Album Rating: 2.5

Not sure that's necessarily true, I think people can make up their own minds.

Album Rating: 3.5

It ain’t broke don’t fix it ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Album Rating: 4.0

"Not sure that's necessarily true, I think people can make up their own minds."



Sure, I don't hold that everyone is influenced in this way.



(Nor do I think that it is necessarily bad to be influenced in this way. I take it that reviews can shape our interpretation of music like, say, traditions of interpretation shape our interpretation of texts (anything from the Bible, to the US Constitution, to Jane Austen). Sometimes these things obscure our view of the source material (the text, the musical piece) and we need to step out of their framework to see the material afresh. That's unfortunate when that need is present. But other times, they help us read the thing effectively - help draw our attention to its valuable features, the patterns it manifests etc. So I think a legitimate function of a review, and a function I often turn to it for, is guidance on how to listen to the music. What features should I pay attention to, what expectations should I have in mind, so that the value of the piece is unlocked for me? Of course, we're not always capable of hearing what the reviewer hears. So there are plenty of times where we have to just say, "I just don't hear it, this isn't for me". But there are definitely times when a review has helped me appreciate something. So I take the capacity to be influenced in this way as a neutral capacity that produces mixed results dependent on the accuracy/quality of the interpretive tradition, or review, we are exposed to. Sometimes the results are bad, sometimes good. In the bad case, a review can nudge us toward blindness towards the good features of an album, or towards over-emphasis on attention to bad features.)

Album Rating: 2.5

yeah i think this is basically the same as every other russian circles record but with awesome production



i passively dig

Had to make a burner account just to chime in on this. Reading that review and the subsequent replies was inspiration for the handle.

First and foremost, that's a shit review. There's absolutely no two ways about it. Whether you're a Russian Circles fanboy that worships this record, someone who think the band are a trio of unimaginative hacks, or somewhere between those extremes... that review does nothing.

Paragraph 3 begins with "This brings us to the actual review."

So where is it? I'm still looking.

The author spends the next 2 paragraphs wasting both his time and my own to simply say "this album is more of the same" ~ and I'm supposed to buy into this notion from someone who's only heard of Chelsea Wolfe through her cameo in Memorial? Okay.

JS19 called it last page. This review's average is low because of the herd mentality that comes with Sputnik, RYM, and these sort of user-driven meta review sites. I wish I could share Demon's optimism at the top of this comment page but as a longtime lurker of Sputnik I have to admit the flock tendencies are very real and very embarrassing to witness time and time again.

Russian Circles are not my favorite band in the world. Bloody Year is not my AOTY. I don't feel personally attacked by the opinions held in this thread. But to dismiss it as a throwaway record is pretty silly. And to claim that they're doing absolutely nothing fresh or different from the rest of their discography is just incorrect. Post-rock and post-metal as a whole are mostly dead genres in the year 2019 but outside of that new Pelican record I'd love for anyone to point me to a band that write a riff like Russian Circles. They're not reinventing the wheel but they excel at what they do.

Are we going to ignore that this is Russian Circles' first record in 13 years where Dave actually uses blast beats? [We are?] [Alright then.] The man continues to be one of the most proficient drummers in the realm of post-whatever and keeps this band's output fresh. I'll stop listening to Russian Circles when Dave phones it in and records lazy drum parts.

Brian's bass is just as sinister as it has ever been. Did someone actually complain about the bass tone a few pages back? lol Jesus. Irredeemable. Arluck shifting into max gear [you know when it happens] kicks in more teeth than most of 2019's hardest hitting moments.

If I have one critique it's that a lot of the album's tracks BEGIN with similar guitar bits from Mike. There's a lot more strumming in the vein of something like black metal that kicks off a lot of these songs. It may help to convey the vibe that they're obviously going for on Blood Year. But on first listen a lot of it bled together for me, and I couldn't really get what each song was going for until they really hit their strides. A lot of people seem to gobble up the melodic tapping from their earlier work, i.e. Memorial's Ethel. And that's cool. But how are we going to yearn for more of that while also critiquing the band for not changing their sound and giving us more of the same? Surely you DO see how dumb that argument is, right?

This album is lean and mean. Outside of the intro and an interlude, it really doesn't give a whole lot of room to breathe and reflect. You have to keep up. I think a lot of people approach post-rock with a cursory or passive mentality when digesting albums in full. And as a result you get comments that dismiss the efforts as "a wall of guitar" or whatever. The record is 40 minutes and after 2-3 listens it became very obvious that every track serves a very particular purpose to the big picture. There is hardly any real redundancy at the end of the day, and I can very easily pick any Blood Year song out of a shuffled Russian Circles lineup of tracks. Pretty easily, especially with Mike's guitar and the general atmosphere that the album paints. It's a unique notch in the band's discography and I don't know why that's so hard to hear.

That closer alone is worth the price of admission. I don't think the band has crammed as many head-bob inducing riffs into one neat package as they've done with Quartered. I really enjoy the guitar-heavy tracks off Guidance but the riffs per minute are off the charts on this one.

In conclusion I already know I'm an asshole and that this is an abrasive comment. I'd probably give the album a 4.5 right now but that's because I'm enjoying the piss out of it and it's a bit of a honeymoon phase. I foresee it settling into a 4.0 or 3.5 at worst. The rest of their discography fluctuates over the years and depending on the mood.

I won't be logging back in to address anything, so have at it I suppose. Just had to discuss the album at hand since the review obviously didn't. I'd encourage another listen with less distractions if you're able to swing one. This album has more to give than a lot of people are giving it credit for.

Album Rating: 3.5

finally someone has the guts to say all that

Album Rating: 2.5

Wow, great effort Yikes - it's a shame you won't be logging back in, because your comments could form the backbone of a stellar review... much better than what we already have here - i.e. one which is very dismissive and barely mentions the album's content (as has been alluded to).



I'm yet to hear this myself, but am admittedly intrigued, as some of their earlier works are enjoyable.

Album Rating: 3.0

Yikes indeed



I will vouch for myself as being totally un-swayed by the reviews here (rarely read) or the other ratings.



Russian Circles are likely to be a 3 out of 5 sort of deal for most, they're solid but hardly revelatory. Pretty likely to hear a band this good down your local boozer/venue from time to time.



There tends to be more of an obvious herd mentality with stuff that's very highly rated or panned to oblivion. This 100% sounds like an album that's going to receive a load of 2.5-4 ratings (which is what it has got) :/



3.4-3.6 average all day, that is your standard grade here - nothing to wet the bed over

Album Rating: 2.5

I may be guilty of projecting my own thoughts onto the community as a whole, I just assumed people were less easily swayed or more 'bloody-minded' when it comes to their own opinions. I guess it can happen, herd mentality isn't exactly an uncommon occurrence, or unfamiliar concept.

Nah this is a 4.

I mean, that snare sound is already a 3.5

Album Rating: 3.5

love the ultra blackened feel on milano



this is one of the bands whose work i always dig but they always leave me wanting more

Album Rating: 4.0

Lol it was me who complained about the bass tone so I'm apparently very right and also very wrong at the same time

Album Rating: 4.0

Also Doof have you seen them live because I bloody wish I could see a local band who ripped as hard as they do on stage

Album Rating: 3.0

I can imagine the main draw with these dudes is watching them live, that would make sense

Album Rating: 3.0

Yeah local bands wish they could do what these guys do live. Did get around to spinning this though, and woof. Frustration born from disappointment.

Album Rating: 3.0

'Nah this is a 4.



I mean, that snare sound is already a 3.5'



This album is all sound to me, a great sound, maybe a 4 out of 5 sound



The album experience? The sustained compositional interest? More like a 2 out of 5, they lose me across a whole album. Esp when you've listened to some of their previous output and other bands who sound somewhat similar

Album Rating: 3.0

Reminds me of what I thought after listening to this year's Mono album...



'if only this was the first ever post-rock album I'd award Mono a 5 out of 5...unfortunately it's actually the 11,231st post-rock album that sounds pretty darn similar. So a 3'

Album Rating: 2.5

I like 'old' Mono, but haven't checked any of their later releases.



...by the way, a Dewi 4/5 is like a 3 or 3.5/5 in 'our money' anyway Doof.