Metal Reviews

You're welcome to comment on:


Click here to see the review.

The riffing is not very original but straight in the face, soloing is not uninteresting at all since some lead-breaks have an unusual emotional quality, and for the drumming 'solid' would be a better term instead of 'average'.
My problem with Unleashed is, that they do not manage to fill a 45 minutes album with equally good songs. Some are really self-replicating. So what? Just cut out the 5 fillers and you end up with half an hour of finest straight Death Metal for fans!

Sometimes it is the other way round. Woumen seem to have nothing special at first sight, but you fell in love with them though.

Personally its an 80, but I think your quote is okay, it IS for fans only, indeed.
BTW, I whished the hordes of new BM reviewers also would take the term "for fans only" more serious.

Well, it's obvious that if it says "Black Metal", then it means that it's meant for people that like black metal, so it's useless to put it under every time.

IMHO "Outstanding" albums or "Masterworks" normally should appeal to a broader audience, independent of the genre preferences.
However, you can also take a different view and say that EVERY album is for fans only...
As long as the description is fair enough, the quote is meaningless anyway.

There you are very right, I rarely look at quotes, just the elaborate discription of the music, which is too often a little put away. I valuate comparisons a lot. When the description of something attracts me, I check it out, easy. And by the way, I'm pretty sure that every or at least almost all albums that I quoted higher than 80 appeal to a lot more people than BM heads. Still, there are some people that just don't like BM, because of the vocals and production or something, so no matter how good the album is, if it's thoroughly black metal those people will not like it, should we quote all of those album under 75 then?

A bit related to what you guys are discussing over here:
I really think albums reviewed get quoted way too high. For example, let's take April. There are 25 reviews so far (with quotations), and of these, 22 range from "very good" to "masterpiece". This means 88%. Generalising a bit, is this really true? For the state of metal? 88% of outputs out there are very good, outstanding or masterpieces, and only 12% average or worst? I'd be glad if this were true, but I'm convinced it's not. Maybe the other way around.
10 out of 25 are considered "outstanding", this means 40%. And 5 out of 25 are masterpieces. I'd be happy if one out of every five metal albums released were masterpieces, but really, they are not! No way. The real number of masterpieces is way smaller.
I haven't listened to most of the new albums reviewed, so I will no comment on specific cases. But, just by looking at the numbers, you realize that something's not right with the quotes these albums get.

There is an old thread about this topic:
http://www.metalreviews.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=2415

OK. Didn't see that. Before my time.

I wholly agree with you. I try to keep the amount of 80 and higher qoutes I hand out below 50% which seems reasonable for me, since I pick out the best albums to review.