixed results". This really contrasts with the rest of your mostly glowing review and the score you give the album (4.5, which is just shy of perfection). "Mixed results" implies you think the album is meh. You should change that last sentence to better reflect your true feelings on the album.



The second paragraph has some typos and grammar issues (Architects'), and I don't like the fanboyish premise of comparing how good the opening track is to all of the other opening tracks (maybe a sentence like "...is perhaps one of the most powerful opening tracks in Architects' career" would have served that purpose better instead of a direct comparison). Some of the wordings are also painfuly awkward, like the sentence about the breakdowns. Something like "Instead of resorting to boring one-note chugging, Architects employs powerful, creatively melodic breakdowns in their music, generally using the melody instead of letting it be a crutch." That would obviously have to be modified for context and stuff, but you get the idea. You're also still using the run on sentences that the contrib on this thread pointed out, you should fix those for flow.



The third paragraph has a mission as admirable as the first when it comes to review flow, but it's a bit sketchy here. You start to talk about the vocalist, then move to the guitarist, then go back to talking about the vocalist. You should generally finish your points about one aspect of the music in one part of the paragraph before moving on. Also, get rid of the interjection about the Ruin album - it just kills the flow dead, and there's no purpose for it being there. You're not talking about the Ruin album, you're talking about this one.

Album Rating: 3.5

The paragraph where you list the album's faults is mostly fine, but you should describe more about

the drum thing. Why aren't they fine? Not technical enough? That's sort of what you're implying, but

don't imply, TELL me. Don't be afraid to just go right out there and say that if that's what you

think.



The last paragraph still doesn't make much sense. I don't understand how you can sit there and tell

me in the previous paragraph that the formulaic songwriting is one of the album's faults, and then

immediately proclaim the album to be "one of the most well written albums in modern metalcore".

You're directly contradicting yourself. You should generally avoid making hyperbolic statements like

this, unless you're writing the most glowing of perfect 5 reviews. You are also a bit contradictory

with the way you word your last point - you laud the band for returning closer to the sound that

made them famous, but now you're asking them to start branching out again. I'm sure there's a way to

make that last point without sounding schizophrenic.



In the middle of the review, you switch to first person for a couple sentences. This is an easy trap

to fall into, and it's a minor flaw at this point, but it's still something you should keep in mind.

You want to pick either first or third person when doing a review, and not switch between them.



This probably seems a LOT of criticism (and it is, kinda), but rest assured, nothing but

improvements were made from how the review was originally. Keep trying, man, practice makes perfect

when it comes to this stuff.

Album Rating: 2.5

Thanks heaps man, will fix it up further now



And yeah, I dig this album heaps, and Hollow Crown is one of my favourite albums of all time, so it's hard not to be biased but i'm trying

Album Rating: 2.5

Pretty much done with this now, hopefully a few people who negged will change their mind, criticism is welcome!

Album Rating: 3.5

good, you addressed most everything that was just glaring. the only thing now is you added a bunch of plural stuff where it wasn't needed XD take away the apostrophes that don't make grammatical sense, you don't need them unless you're showing possession (like "Architects' discography") Everything else is decent enough, so I will pos now for the effort you've put into making this better ^_^ it's nice to see someone striving to get better, and you can always improve - I'm the one giving the criticism, but I'm FAR from perfect.

Album Rating: 3.5

also, bias is ok if you show it in a review. if you liked a bands other stuff, that's fine if you let it show through - and you WANT it to show through a little bit IMO, so people know what they're getting into. If they hated everything else by the band, and the review is by someone who loves everything else, they know that their opinion probably won't be in line with the reviewer in question. It helps them decide if they should trust the opinion and listen.



There's a fine line sometimes between being a fanboy and just writing a glowingly positive review. I recommend you read a lot of positive ones to get some ideas of how they do it. Just try to avoid talking to the reader like they're already a fan of the band.