A review should ultimately be about, you know, the album that's being reviewed? There are some cases where it's ok to deviate (a personal piece of writing for an album that means a lot to you for example), and I'm not some boring prescriptivist who says you can't do something different, but this review tells me absolutely nothing, it's basically an abstract piece of fan fiction with little-to-no relevance whatsoever. I've seen snox reviews more readable than this.

this review doesn't make me want to listen to the album, it doesn't make me not want to listen to the album. it tells me nothing about what the album sounds like. that is the goal of a review. if not at least make you think a little or feel something. this does none of that. going outside of typical review construction is fine but it should still achieve some of the goals i already stated. this is meaningless gibberish in my opinion.

Except this piece does review and attempt to articulate the themes and contents of the album, and in turn critique them. It's fair to have a problem with how it goes about doing this. But to argue it isn't a review unless it follows your prescribed formula - and allow it to derive from said formula only as you seem fit - is prescriptive and just nonsensical IMO. Opinions, though, fair enough, and I hope you're both well.

never said this wasn't a review. you are misunderstanding.

I'm not sure it says anything about the contents of the record. There's no indication of genre or ensemble through the review. It does mention reverb and vocals but those on their own accomplish very little in conveying information about the sound of the record. It also doesn't really comment on themes - it declares that the record is a meaningless, navelgazing record of self-absorption, but doesn't offer any evidence for this that the reader can latch on to. In that sense, it doesn't do much at all expect place some vague philosophy on the table which itself isn't clear enough to stand on its own.
EDIT: Unless this counts as a declaration of the lyrical subject of the record: "The voice is emblematic of bottled-up desperation: to have your heart mended by the girl who once love heart reacted your profile picture on Facebook; to find company so perfect it could have risen from the pages of your diary." and even then it's unclear.

i agree completely. it's so vague that it's gibberish. this is like i took first year english and philosophy 101 at college and i am very smart the review.

If you look at Jack's last review, which is also a bit conceptual, it succeeds largely because it gives the reader footholds to cling on to in terms of sound and content. This one abandons them for the worse.
The only reason I'm typing all this out is because one of the most valuable things about a forum like this is that we can not only support each other but also help each other improve through critique, which is especially helpful when a Contributor or Staff member, who don't receive the quantitative "X/Y thought was well written" feedback, writes something that seems weaker than their usual content. Also it's just cool to constructively discuss writing, obviously. No ill will toward anyone here and I hope some of this rambling helps in some way. Happy lazy Monday everyone

You place "review" in quotation marks and argue it doesn't have the same goals that a review should do. But that's fair if I misunderstood you, I was responding moreso to Sint. (:

And I understand Toad! I agree, I think critique/discussion like this is important. Hope you're good.

yeah i'm by no means saying he can't write, like a lot of his other reviews are really good, but this one just doesn't work

where exactly are the themes of the record discussed? i don't see anything describing the sound, there are one or two off-the-cuff remarks about the vocals but going by this review i'd have absolutely no idea what this record is. And i'm not gatekeeping and saying it's only allowed to do a certain thing, i'm saying that if it wants to deviate from the norm it has to justify itself, and this doesn't - instead of the phrase 'rules are meant to be broken' it should be more 'rules are meant to be broken by those who know how to break them' - simply doing something different is not a justification in and of itself.

a nice, constructive, non-hostile discussion on sputnikmusic.com? i must've come back to the wrong site.

also anyone who hasn't should check this band's first two albums, really cool reverby Smiths-esque tunes

did like the singles from this but haven't heard the whole thing yet

I turned this off two songs in and haven't come back, so in a sense it's convenient that the write-up dissuades you from hearing it. The review embodies the meaninglessness found within: there's little to latch onto in the writing, mirroring the listening experience. I appreciate the parallelism.

"I've seen snox reviews more readable than this."

Let's not say things we can't take back

if i wrote a poorly written incoherent rant for a bad album would that be good because it mirrors the listening experience? i don't think so.

tbh I can understand why someone would take issue with the review for reasons outlined above but considering what Jack was going for (a review that essentially satirises the material it pertains to) it's definitely not bad. Props for ambition [2]

Sint, I'll make an argument regarding where the themes/contents are articulated outside of the form itself. If we still disagree, it might be best to end it there, because it'd mean we fundamentally disagree and/or have interpreted the piece very differently. Which is fair. You can counterpoint, too, of course, that's cool.

"...nothing can be known for certain." / "I know for certain that fantasies are dangerous and diminutive. Sometimes spiritual/mental retreats are tantamount to ignorance..." / "The mind manifests these vague utopias but they are fleeting and fragile. They leave us vulnerable to the bookends of reality, indulging in the antisocial, all for just The Echo of Pleasure."

From these lines, I think it's apparent that the album presents something dream-like, vague, almost intangible; the writer argues that these compositions are fleeting and fragile, brittle and loose in structure. He claims that the title, The Echo of Pleasure, is apt in representing this, however the music does too little to lull the reader into - or at least respresent for them - something effectively utopic, or immersive. Jack presents a similar critique throughout the entirety of the piece:

"As four hopeless romantics from New York may or may not have discovered, translating dreams and aspirations into dense clouds of reverb is an idea that exhausts itself..."

Here, he introduces the band's attempts to translate these same ideas, and argues that their means of doing this - through "dense clouds of reverb" - is, to an extent, ineffective. He even reflects the ambivalence of this - "may or may not have discovered". Which is an important critique and recalls the given score.

"We are left further adrift as we realise the vocals are subservient to the music, responding meekly and confusedly to the plodding numbers of which they occupy. The voice is emblematic of bottled-up desperation..." / "If I had a diary... it would be like these compositions: meandering, formless; full of half-baked ideas that revolve around insipid central conceits."

I think it's obvious how these lines articulate a clear critique and analysis of the album. But even the frame around clear expressions such as these are evocative of the music itself. Of course, I might be misinterpreting it, but the hospital frame evokes uncertainty, sterility, a feeling of being lost... It evokes, I'd assume, the themes and sound of the album.

Album Rating: 2.5

woah

Album Rating: 2.5

this was just a bit of fun guys!!!! there's plenty of reviews that discuss the music and that less than this (see butcher's latest The Fall review, which is amazing; etc etc) and I think they're a breath of fresh air. also futures glad to see you around man!! (i think??? possibly??? uhhh...)

I FOR ONE enjoyed it, very much indeed

and thank u for directing me to that butcher review that i missed, wowwee