You can hardly just call Fire a metal head too. 20% of his pie chart is other genres than metal.

20% may not seem like a lot but keep in mind the guy has 1622 album ratings so he's heard his fair share of non metal

klap4musik has said that on 2 separate occasions for no reason other than to say "LOOK, I DON'T LIKE AN ENTIRE GENRE OF MUSIC, WATCH ME BE A FAG ABOUT IT"

I agree with cactuar

Album Rating: 5.0

Damn I need to get on some Beatles again. I think this was either a 4.5 or a 5 for me...

Album Rating: 4.5

white album is their best tho jus sayin

actually Ulsufyring is right, you indie kids need to stop using "oh hai he's a metalhead he can't rate or criticise anything other than metal, stfu" as a defence. He listens to metal, so what? It's not like he doesn't know jack about what he is talking about in this review. It may be a bit ranty yes, but it's definitely nothing neg worthy and it ain't a bad review by any means.

i doubt your indie cred Metalstyles. and Ulsufyring you need to gtfo of your grim little troll cave. Ulsufyring ist fag.

Album Rating: 4.0

weird i never said "because he is a metalhead he shouldn't be rating this." i said, he comes off as a metalhead who doesn't back up his reasonings for not liking abbey road very well (as i stated previously and you conveniently ignored). i didn't neg this review because i don't think it's bad enough to deserve a neg; a review like the one ulsu posted is the kind that generally should receive a neg. i just think a negative review of this album could have been written much differently and came off better rather than what it sounded like to me, and, i think, to many others who've posted here.



and ulsu, that quote was specifically aimed at waior, who wrote both those reviews - inside joke sorry for offending your sensibilities. i've been known to enjoy the occasional metal/hardcore record



finally, your assumption that everyone would be saying this is great if it wasn't the beatles is just untrue. any credible reviewer on this site rates and judges based on the merits of the actual review, not the artist (at least, i would hope so). there's plenty of beatles records that i wouldn't rate above a 4 - this is one of them. i just thought this record deserves a better negative review than what it has here.

i disagree, half the negs are because of beatles fanboyism, and in addition, there are almost NO credible reviewers left on here; that title fits less than 2 dozen people tops

Album Rating: 4.5

i always read "fyring" in your name as "frying"







thats slightly humorous

LATE

this record deserves a better negative review...

Album Rating: 4.5

also heres an example of a kind of similar thing happening and not the beatles



http://www.sputnikmusic.com/album.php?reviewid=30761





i think

Album Rating: 4.0

should i go through their entire discography now so i am not presumed to be stupidly obsessed

it doesn't deserve a negative review at all.

Review is garbage

why wouldn't I SCREAM!?

Album Rating: 4.0

adam you know what i mean you bastard :/

i doubt your indie cred Metalstyles

Album Rating: 4.5

it was a joke