Album Rating: 3.5

Xenorazr's review is much more appropriate in terms of writing. The rating is a bit too high imo, but that's not the point. It's really just about writing quality. Unfortunately, Contributor < Staff.



Edit: Oops, to late.

Album Rating: 3.0

Fully agree with your review. Especially the part about how The Bee (and other tracks) "hides simplicity behind an illusion of density". Never have Amorphis used so many layers in their music yet it still manages to be some of their most unrewarding material. Less is more is a concept they seem to have totally dropped during the production stage of this album. Amorphis used to be so good at that. A messy and bombastic sound-image plagues this album throughout.



"Maybe I’m just a jaded fool that’s not in the right place in my life to appreciate Queen of Time for what it is"



I asked myself the same thing. I was shocked at myself for not loving this considering how much I still enjoy Under The Red Cloud.



I might bump this but I'm too bitter atm.

Album Rating: 3.0

"Sucks that people can hide behind the "staff" banner and somehow become impervious (magically) to writing poor reviews, never to write again something that could be construed to deserve a negative vote.



Should have stopped reading at "on my third or fourth listen." (For God's sake)."



In other words "need mah arbitrary upvote/downvote system so this guy that doesn't like an album i like can feel mah wraf". I'm not hiding from shit. It's mx's choice to do away with the voting system for staff, I'm as open to meaningful criticism as I've always been.



"He has 4 facebook likes. Imo that's pathetic enough."



There are no words. This is just painfully stupid.



"... I agree that the review comes off as extremely unprofessional. "Hell, it’s made me question a lot of albums I’ve previously enjoyed and considered to be dense listens." - ugh."



Literally explain this at all because I have no idea what the fuck you're on about.



"Xenorazr's review is much more appropriate in terms of writing."



Is it more appropriate because you agree with it, or because you really think my writing is just so below par? Perhaps some more specific criticism rather than just loosely calling it "unprofessional" or "less appropriate".



It's not like I gave this a 1, it's a decent album that I acknowledged should please a lot of people more than it did me. Xenorazr got feature time on his review day one and it's always there for you to read if you like it. There's a line between legitimate criticism and being salty I didn't love an album you did, some of this is certainly within the latter camp and in that case all I can advise is that you get over yourself.

Album Rating: 3.5

""... I agree that the review comes off as extremely unprofessional. "Hell, it’s made me question a lot of albums I’ve previously enjoyed and considered to be dense listens." - ugh."







Literally explain this at all because I have no idea what the fuck you're on about."



Since you're a staff reviewer, I'd expect you to be able to tell the difference between "dense listens" and the sorta pseudo-"dense listens" you are talking about in that sentence in the first place. Like I said, if you weren't staff it wouldn't be that big of a deal, but you essentially openly question your own reliability as a listener and music critic in that very sentence. And that's what I mean with "unprofessional".

Album Rating: 3.0

I'm not getting paid for this gig. I got promoted because people liked my writing and I contributed often over the span of a few years. Professionalism only applies in regards to site behavior, and even then some might say we're lacking in that around here. In reality I'm just a user who listened to enough music and wrote enough words about said music and the words seemed to please the people it needed to please.



We're not some kind of elite caliber, my "reliability" as a writer doesn't matter. I'm just listening to shit and telling you what I thought about it and questions like the one I posed here are just food for thought. My approach to reviews for a long time has been to avoid straightforward analysis a lot of the time and instead speak about my personal experiences with records, how they make me feel and the thoughts that arise from those feelings. There are a number of writers I can name on this site that do the same. People's opinions change and experiences with new music can make you approach older music in a new light. That's just part of being a music listener. I don't know anyone that consistently holds the same opinion on all the music they've heard forever. "Hell, it’s made me question a lot of albums I’ve previously enjoyed and considered to be dense listens", this was just a musing in the moment that I found interesting. I fail to see how it in any way makes me less professional as a writer for a website that isn't really that professional in the first place.

Album Rating: 5.0

this is going to be the same as the Sevendust thread isn't it?

Album Rating: 3.0

idk, what happened there?

Album Rating: 3.5

Yeah, there are reviews on this site that are super professional and literally "elite caliber". And of course I know that you aren't paid and therefore aren't really a professional critic in the classical meaning, but you being staff has some consequences as for how your reviews are treated by the site nonetheless - meaning that they are automatically flagged (that's something that will never stop bothering me). And yes, of course you can just ignore that you are staff and write like you weren't, but at the end of the day you can't really act like it has no consequence at all, so yeah. As a flagged review, I would prefer a more rigorous review like Xeno's to musings, like you called it - with that said, please keep in mind that it's still a pretty good review for what it's worth, so I hope you don't take anything of that all too personal.

Album Rating: 4.5

Also some reviews are so bad, you* skip constructive criticism and go straight to shitposting.



*Me.

Album Rating: 4.5

Sorry for causing you pain, gameo.

But please do explain what's up with those facebook likes and what your thoughts are about them.

Album Rating: 3.0

"of course you can just ignore that you are staff and write like you weren't"



There's an insinuation here that I don't think was intended, but regardless of intention and implication I'll just say that my writing has only ever been a response to criticism. I say that with absolutely zero doubt. I take criticism very seriously, often too personally (and mostly in the past I like to think), and what I've evolved into as a staff writer has been the result of my readers.



Xeno's review can be flagged if the other staff members prefer it. I stand by what I wrote and think it was good so I won't turn down the free flag I got.

Album Rating: 3.0

I dunno what's up with the facebook likes bit since I didn't even see this get posted on the sputnik fb page, but it's not like that page gets a massive amount of traffic via comments/likes that I've seen, nor do I even frequent facebook anymore. Don't think that feature here really amounts to much of anything.

Album Rating: 4.5

Thanks.

You need to get a lawyer on this. I bet you are owed royalties.

Album Rating: 5.0

"idk, what happened there?"



Nocte did a negative review of the new album and some fanboy raged and said that his review was awful. He basically tried to came up with 200 IQ reasons as to why but he was just making an ass of himself. Tbh, it was quite funny.

Review did a very good and solid job at covering the album.
Can't wait to check this tomorrow.

Jamming this rn. So far the first three songs are fantastic.
Band always delivers the goods.

Album Rating: 4.0

Yep.

Album Rating: 4.5

It is damd good,one of best albums of the year.

Album Rating: 2.5

I'm not seeing what people love about this and I'm halfway through. Feels painfully generic

Album Rating: 4.5

Av checks out.