What score do we get

Afro Lint · **Joined:** Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:30 am **Posts:** 1212

40-49: Metalreviews needs some serious work in almost every area.

Dago · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:42 am

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Dago wrote:

Voted very good. I would have given it a higher score if it wasn't for some tremendous reviews such as Gorguts, Cryptopsy and some others.

Do you mean that we are missing some reviews by those artists ( I know we are missing "None So Vile", that needs a classic place here), or that the reviews that we do have of them aren't very good?

No i mean some old reviews such as Gorguts-From Wisdom To Hate. The guy really doesn't know what hes talking about...

Thomas · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 12:26 pm

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Kathaarian wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

The poll question is pretty straightforward - What score would you give metalreviews?

Now for some others:

How many bands have you discovered soley because of an interesting review you saw here?

How important do you think sites like this are in the metal world?

What site that you regularly visit has the most accurate and most well written reviews?

Feel free to answer any of those or ignore them and vote. Just trying to throw an interesting thread idea out there.

I voted 70. Pretty good. There is room for improvement.

I have discovered a few bands but I've learned tons more from the forum here.

Metal sites are very improtant. They're my only connection to the metal stuff.

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

I'd say MR is my second favorite but I think a bigger staff covering different genres, reviewing all major albums that come out as soon as possible, would make this site much better.

Yeah, a bigger staff would really help out a lot. It's just really, really, really difficult to find even a dozen people who can not just write good reviews, but produce them on a weekly basis. I think it would be really cool if the homepage said "20" or even "15" new reviews with every update. As it stands, I think the record is at 16 reviews, which was the first week of November, 2006.

you could have som sort of audition...

Dylan@Metalreviews · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 3:51 pm

Dago wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Dago wrote:

Voted very good. I would have given it a higher score if it wasn't for some tremendous reviews such as Gorguts, Cryptopsy and some others.

Do you mean that we are missing some reviews by those artists ( I know we are missing "None So Vile", that needs a classic place here), or that the reviews that we do have of them aren't very good?

No i mean some old reviews such as Gorguts-From Wisdom To Hate. The guy really doesn't know what hes talking about...

Yeah, I see what you mean. There are a bunch of old reviews back then that are poorly written. Almost all of those old review threads are now locked.

Azrael · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:59 pm

but i don't think we need to have all that re-reviewed. i mean, if you find the time go ahead, but i don't think it should be made a priority. everyone agrees they're poorly written, but they're just a part of the past now.

Dylan@Metalreviews · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:03 pm

Azrael wrote:

but i don't think we need to have all that re-reviewed. i mean, if you find the time go ahead, but i don't think it should be made a priority. everyone agrees they're poorly written, but they're just a part of the past now.

I agree with you there. I don't think any of us have the time to go back and re-review stuff, plus it's kind of pointless since those reviews are so old (relatively speaking).

TheOctavarius · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:09 pm

Afro Lint wrote:

40-49: Metalreviews needs some serious work in almost every area.

Yeah. We have an annoying black dude running amok in the forums.

70-79. IMO, the score would be lower if I weren't here.

Dago · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:26 pm

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Azrael wrote:

but i don't think we need to have all that re-reviewed. i mean, if you find the time go ahead, but i don't think it should be made a priority. everyone agrees they're poorly written, but they're just a part of the past now.

I agree with you there. I don't think any of us have the time to go back and re-review stuff, plus it's kind of pointless since those reviews are so old (relatively speaking).

Yea but at least the reviews should be erased. I mean it's totally pointless keeping them!

Afro Lint · **Joined:** Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:30 am **Posts:** 1212

TheOctavarius wrote:

Afro Lint wrote:

40-49: Metalreviews needs some serious work in almost every area.

Yeah. We have an annoying black dude running amok in the forums.

There have been zero issues with my epic return. Except, of course, when you take childish swipes at me. :rolleyes:

I voted the same score I'd have voted back when I reviewed here. It's not meant to be disrespectful at all.

heatseeker · **Posted:** Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:50 pm

I vote "Very Good"...the review archive is pretty expansive (although some bands seem lacking; Testament, Savatage...some others I can't think of) and for the most part, I agree with the reviews. I think that too many albums get scored in the 90's, but that's as far as my complaints on overrating go. In my opinion, it should be like this:

90-100: Great-Classic
80-89: Good-Very Good
70's: Decent, pretty average
60's: Getting bad...
50's and below: Sucks

I don't agree with the people who say that anything that's not great should be scored in the 70's or below...in school, a 75% is considered average, and I think the same is applicable here.

But anyways, I have been visiting this site since I listened to like three metal bands and have discovered pretty much every band that I like here. And, I haven't found any site that I think is better...so, props...

On a side note...

Kathaarian wrote:

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

That site doesn't work and I'm interested in checking it out. Typed the link incorrectly, maybe?

Kathaarian · **Posted:** Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:50 am

heatseeker wrote:

I vote "Very Good"...the review archive is pretty expansive (although some bands seem lacking; Testament, Savatage...some others I can't think of) and for the most part, I agree with the reviews. I think that too many albums get scored in the 90's, but that's as far as my complaints on overrating go. In my opinion, it should be like this:

90-100: Great-Classic
80-89: Good-Very Good
70's: Decent, pretty average
60's: Getting bad...
50's and below: Sucks

I don't agree with the people who say that anything that's not great should be scored in the 70's or below...in school, a 75% is considered average, and I think the same is applicable here.

But anyways, I have been visiting this site since I listened to like three metal bands and have discovered pretty much every band that I like here. And, I haven't found any site that I think is better...so, props...

On a side note...

Kathaarian wrote:

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

That site doesn't work and I'm interested in checking it out. Typed the link incorrectly, maybe?

could be vampire. I can't be sure because the site seems to be down currently, I can't access it either.

Adam · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:17 pm

metal_xxx wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Kathaarian wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

The poll question is pretty straightforward - What score would you give metalreviews?

Now for some others:

How many bands have you discovered soley because of an interesting review you saw here?

How important do you think sites like this are in the metal world?

What site that you regularly visit has the most accurate and most well written reviews?

Feel free to answer any of those or ignore them and vote. Just trying to throw an interesting thread idea out there.

I voted 70. Pretty good. There is room for improvement.

I have discovered a few bands but I've learned tons more from the forum here.

Metal sites are very improtant. They're my only connection to the metal stuff.

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

I'd say MR is my second favorite but I think a bigger staff covering different genres, reviewing all major albums that come out as soon as possible, would make this site much better.

Yeah, a bigger staff would really help out a lot. It's just really, really, really difficult to find even a dozen people who can not just write good reviews, but produce them on a weekly basis. I think it would be really cool if the homepage said "20" or even "15" new reviews with every update. As it stands, I think the record is at 16 reviews, which was the first week of November, 2006.

you could have som sort of audition...

We do...

As stated in a news post not too long ago, anyone who wants to write for MR should send sample reviews to Chris or Mike, or any of us for that matter as we can just forward them on to the powers that be. Usually it is good to include at least one positive review and one negative review. Some work out (Dylan), some don't (Andrew).

Seinfeld26 · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:12 pm

Dago wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Azrael wrote:

but i don't think we need to have all that re-reviewed. i mean, if you find the time go ahead, but i don't think it should be made a priority. everyone agrees they're poorly written, but they're just a part of the past now.

I agree with you there. I don't think any of us have the time to go back and re-review stuff, plus it's kind of pointless since those reviews are so old (relatively speaking).

Yea but at least the reviews should be erased. I mean it's totally pointless keeping them!

I disagree. There are some rather important albums in MR's early archives, and erasing them would mean erasing some rather pivotal metal albums. And, thus, being subjected to possible flaming from readers.

Seinfeld26 · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:16 pm

Adam wrote:

metal_xxx wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Kathaarian wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

The poll question is pretty straightforward - What score would you give metalreviews?

Now for some others:

How many bands have you discovered soley because of an interesting review you saw here?

How important do you think sites like this are in the metal world?

What site that you regularly visit has the most accurate and most well written reviews?

Feel free to answer any of those or ignore them and vote. Just trying to throw an interesting thread idea out there.

I voted 70. Pretty good. There is room for improvement.

I have discovered a few bands but I've learned tons more from the forum here.

Metal sites are very improtant. They're my only connection to the metal stuff.

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

I'd say MR is my second favorite but I think a bigger staff covering different genres, reviewing all major albums that come out as soon as possible, would make this site much better.

Yeah, a bigger staff would really help out a lot. It's just really, really, really difficult to find even a dozen people who can not just write good reviews, but produce them on a weekly basis. I think it would be really cool if the homepage said "20" or even "15" new reviews with every update. As it stands, I think the record is at 16 reviews, which was the first week of November, 2006.

you could have som sort of audition...

We do...

As stated in a news post not too long ago, anyone who wants to write for MR should send sample reviews to Chris or Mike, or any of us for that matter as we can just forward them on to the powers that be. Usually it is good to include at least one positive review and one negative review. Some work out (Dylan), some don't (Andrew).

I can see Metalreviews has become quite a bit more selective in who they choose to be reviewers. Otherwise, you run the risk of having more reviews like this.

Dylan@Metalreviews · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:39 pm

Seinfeld26 wrote:

Adam wrote:

metal_xxx wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Kathaarian wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

The poll question is pretty straightforward - What score would you give metalreviews?

Now for some others:

How many bands have you discovered soley because of an interesting review you saw here?

How important do you think sites like this are in the metal world?

What site that you regularly visit has the most accurate and most well written reviews?

Feel free to answer any of those or ignore them and vote. Just trying to throw an interesting thread idea out there.

I voted 70. Pretty good. There is room for improvement.

I have discovered a few bands but I've learned tons more from the forum here.

Metal sites are very improtant. They're my only connection to the metal stuff.

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

I'd say MR is my second favorite but I think a bigger staff covering different genres, reviewing all major albums that come out as soon as possible, would make this site much better.

Yeah, a bigger staff would really help out a lot. It's just really, really, really difficult to find even a dozen people who can not just write good reviews, but produce them on a weekly basis. I think it would be really cool if the homepage said "20" or even "15" new reviews with every update. As it stands, I think the record is at 16 reviews, which was the first week of November, 2006.

you could have som sort of audition...

We do...

As stated in a news post not too long ago, anyone who wants to write for MR should send sample reviews to Chris or Mike, or any of us for that matter as we can just forward them on to the powers that be. Usually it is good to include at least one positive review and one negative review. Some work out (Dylan), some don't (Andrew).

I can see Metalreviews has become quite a bit more selective in who they choose to be reviewers. Otherwise, you run the risk of having more reviews like this.

Or this. This probably had people WTFing all over the place.

Seinfeld26 · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:06 pm

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Seinfeld26 wrote:

Adam wrote:

metal_xxx wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

Kathaarian wrote:

Dylan@Metalreviews wrote:

The poll question is pretty straightforward - What score would you give metalreviews?

Now for some others:

How many bands have you discovered soley because of an interesting review you saw here?

How important do you think sites like this are in the metal world?

What site that you regularly visit has the most accurate and most well written reviews?

Feel free to answer any of those or ignore them and vote. Just trying to throw an interesting thread idea out there.

I voted 70. Pretty good. There is room for improvement.

I have discovered a few bands but I've learned tons more from the forum here.

Metal sites are very improtant. They're my only connection to the metal stuff.

Vempire-reviews.com Simply godly, great underground stuff never escape their attention. Famous bands albums get reviewed instantly.

I'd say MR is my second favorite but I think a bigger staff covering different genres, reviewing all major albums that come out as soon as possible, would make this site much better.

Yeah, a bigger staff would really help out a lot. It's just really, really, really difficult to find even a dozen people who can not just write good reviews, but produce them on a weekly basis. I think it would be really cool if the homepage said "20" or even "15" new reviews with every update. As it stands, I think the record is at 16 reviews, which was the first week of November, 2006.

you could have som sort of audition...

We do...

As stated in a news post not too long ago, anyone who wants to write for MR should send sample reviews to Chris or Mike, or any of us for that matter as we can just forward them on to the powers that be. Usually it is good to include at least one positive review and one negative review. Some work out (Dylan), some don't (Andrew).

I can see Metalreviews has become quite a bit more selective in who they choose to be reviewers. Otherwise, you run the risk of having more reviews like this.

Or this. This probably had people WTFing all over the place.

+1. This guy never actually talked about the music. He just wrote a vague Lovecraft interpretation and then passed it off as a review. Has Metalreviews.com ever actually kicked people off their metal reviewing team before?

Also, here's a suggestion: May be in the future, every review should have (in addition to a rate the album poll) a "Rate the review" poll.

Goat · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:56 pm

Seinfeld26 wrote:

Also, here's a suggestion: May be in the future, every review should have (in addition to a rate the album poll) a "Rate the review" poll.

Well, it's not like everyone rushes to say how good a review is. It's easy to pick some of the obvious bad ones out, but I think they're far outweighed by some downright brilliant writing.

There are still reviews that have had no response from people, with absolutely no justification. I'd love to go through them at some point, but work is too big an obstacle at the moment. No reason the readers should pass over reviews at all. Once every single one is being replied to, then perhaps you'd (not specifically you, Sein) be justified in asking for more. If people can't read through 10 a week, they'll never manage 20.

Mintrude · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:16 pm

I don't own a MR mug, but I will buy one.

noodles · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:21 pm

Zad wrote:

Seinfeld26 wrote:

Also, here's a suggestion: May be in the future, every review should have (in addition to a rate the album poll) a "Rate the review" poll.

Well, it's not like everyone rushes to say how good a review is. It's easy to pick some of the obvious bad ones out, but I think they're far outweighed by some downright brilliant writing.

There are still reviews that have had no response from people, with absolutely no justification. I'd love to go through them at some point, but work is too big an obstacle at the moment. No reason the readers should pass over reviews at all. Once every single one is being replied to, then perhaps you'd (not specifically you, Sein) be justified in asking for more. If people can't read through 10 a week, they'll never manage 20.

Note to self: comment "don't care" on every review I read but didn't otherwise feel like commenting on

Goat · **Posted:** Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:24 pm

noodles wrote:

Note to self: comment "don't care" on every review I read but didn't otherwise feel like commenting on

You're being obtuse. Why ask for more if you don't care about the ones that are there?

Metal Reviews

What score do we get

Who is online