|
That's not what his argument is AT ALL.
| | | Album Rating: 2.0
why does everyone that disagrees with the review automatically assume he doesn't like it because it's popular good grief. lets be completely objective here, this just isn't good folk (or indie whatever) music. regardless of what other bands are successful or popular.
| | | Album Rating: 2.0
11 negs thats pathetic
| | |
Eko speaks the truth
| | |
why does everyone that disagrees with the review automatically assume he doesn't like it because it's popular good grief. lets be completely objective here, this just isn't good folk (or indie whatever) music. regardless of what other bands are successful or popular.
You apparently didn't read my gripe with it
| | | Album Rating: 2.0
I just like seeing seeing someone stick it to this band. They're pretty awful.
| | |
this is all so damn PREDICTABLE
| | |
c'mon guys do something unexpected
Actually, David's comment got me thinking: could you have done this same review two years ago in 2009, or does the fact that the band has been so successful in the time since give your argument more relevance? If you could not have, then it seams your argument is based on the strength of the mainstream's response, as it happened, which was strong, instead of the strength or lack thereof of the band and/or its actual music.
| | |
Sorry but I just feel like the reviewer wanted to write a negative review for the sake of it. To call this band worse than Katy Perry is absurd.
| | | Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off
Kinda sick of people's lack of reading comprehension leading them to believe that reviewers are dead
set on writing a negative review for a band and just finding reasons to hate them. It reminds me of
Downer's TBS review.
If you think this review even said anything about the band's popularity, you're an idiot.
Popularity might amplify the phenomenon I'm talking about in the last paragraph, but it doesn't
create it.
If you think I hate this album because it's popular you obviously have no idea what my tastes in
music are and you're a fucking moron.
I don't care about negs or people disliking the review but at least understand what it says before
you start chatting nonsense in the comments.
| | |
Alright fair enough, though I'm fairly certain I'm not an idiot, thank you. If I misunderstood your review, I apologize.
| | |
13 negs is fucking ridiculous. The question isn't "do you agree with this review?" it's "is this review well written?" which it clearly is.
| | |
Whatever he intended, I agree, yes, the review is well written.
| | | Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off
As for the question of why I wrote this review now and not in 2009, the answer's pretty mundane. I was abroad when this album was released so I didn't review it at the time, and I only wrote it now off the cuff because the new song gave me an idea as to what I could write about for my 150th review.
| | | Album Rating: 1.0 | Sound Off
I really dislike this review. It's as though you've decided- possibly before listening- that this album is an effort by hipsters, for hipsters, so your argument boils down to "it's so sincere and good that it doesn't sound sincere or good".
Just saw this. That's not my argument at all.
| | |
Do me next Knott, do me!
| | | Album Rating: 3.0
Kinda sounds like Knott got his knickers in a knot over what's knot really all that knowningly important - the gradual desensitisation of a modern culture.
| | |
As an impartial bystander, I'd just like to say that the review is well-written but its point is kind of, I don't know, I wouldn't want to say redundant, but over-blown.
There is an unspoken truth within the self-proclaimed indie community that people who enjoy music that gets played on radio stations are in some way the victims of an elaborate con. Are you a part of that community? Because if not, this beginning is basically like Other people have been saying..., and you don't want to start out your review with what others think because it's your review, especially seeing as what follows is your personal point of view. Besides, it's the indie community, they're as close-minded as your average metalhead.The logical progression of this belief is the even quieter suggestion that a lot of people don't actually enjoy what they purport to, and are - through a combination of their own pretense and the record labels' apparent mastery of brainwashing - simply posturing. When they dance to Lady GaGa and cry to Westlife, they really wish they were swaying to Burial and healing to The National, or something like that. This is just mumbo-jumbo that leads to nowhere and proves nothing simply because a) There is no certain proof that these people don't like their music b) Contrary, I would say that many of the so-called "deep and substantial music" listeners are much more likely to lie about what they like simply because they go to sites like the one we're on and are much more worried and aware of musical cred. Most pop music lovers that I know (I'm excluding AtavanHalen here) really don't give a damn and c) I'm fairly certain that when they listen to Gaga and Westlife instead of The National and Burial then they just don't know about the latter two or don't enjoy them as much (in a certain situation or in general, doesn't matter).that, for example, bland pop music teaches people to disengage from musical diversity to such an extent that they don't feel like more "substantial" artists could or do have anything more to offer While I do agree with the general point you're trying to make, music is both relative and subjective, meaning that this "substance" that you mention is also relative in this case. Hell, some people can and do find substance in club-bangers while these so-called deep indie albums don't do anything for them, and you can't put them down for it either because music is meant for enjoyment first and foremost and if they get their kick out of mainstream music, let them. Based on that, this argument doesn't hold water.
| | |
Also, you can't possible say this is the worst album ever, regardless of its motives, when you yourself say there are some gems on it, give it a 1.5, and say the songwriting isn't bad as much as it is boring and predictable. So yadda-yadda-yadda, what you wrote here is definitely well-written, I don't mind the build-up of the review (structually) and I can see where you're coming from, but I have to agree with taylormemer that the problem you're dissecting is just not that important or shocking, seeing as the mainstream has been about popularity, not about integrity, since the '90s. These guys just decided to lean on the "we're gonna be inspirational and meaningful" schtick, and if it works for them, better yet, if they believe in it, great.
OK, honestly, I'm gonna shut up now :].
| | |
longest metalstyles post in recent memory
| | | |
|
|
