Album Rating: 4.0
Ok honestly though Doof why did you hate it so much? A 1.5 is REALLY low. Do you just hate this style of post hardcore? Was it the vocals? Like at least tell us why you rated it THAT low
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
It conveys absolutely nothing interesting to me melodically, emotionally, intellectually, spiritually
It's just a monotonous trudge through 'already heard' huff and puff twinkle voice teen-bait 'post hardcore' trope vocals with tired derivative chugger chug riffs and 'twinkle sections' of guitar uplift as manipulative in their intention as the cheesiest soap opera soundtrack swells.
I haven't focused on the vocals because nothing stood out with them either, if you're singing like a 12 going on 13 year old you're probably writing lyrics to match.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.2
"Unlistenable is a purely subjective term"
yeah but you said dictionary definition, which isn't subjective, cos it's a definition. I'm just pointing out your poor use of language tho, carry on with the shit takes
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
Why can't the dictionary define a word that's 'to be used subjectively'
Like the word 'taste' as used in the term 'personal taste'
Rowan for someone so clever you aren't half thick
|
| |
Sometimes it’s good to write a review without critiqued every sentence and looking in the syllabus all the time. For that I will give you a pos.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
at its worst this is generic post hardcore, that's not worth a 1.5 no matter how you slice it
the production is ace and the songs are catchy enough, sure it does nothing to reinvent the wheel but they already did that with the satellite years
by giving it a 1.5 you're putting it on the same level as aiden
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
i'd put this on the same level as magnetic north, it's nowhere close to the satellite years
only the clouds takes a giant shit all over this record
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
I don't like this argument - I have a lot of better albums on a 2 than this so that would be unfair on them....if I bump them up to a 2.5 then that's not fair on the stuff I have on a 2.5 so they all need bumping....
....then you end on 1000 5 out of 5 ratings and you can't tell what is actually a deserving 5.
Or you can just rate 95% all 3.5's and f'ck everything
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
If it eases anyone's pain I do have an Aiden album on a 0.5 rating on RYM
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.2
lol "Dictionary Definition: unlistenable
to be used subjectively even if something is, in fact, listenable"
yeah, I detect no problems there
|
| |
I think the record is listenable, by which I mean it's "capable of being listened to," but what's a good reason to? Not atmospheric enough, nor catchy enough, nor emotional enough... just a humdrum mess.
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
It's a nonsense term really.
Definition: something unbearable to listen to.
I don't think there's any music 100% of all humans would find 'unbearable' (clue, usually it's made by humans, who you think would tolerate it to some degree. Beyond that it needs to be released, sometimes involving money) so it has to be subjective
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
the ‘subjective’ argument here should stop before it gets stupid
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
Anyways does 1.5 equal 'unlistenable' - thought it was 'awful'
Plus I rate stuff the same here and on RYM where you have the 0.5 available so this is two levels above the stuff I consider the worst.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't call this 'unlistenable'. Just so poor I'd never reach for any track again - aka a 1.5
|
| |
for what it's worth, i checked the dictionary definition and it's "(especially of music) impossible or unbearable to listen to." doof is correct
|
| |
Album Rating: 1.5
Sounds like we're both right :D
Impossible = objective
Unbearable = subjective
|
| |
Great album agreed
|
| |
Great album agreed
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5 | Sound Off
This album would've been cool 15 years ago
|
| |
Yeah I would have loved this when I was a teenager and didn't listen to much good music
|
| |
|
|
