Ok but to be serious (which is a big change), I would LOVE you to stop writing these little rants about how everything thats popular is bad yad yade yada whatever, because they're getting realy annoying. But I know that you're not. So since you'll be continuing this whole thing, at least they're getting better. This was a well written review. Although Ill admit that by reading it, its obvious you dont realy understand the bands music.This Message Edited On 07.24.07

illuv-- general is what most "great" (by societal standards) critics went for. you don't need to know everything about an album. it is the opinion business; you're reading what someone thinks about an album.

Robert Christgau, as i've already mentioned, is highly praised (i disagree with him usually but love his writing) and he is a highly general reviewer. go see his website and read some of his reviews.

Guys, this guy is well on his way to approved status. Easily one of the better writers to come out of 2007 so far.

Ok but to be serious (which is a big change)

I would LOVE you to stop writing these little rants about how everything thats popular is bad yad yade yada whatever, because they're getting realy annoying. But I know that you're not. So since you'll be continuing this whole thing, at least they're getting better. This was a well written review.

sonic-- Rolling Stone is sometimes right actually, more so than the average teenage metalhead will give it credit for. They were right about Hendrix, for instance.

sonic-- i don't even know if it's sarcasm or not at this point. he said he'd pos me and i saw a pos, so i think he is serious. finally someone who recognizes my talent.

either that or a king of sarcasm who needs to get started on some awesome neg reviews right now.

You're right sonic about rolling stone and that's why i say they're coroporate so often. they hate on something then betray their rown editorial opinion when it becomes popular. also they claim to be against corporate rock when they themselves are a corporation.

but sometimes they are right.This Message Edited On 07.24.07

You don't think so?

hbp-- i think so. i would just be amazed if ur serious as hostile as everyone else here has been to me.

Forget them dude. Your reviews are quality, the mods know that.

Sonice, man, it's his opinion. He backed it up well.This Message Edited On 07.24.07

Alright, I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt before, but seriously. This is
getting to be a little too much. Yes, I read the whole review. It's well written. But really.
How about you try to do something a little less well known so no one will come and yell
like all the rest of the time. Unless that's your intent? Not to sound cynical, but c'mon.This Message Edited On 07.24.07

Album Rating: 5.0

Holy crap I hope you are a gimmick that was another terrible review.

hyperboleking, how old are you? I'm just curious.

apparently he's 29. im betting on about half that at most.

Why does it matter? He's a good reviewest.

sonic-- not everyone agrees they are bad. i have a small number of people who appreciate my reviews and find them funny and interesting.

HBP how are his reviews well written? I mean seriously, the grammar is ok, but he fails at everything else utterly.

What ever happened to liking music just cause it's pleasing to the ear instead of whether it's "corporate" or if it follows certain "rules"?

Album Rating: 5.0

I'm supposing you are in on it.



He is not a good 'reviewest' by any means.

No body, I repeat no body thinks they are funny and or interesting. This Message Edited On 07.24.07

that guy is right.
though jacaranda has a kool avatar...TThis Message Edited On 07.24.07

He's a bad "reviewest". Anyone who's well aware that they are extremely narrow minded in the category of music taste should not waste their time writing negative reviews, and should focus mainly on positive ones.This Message Edited On 07.24.07