Album Rating: 3.0
this is good
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
[2]
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
the album i mean
|
| |
lmfao
|
| |
'“Follow Me” draws you in with a lighter acoustic introduction and simpler structure, building up to an anthemic hook that’s deceptively uplifting, and “We Will Remember” offers a feel similar to a Hats Off to the Bull-era Chevelle cut that leads to another infectious, upbeat hook.'
Sentences like this are why I negged, don't cry to the meds about getting ratio'd.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I was on the fence about even mentioning it in the meds forum, Nazz. I was just confused by the reception; five negs in the span of a few minutes seems like a calculated effect.
|
| |
Part of that could have been people just neg-bombing a positive review of what they assumed (correctly) would be a bad album.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I gave a similar review to Battles and that's got an 11/13 ratio, but I digress. I wasn't about to blame the folks who had actual grievances.
|
| |
The only line that irked me was "While I was softer on that album than the majority of the In Flames fanbase, it doesn’t change the fact that fans did not take kindly to the album." Probably because this info is just not necessary, unless your opinion is the one of a renowned long-time running critic.
The rest is fine, I don't think it deserves the negs. I counter pos'd. I'm probably gonna pass on this one, don't think this band is gonna blow my head at this point.
|
| |
https://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=577035
for you
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
@Dewi: Thanks, and yeah I don't blame you.
@Frip: isn't that thread practically dead? I could easily go through and make necessary changes on the spot.
|
| |
I posted on that proofread thread at the beginning of February Frip, it's dead.
|
| |
It's only dead because most people seem to think they are beyond having their work proofread. Could guarantee you I and anyone else would be more than interested in helping you.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
So how shit is this compared to the last two? Are there laughs to be had?
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
I'm not beyond having it proofread, but I'm at a loss as to what needs to change. I mean you'd think being this many reviews in that I'd be able to figure it out myself but I'm sincerely not seeing it.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
Fucking christ, this review actually goes over their golden days and how theyre not going back. Its beyond a cliche right now.
|
| |
You seem to have issues wrapping up a sentence and your paragraph structure is way off. A paragraph can be as long or short as it needs to be as long as everything contained in it is part of the same thought or topic, one of your paragraphs pivots from being about inconsistencies in song quality into the bleak lyrics of the album. I'll happily remove my neg tomorrow morning if I wake up and it reads even marginally better.
|
| |
haha yeah nothing needs to be changed at all be a shame if someone wrote 600 words explaining what needs to be changed in your review style at this point really i mean you seem to be good
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
Is this anything like Come Clarity/Sense of Purpose era? Would check if so
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
@joshieboy: Some tracks have Come Clarity vibes, but the majority of this is ASoP/SoaPF esque
|
| |
|
|
