So first of all, anyone who agrees with you is intelligent, and anyone who doesn't, isn't? Posting like that will get you nowhere, so please don't.

No, that isn't what I was saying at all...

Yes, of course it is opinion. You can never get outside of your opinion, but, you can temper opinion with common sense. I've read your review, and what you're saying is that it is a first class example of hard rock; it's not doing anything new or different, it's not creating a new genre or blowing away our concept of music as we know it, so why should it get a 5?

I DO THINK it blows away all other rock and roll!! That is my opinion! I think they are more talented than any other band I've ever heard.

They're no more or less talented than Creed, the only difference is the personality of the lead singer.

Album Rating: 1.0

[QUOTE=splashfreak]

I DO THINK it blows away all other rock and roll!! That is my opinion! I think they are more talented than any other band I've ever heard.[/QUOTE]



There you go, "other rock and roll", making it a prime example of the genre. Not a world-slaying album.

They're no more or less talented than Creed, the only difference is the personality of the lead singer.

Yeah, because musicians never get better. Scott Philips is exactly as talented as he was when he was fifteen. And Myles has a WAYYY better voice than Scott Stapp (anyone who tells me Myles sounds like Scott is an IDIOT, because Myles doesn't sound a THING like Eddie Vedder, who Scott sounds almost exactly like).

There you go, "other rock and roll", making it a prime example of the genre. Not a world-slaying album.

Whatever that means. To tell the truth, I didn't read the "rules", I didn't know there was "rules" for writing CD reviews, but it is by far the best album I have ever heard, so I figured a 5/5 made sense.

Album Rating: 1.0

[QUOTE=splashfreak]

To tell the truth, I didn't read the "rules", I didn't know there was "rules" for writing CD reviews[/QUOTE]



Well there's your mistake.



EDIT: More than anything else, this CD has been out all of five minutes, so there's nothing to say it'll "stand the test of time" (stupid cliches).

It's already better than anything Creed ever did

...it could get 5/5 based on that alone ;)

Having read all the reviews, replies, and recriminations in this thread, I'm gonna put in my two bits on this CD. Since I just registered with mxtabs today, it'll also serve as something of an intro to my opinions on modern music in general.
First off, the intro. As my slightly crappy username ("so what are you, a bulldog?") may suggest for those metaphor-conscious individuals out there, I consider myself to be more of a "ripper" than a "shredder." This is because I possess no technical skill whatsover in the speed-picking department: my solos are played close to completely legato, like Satriani as opposed to Vai, for instance. I am quite fast, though, and am up to the level where I can play most of Satch's stuff, to give an idea of the skill level. And also, melodic rock has always been better than metal as far as what I choose to play: I would practice Rush over Dream Theater, even though I like them both a lot.
Now, the two bits. I got the CD the day it came out and I think it kicks *** in a lot of ways. Here's the list of why.
1.) Tremonti's playing
Tremonti finally busts loose with his metal-schooled soloing all over the place on the album, which is very heartening to me. I have long been waiting for rock guitar players to reacquire the use of their balls and realize that showing you actually know that there are notes beyond the 12th fret is not a bad thing. The time has been long overdue for players(and fans, too, for that matter) to quit being such credibility-conscious pansies and understand that rock soloing is one of the most expressive (and badass) ways to communicate the message of your music, and is usually a hell of a lot more original than recycling the same chord progression unto the ending of the world while claiming that "you wrote" it. Tremonti, from the moment I heard his awesome solo on "Pity for a Dime" on Creed's first album, has always had my respect as a guitarist with ability, and has always seemed poised to bring this torch back to the rock lexicon. He seems to do it with a vengeance on most spots on the album.
2.) Phillip's drumming
Well, he certainly sounds better than ever before. After he didn't even attempt a double-bass drum blast on the otherwise super-heavy Creed song "Bullets," it's very exciting to hear him rectify that error on "Metalingus."
3.) The high notes
While singing in his midrange, unfortunately, the new guy from the Mayfield Four sounds depressingly similar to ****head Stapp from the old group, but when he starts going into the upper register...well, I wouldn't go as far as some people (comparing him to Chris Cornell, All Music Guide? Shame on you), but it certainly opens up many more melodic possibilities than the incessantly whiny-sounding Stapp would probably have provided on the same material.
4.) The differences
Let's face it. The lead single does sound exactly like Creed. Matter of fact, the whole album pretty much sounds like Creed. Except...wait...something's missing...oh, yeah! No f***ing pretentiousness!! (By the way, I think it's real funny that Stapp donated songs to Passion of the Christ, which throws his old argument that "Creed are not Christian" out the window, but that CD of songs "inspired by" the movie has not a single Stapp song on there, so Stapp is releasing it later this year as his solo piece). In addition, there is waaay more musicianship. "One Day Remains?" The title track floored me so badly I started laughing as I was listening to it, saying "Oh, my GOD, this is so f***ing GOOD!" It sounds NOTHING like what Creed usually put out, and for a another reason, too. The songs are way more "up" sounding, and even the heavy stuff like Metalingus and Watch your Words sounds more like "Let's have fun being cool and derivative," instead of the old "Let's be dark and moody post-grunge poseurs that God hates." The fingerstyle intro to "In Loving Memory" is gorgeous. Let's see Good Charlotte come out with anything half as good.
But I'm not unobjective. There are several factors, mostly resulting from a seeming lack of confidence in the integrity of the new band from its ex-Creed members, that bring this listening experience down for me. Here it is:
1.) Tremonti's playing
"Hey, ashole, u jus contadicted urself." Yeah, I know, so don't even bother flaming me about it. Let's be clear. I love the fact that Tremonti solos like a madman on these songs, but the thrill comes more from its symbolic impact ("Finally, somebody's doing it again!"). Actually, though, Tremonti does not do a very good job of judging which type of solo should go in which song. After blasting out two amazing, perfect solos in the first two songs, he ruins everything in "Open Your Eyes," with a shredding solo that is not called for at all. Slow, melodic, yes. Maybe even a "ripping" one wouldn't have been bad. But a shredding one? No, no, no. Tremonti. Buddy. I know you memorized every excercise in "Speed Mechanics for Lead Guitar." I saw your quote on Troy Stetina's website. Now, millions of record buyers know it, too. Now go back to your SRV and Pink Floyd albums and don't come back until you've played some nice, slow music instead of a whole lot of fast notes.
2.) Name that chord progression
Yes, sadly, Good Charlotte is actually the least talented member of the bands that suffer from this syndrome. Especially in the latter half of the album, the chord progressions, while gorgeous, musical, and resolutely not "weird," nevertheless leave a nagging feeling of deja vu while being listened to. And that's more annoying than an obvious, direct quote. Melodies and differences in tempo can usually offset this, but unfortunately the tempo is 100 beats per minute, and I think I've heard the melody somewhere before too.
3.) Oh, the Creedness
It's very disappointing. I know it's basically the same band, but still, these guys have made so many awesome modifications to their sound that make them so much better than Creed ever was, and then they chicken out on which song to use for their lead single. You are playing better, sounding better, with no Christ posing this time, and I know that you're a generally different band from Creed, but your introduction to the rest of the world sounds exactly like your old band. I tell you, that's not a good sign to all the Creed-haters that you have to convert. "One Day Remains" better be a single at some point, or I will be so royally pissed off.
So, that's it, basically. Long post, huh? Sorry. Anyway, I'm sure I'll get replies to this, and I look forward to the like-minded individuals. And, hell, I look forward to the flames, too, because they always make me laugh. Bottom line: Alter Bridge is better than Creed ever was. It takes a few massive steps in exactly the right direction. Take a few more risks with your next series of songs, and you should be on top of the world. If you don't, then you are truly Creed under another name, and sadly the music listeners who matter--the musicians--will not be listening to you for very long.
EDIT: Sorry if some this sounded smart-alecky. I have strong opinions on stuff like this.

Sorry Ripper22, but you have to elaborate a little if you ever want to be taken seriously on these forums.

Album Rating: 1.0

Welcome to MX, that was a good first post.

^^^^^^^

I agree with some of what you said, but I really like the solo on Open Your Eyes. To me, it fits perfectly.

Anyway, this was my first review,I didnt't know about all of these rules, but I would STILL give this album a 5/5 even now.

Bottom line: Alter Bridge is better than Creed ever was. It takes a few massive steps in exactly the right direction. Take a few more risks with your next series of songs, and you should be on top of the world. If you don't, then you are truly Creed under another name, and sadly the music listeners who matter--the musicians--will not be listening to you for very long.

I agree with that, and I'm of the opinion that without Stapp around anymore, they will go in the right direction.

Shit.

[QUOTE=splashfreak]it is by far the best album I have ever heard[/QUOTE]
You need to listen to more albums.

[QUOTE=Tangy zizzle]Shit.[/QUOTE]


...and here's an example of how not to post.


Honestly, no matter how good this is, it shouldn't get higher than a 4, MAYBE a 4.5 if it was outstanding. I'll judge better after I've heard more, I'm sure.


Hat's off to ripper for a great post though.

its late...im tired....i dont feel like writing a book sharing my thoughts on this album.

i will say this though..these guys are pretty good at what they do. i'll agree the album is far from groundbreaking, but i still think its a pretty kickass cd that deserves at least a chance from everyone. i want to comment on the complaints people have tho, mainly with the similiarities people find in this band to their ex band creed. expecting something very different from creed is a mistake to begin with, since a band is a band and they will produce music that they create best, based on their style. when youve been a band for a long time, you become attached to your style, and the songs that flow out come pretty naturally and you dont really think twice about them. so before you criticize the band for sounding too much like creed...just remember: "they ARE creed". and further listening into the album should make you realize that in comparison to other creed albums, there ARE very notable differences, such as ripper and the thread starter pointed out: the solos, as well as the more metalish feel some songs produce.

with that said...i want to comment on tremonti. i dont wanna repeat on what others have said already so im just gonna cut to the point: the guy is talented, and he shows it on this record. i dont need to explain it...you guys are all musicians, the majority guitar players...you guys should know a good player when you hear one...come on now. and the solo on open your eyes...are we not hearing the same song? no matter how hard i try...and trust me....i try, i FAIL to see how ANYONE can see this solo as a "pointless" solo, or a "jumbled flurry of notes" as i think one person called it. the solo is my favorite part of the song, and saying that it doesnt fit it is absurd? ARE YOU SERIOUS!? the buildup to it is perfect...when its at its peak, its perfect, and the end PERFECTLY brings the song back to its chorus. it fits the song perfectly boys and girls. everyone put the song on now and crank it, and pay attention...it will click sooner or later.

1 more thing. lets say im wrong and it IS just a showoff solo.

whats wrong with that?

me being a guitarist...if i had HALF the talent tremonti had...i would walk up and down the streets night and day with a guitar and a portable pignose and just show off...so imagine if i had the opportunities to record solos for songs on records...

did we forget what rock music was all about? eruption? free bird? hell...even your ones and sweet child o mines....rock guitar is about attitude. its about balls. that solo has balls...

prove me wrong?


im tired...thats all i have to say right now. peace.

Tremonti is a boring guitarist. His solos are uninteresting. How anyone can't see that is beyond me. He's like the stereotypical rock guitarist.

[QUOTE=YDload]Sorry Ripper22, but you have to elaborate a little if you ever want to be taken seriously on these forums.[/QUOTE]
Elaborate on what, precisely? I didn't think I could go much longer trying to cover the different points of view.
EDIT: BTW, thanks, The JoZ. Appreciate it.

[QUOTE=Loverman519]
with that said...i want to comment on tremonti. i dont wanna repeat on what others have said already so im just gonna cut to the point: the guy is talented, and he shows it on this record. i dont need to explain it...you guys are all musicians, the majority guitar players...you guys should know a good player when you hear one...come on now. and the solo on open your eyes...are we not hearing the same song? no matter how hard i try...and trust me....i try, i FAIL to see how ANYONE can see this solo as a "pointless" solo, or a "jumbled flurry of notes" as i think one person called it. the solo is my favorite part of the song, and saying that it doesnt fit it is absurd? ARE YOU SERIOUS!? the buildup to it is perfect...when its at its peak, its perfect, and the end PERFECTLY brings the song back to its chorus. it fits the song perfectly boys and girls. everyone put the song on now and crank it, and pay attention...it will click sooner or later.

1 more thing. lets say im wrong and it IS just a showoff solo.

whats wrong with that?

me being a guitarist...if i had HALF the talent tremonti had...i would walk up and down the streets night and day with a guitar and a portable pignose and just show off...so imagine if i had the opportunities to record solos for songs on records...

did we forget what rock music was all about? eruption? free bird? hell...even your ones and sweet child o mines....rock guitar is about attitude. its about balls. that solo has balls...

prove me wrong?


im tired...thats all i have to say right now. peace.[/QUOTE]

You know, I've got nothing to say except "good job." You proved ME wrong, I think. There's nothing wrong with a showoff solo, as long as there aren't too many, which cannot be said of Tremonti's soloing on the CD. Still, I like expressiveness. I still wish there was more string bending and less picking.

But I guess if Open Your Eyes becomes a huge hit, I'll **** all over what I said and we'll call it even.

[QUOTE=Ripper22]Elaborate on what, precisely? I didn't think I could go much longer trying to cover the different points of view.
EDIT: BTW, thanks, The JoZ. Appreciate it.[/QUOTE]

joke.

...and here's an example of how not to post.


Honestly, no matter how good this is, it shouldn't get higher than a 4, MAYBE a 4.5 if it was outstanding. I'll judge better after I've heard more, I'm sure.


Hat's off to ripper for a great post though.

I don't know. a 4/5 seems so... low. Maybe a 4.5/5 would do it justice, I don't know. From now on, when I review CD's, I'm just going to skip the final rating. You get flamed no matter what you put.

I mean, Nirvana's albums had huge effects on the music scene, but does that mean they were good? No. I think they were crap. I don't think an album needs to change music to earn a 5/5.

I just went to the "how to review a CD thread". This is what I found.

Rating
Sometimes the easiest part of the review, sometimes the hardest. At mx CDs should be rated out of 5. Now when you rate really think about this. Criteria a rating should apply too
5: The album is fantastic. You keep listening to it constantly, the songs are catchy and enjoyable. Something within the album directly appeals to the listener. This is an album you should be listening to in 5 years still.
4: Strong album. Alot of good points to the album. A track or two may bring it to this level or it may not have great lasting appeal. Should still have something that directly appeals to most music fans.
3: Ok in its backyard. An album which won't appeal to someone that doesn't like the genre. It has good points but also has alot of bad points. Might compare to the mainstream of the genre.
2: Pretty pathetic. Maybe one or two standout tracks but very monotonous. Nothing stands out and grabs the listener. Many bland and boring tracks.
1: Crud. It's boring, it's uninspired. There's nothing unique about it and it's a waste of money. No songs should standout for a rating like this. Musicianship and lyrics may be awful aswell.

One Day remains is fantastic, I listen to it constantly, the songs are catchy and enjoyable, and it definitely appeals to me, the only "listener" I can speak for. I will definitely be listening to it in five years.

So tell me, what did I do wrong with my final rating?