this is why i love theacademy
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
He makes connections to the vocal style, not everyone likes his "gruff" vocals. He says they barely
switch up the sound, which personally I find as an act of amazing consistency and quality, but some
people may find it boring. He mentions that their talent is underutilized, which is arguable depending
on what talent you're speaking of. I think their song writing talent is as strong as ever, but their
isn't really much stressing in their technical skill. It's not a long review, but he explains what he
doesn't like about it, and they happen to be things I find to be pleasant or inconsequential to the
quality. I think it reads more like a 2.5, but .5 isn't worth a neg.
Definitely more of a comparison to their other works than a standalone judgment, but by no means
poorly written, or defended.
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
im making the world a little more cheery for everyone
merry xmas, spirit
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Didn't mean to deflect earlier btw, your inquiries are valid ones, I just get distracted easily aha
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
You're pretty smart, way smarter than the people pos'ing your review. You just wrote something dumb The writing isn't dumb, you disagree with it. The run-on sentence you picked is technically a run-on but if you were having a conversation with someone, you wouldn't stop them mid-point and say "INSERT A PERIOD MY GOD" conversational tone makes it work in my opinion, for I prefer it over writing a pre-structural, based-on-boring-format review. Rather, the flow is natural from my head.
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
"He makes connections to the vocal style, not everyone likes his "gruff" vocals."
I don't know what the first part of this means, or why the second part is relevant. Obviously not eveybody likes dustin's gruffz... Not really something that needed defending, but ok..
"He says they barely switch up the sound, which personally I find as an act of amazing consistency and quality, but some people may find it boring."
Yeah i understand this. I'm talking about how he writes this into the review.
He mentions that their talent is underutilized, which is arguable depending
on what talent you're speaking of. I think their song writing talent is as strong as ever, but their isn't really much stressing in their technical skill.
This is the same as the first point, about the language. This is something he mentions in passing, and i don't think it has much of an effect on why the review is not well written.
All you just gave me was what you agreed or disagreed with; I could agree with every point and the review would still have hideous sentences with 30 meaningless music theory 101 buzzwords and 29 commas
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Well you didn't specify at all what you wanted me to explain to you then. You asked why I thought he defended his points, I explained that to you. If you don't like the style of writing then that's subjective and no one can argue with you about that. Everyone writes for a different audience.
I mentioned in passing what I agreed and disagreed with, but it was by no means the focus of my response. I think you're pointlessly seeking conflict at this point.
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
you disagree with it.
not all of it
The run-on sentence you picked is technically a run-on but if you were having a conversation with someone, you wouldn't stop them mid-point and say "INSERT A PERIOD MY GOD" conversational tone makes it work in my opinion, for I prefer it over writing a pre-structural, based-on-boring-format review.
Except this is not written in a conversational tone. Writing like youre ranting doesn't suddenly change petulance into 'conversational tone.' Tone is just as much about attitude...
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
If you don't like the style of writing then that's subjective and no one can argue with you about that.
but this
Was this Review Well Written? Yes | No
this is the whole debate you began with... defending pos and negs... how could this not incorporate style?
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Was this review well written? =/= Did you like the style?
imho
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
ok so:
1. you didn't agree with most or all of the review
2. you have nothing to say about the style in which it was written
then why are you not a pos-troll?
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
not that im anti-troll or anything... if that's your way, power to you brother... i'm just trying to get to the bottom of this, for the sake of the community
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Because from a structural/grammatical standpoint it's completely sound, and he explained his points
sufficiently.
By your definition it certainly doesn't merit a neg either.
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
Except this is not written in a conversational tone. Writing like youre ranting doesn't suddenly change petulance into 'conversational tone.' Tone is just as much about attitude... Rants are blind, angry things that go nowhere and have no purpose. This is not, while in a more upset tone than not, a rant. And how can you say it's not conversational when a lot of these sentences came out of conversations I've had?
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Insightful^
|
| |
Album Rating: 5.0 | Sound Off
grammatical standpoint
let's talk about this part!
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
I'd rather not to be honest, this is getting pretty tiresome.
Run on sentences have nothing to do with grammar and technically they aren't incorrect. Considering there aren't that many of them I wouldn't even consider them flow breaking enough to warrant a neg.
Once again, by that definition it shouldn't merit a neg.
|
| |
NAUGHTY WORDS FOR YOUR STOCKINGS
|
| |
Someone is getting coal this Christmas.......
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Coal prices are high, I wouldn't complain
|
| |
|
|
