Album Rating: 2.0

I know what you mean. I don't hate this as much as it sounds, but that's because I have a crap taste in music. I l'd like to think I'm honest. Yeah, I got some sick burns on this.

The Transformers metaphor for the whole review is too much. Seriously made it a chore to read, no matter how spot on you are about it all.

album reviews in disguise

^lol

Personally I like the fact that this review isn't a history of the band like most reviews these days. I don't care about their life story.

Album Rating: 2.0

yeah agreed fuck relevant content concerning the history of the band



i want pop culture references

This album was SO much longer than it had any right to be. It drags on and on and on, with nothing really to show for it.

Album Rating: 3.0

this really could've been a good 40-50 minute record, just cut out 3-4 songs and the pointless outros and it could've been a 4.

Album Rating: 2.0

wow I hated this yesterday but thought that I just wasn't in the mood so I tried to give it another chance on my long drive today and this is honestly just so awful

Album Rating: 4.5

Cut out Telepathic and Satellite and it definitely would've been a 4

Album Rating: 4.0

Album is probably gonna be on my AOTY 2017 list. This year is off to such a good start musically.

Album Rating: 2.0

@JeetJeet



"The Transformers metaphor for the whole review is too much. Seriously made it a chore to read, no matter how spot on you are about it all."



Wow, you must not like allegories then. Anyway, beg to disagree. I'm showing, not merely telling. My thesis essentially is that this is bad in the same way Bay's Transformer's movies are bad. So I think comparing and synthesizing the album and those movies together is appropriate throughout. Though, there are stretches where Transformers/Fox is not brought up. If this was a "chore," it wouldn't be featured. Could this be more concise? That's fair, but you and others are making a mountain out of mole hill.

Album Rating: 2.0

OK really dude?



first you say 'Sowing likes it so his endorsement is enough' and now 'if this was a chore it wouldn't be featured'



hate to break it to you but pretty much all a review needs to be featured is for someone to ask nicely in the mods thread in the forums or to be the first/only review for a relevant new release



fucking learn how to take criticism ffs

Album Rating: 2.0

"you and others are making a mountain out of mole hill"



how about - if more than a couple people have the same complaint about a review - acknowledging that politely and maybe presenting your intentions/clarifying instead of telling them that they're outright wrong

Album Rating: 2.0

I didn't ask for it to be featured. It got there on its own merit. And I've taken criticism that it's too long -- that I belabor the point. I disagree, and even if I'm wrong, it doesn't make this a "chore" to read. 1,000 words is not that much to read.



In general, people on Sputnik don't know how to be charitable in their criticism.

Album Rating: 2.0

Betray,



I've been very accepting of criticism of this, including from you. My comments on the thread attest to that. But this isn't a "chore" to read -- I resent that -- unless people really have that short of an attention span.

Album Rating: 2.0

my point was that the way you said "Sowing gets it, and the endorsement is enough for me." and "If this was a "chore," it wouldn't be featured." make it seem like somehow a Mod of the site approving or getting to the front page 'by it's own merit' (or again, maybe because it's the ONLY review of a fairly large new release) somehow makes all the criticism null and void.

Album Rating: 2.0

"in general, people on Sputnik don't know how to be charitable in their criticism."



not like it would have mattered how they worded them since you've taken each criticism so god damn personal.

Album Rating: 2.0

Yeah, I think Sowing is probably the best reviewer on this site, and some of his reviews dwarf this. So his praise is flattering. I'm saying, if this review is bad, a "chore" to read, it's less likely some administrator or Mod wouldn't feature it for every visitor to Sputnik to see.



No, I acknowledge the criticism, and I've argued why I think it's a bit misguided. I've haven't heard a rebuttal to that other than a re-assertion of the original criticism on this thread. Fine, it could be shorter, more concise, but I don't think it makes or breaks the review though.

Album Rating: 4.0

What is this argument even about?