Metal Reviews

Hahaha!

these forums are boring now.

plus, not to much awesome metal has been coming out

from the perspective of someone who logs into the forums once every two weeks to do nothing, yes, the forums pretty much are in steady decline in terms of number of posts.

that is all I have to contribute.

Oh no! How dare anybody be silly! And on the interenet!? What is this all coming to.

I assume that the mods will be appointed from the forum and not drafted in from elsewhere. Bringing in people with that sort of power who have no idea about what the forum is like is never a good thing.

Bring back Ken!

I don't know all these people you're talking about... Since I'm one of the newest additions that shouldn't surprise anybody but, like someone else said, and since I'm kind of an old-timer, I appreciate that there are not just underground elitists around... I like that, here, we can discuss music in general even if metal-related-music is the main topic of interest. I like that I can see a Nick Cave review and that no one is having any problem with it.
So, now, tell me who these kid you mentionned were and what they brought to the forum that us noobs don't.

I would not say that the forum is dying but it is experiencing a major slow down. My observation would be that you have a convergence of a multitude of factors causing this. Some have been touched on already in which people have sited friendly groups forming, coffee house chat, outspoken instigators have faded away, etc. My main three issues would be:

1. In the review realm the site is gravitating toward more obscure bands/titles. With that being said, there just isn't enough prompt attention being given to releases by (dare I say) more popular/well known bands. They do get reviewed but it takes awhile. I feel that the review should appear about the same time as the release of the CD. There are many of us who don't download the "CD leaks". We look forward to reading about those CD's upon their release because we purchase our music upon the official release.

2. I feel that we're experiencing a time in metal (and I only speak of what I have the ability to hear and comment on) where many genres are short on quality/creativeness and long on being overrun by a glut of weaker clones, which just cheapens some of the bigger names. I have found that the gap in between a really great release or find has become longer and longer as well. Understand that my point of view would not be the same as someone who is really into investigating tons of "underground" metal bands and scenes which do have quality rising "stars". My comments originate more from the metal fan who listens to the (and damn I hate this term) more of the "mainstream" of metal. So, perhaps having a lot to share here becomes dependent on some of that criteria.

3. I know that in observing the antics that occasionally are perpetuated here, many people get tired of reading the nonsense. When visitors read interactions that look and sound like 3rd graders involved in a pissing match over what's better, why you have to change an avatar or animation, flame matches which consist of "you suck", "no they suck ass", we who are bit more mature tend to pass on frequenting when that becomes the overall norm. It has been discussed by moderators in other sections and by other posters. There are mature ways of discussing change. Perhaps we should invest in that maturity and have better open-ended discussions that provides insight instead of just getting pissed off or writing incendiary remarks that leads to even more nonsense and/or hurt feelings.

That's my 2cents...for what it's worth.

It's worth a lot! I appreciate, firstly, your point about the big releases. As you said, we do get there eventually, but it would be better to have reviews up for them as soon as they are released. It's being worked on, what can I say? If you notice something we've missed feel free to mention it in one of the 'suggestions' threads dotted around the forum, or email/PM a reviewer and ask, and hopefully we'll get it sorted with time. I do want to point out, however, that obscure bands are more often than not better than the more well-known, and supporting them is very important too. It's all about striking a balance, in the end.

I think that a lot of the attitude around here results from the uber-friendly atmosphere, but with the departure of a lot of people as Rio mentioned, we've had replacements who aren't quite sure how to deal with the place, and so things get a little shakey. It's interesting that where once the bile and 'drama' was directed at the reviewers now it seems to be more generally aimed at other posters - I was guilty of this as anyone back in the day, but having calmed down, spaced out and drunk less in the ensuing years, the fights seem much sillier, as less frequent as they are. By losing Stefan we've not only lost a big poster but also a rallying point for other old-timers, whether they agreed with his crusades or not. The new posters are new, after all; people don't know them and so the old 'family' feeling's gone.

Now that it is gone, we need to replace it, and forging a better series of online relationships through music discussion seems as good a way as any.

I often get the impression that Metalreviews sometimes gathers any new albums they can find at their local "Heavy Metal Market" (without even looking at the bands or titles) so that they can have a sizable number of albums reviewed every week. This IMO is completely unnecessary. There's no need to review exactly ten albums per week (which amounts to reviewing 40 or 50 albums per month). If there's nothing really interesting being released at the moment, cutting back on the number of reviews is perfectly reasonable. And it will eliminate some of the "boneyard reviews" we've been getting lately.



I agree with this too. And this is why I like some of the new rules Zad has posted. It was always frustrating when, on my break at work, I'd go into Metalreviews.com, click on a post, and see some really grotesque picture that could really lose me credibility with the company (and being a software engineer/computer science student, I work on a computer at least 80% of my time). And I agree that there have definitely been a lot more "You Suck!" flame wars in this board over the last year or so in particular. Usually aimed at the same posters (Afro Lint, Stefan, etc.) even when they didn't really do anything wrong. Do we really need this kind of bullying on here? Even if it is supposed to be a joke, there's only so many times you can post, "Ken is gay!!!" before everybody just starts to roll their eyes in disgust.

I don't think a lot of the old posters really know what to do with some of the new posters, either (no offense to any of the newcomers, btw ). They're so used to the more frequent visitors (you, Ken, Brahm K, etc.), that when a new guy comes along, they find themselves having to get used to his presence. And because of how cliquish this board has become, the newcomers tend to get lost in the midst of the more established posters, and so people tend to ignore them more until they've posted long enough that they can be declared "active members" of the MR community.

You're right, within these genres you do have "rising stars". Those scenes need to be cultivated and researched which many of you here at MR do and I applaud that dedication and work to open up our eyes to new music and bands. I wasn't taking a shot at obscure bands en mass at all. At one time all of our favorites were obscure even if they never received international fame and/or status at any stage of their careers.

My criticism is of so many metal genres being inundated with very poor clones of good bands. It's kind of like what happened back in the 80's and 90's. If a particular music formula was making money then sign as many of them as possible. Well, today it's less of the actions of corporate greed because the labels don't have monetary means to do what they did in past years. Now the dawn of the internet allows anyone to record and post there stuff up for mass consumption. I realize that without it good bands would never get a start however, the flip side is that you find (and I'm pulling these numbers out of my ass) 100 bands that sound terrible to the one or two out of 100 who show promise.

I would agree. I felt that way for quite some time. To make matters worse my first encounter here was with Ken. We had a quite an exchange about Evanescence's, The Open Door release. My observations were literally kicked in the ass by Ken. That doesn't foster good open exchanges about music. Instead it promotes dissent and negativity.

** This public service announcement was in way intended to bash or cast aspersions on a past member of this forum. Instead it was meant for descriptive purposes only.**
I'm Raven and I approve this message.

I have to respond to this point. We get an assload of requests for promo reviews from bands/labels. 90% of the time, they are unknown, but I think we owe them review space just as much as the bands you all already know. Obviously, we try to review new stuff as quickly as possible, but a lot of times it depends on whether or not anyone on the staff is really interested. For instance, let's say that the new Dragonforce had not been reviewed yet. I wouldn't feel the need to review it just because it's a major release. Frankly I could care less, so I would rather spend my time reviewing something I enjoy. I'm sorry if this attitude doesn't sit well with some, but we spend a lot of our free time with this, and we should be able to listen to and review whatever we feel like.

Sorry if I'm coming off like a prick, I'm not trying to.

Yes, you're right. The trouble is, that Power Metal and Thrash Metal, in my opinion the most same-y genres of Metal at the moment, are very popular here as much as anywhere, and if reviews of them vanish then there'll be just as much outcry. I've started looking at more Thrash reviews because I realised that, for all that I hate how hordes of bands have appeared because it's popular, MR has been neglecting it a little, and there are some great bands - Gama Bomb, for instance - who would otherwise be lost in the crowd. All we can really do is highlight the good bands and try not to give too much space to the clones, but the trouble is that Metal is music - everyone looks at it differently, and one man's Trivium is another man's Emperor. We can't weed out all the rubbish without letting some bands go that some people love...

Seinfeld's right, we should be more friendly to newcomers, all of us. Maybe a meet-n-greet thread would be in order.



Fully agreed. The vast majority of new releases do get reviewed eventually, too, and really big releases, like Children Of Bodom, Iced Earth, etc, things everyone is interested in to some extent or other, usually are done ASAHP.

I understand your point but as a review site don't you want to concentrate on those bigger releases in a timely fashion to aid in creating traffic to the site due to the amount of fans who follow those established bands? I would think that you would.

I would have to point out that by stating that you "could care less" says quite a bit. I would think that a reviewer would be less self serving and more interested in serving the site or metal community at large. I do understand that your services are volunteer and you will give a more thorough review of something that you enjoy listening to. Perhaps this is more of an administrative/structural issue.

Please understand that I'm not being combative. I'm just curious.

Haha, a name change mid conversation? You had me confused.

Anyway, I don't run the site and I don't pay for it, so I can't speak to your first point. I will say that I think enough "major" releases are reviewed in a timely manner that traffic shouldn't be affected. This isn't AMG so I doubt Chris expects it will ever be a big moneymaker for him. We are, obviously, big on giving unsigned and no name bands a chance here. I just don't see how that's a problem.

As for the second point, let me rephrase. If a big release has gone unreviewed for a bit, someone among the staff will bring it up. It's not like these types of things aren't on our radar. My point was, I don't feel the need to review a band I don't like just because its considered a major release. Also, these bands that request reviews are just as much our audience as any of the forumites, even if they don't post. Besides, shouldn't one of the main goals of any reader of this site be to expose themselves to new bands and styles?

Once again, I'm not trying to be prickly, I just think we get a lot of flack for what we review and when, and I don't see the problem.

I'll add that the new Slipknot and the recent Thrash were hardly at the top of my list to review: we're quite capable of putting ourselves out for you people.

Adam, you're absolutely right on many points. Please don't take my observations as negative criticisms toward you or the site. I love it here and you all have exposed me to bands/music that I would otherwise have never have given a chance to previously or otherwise. For that I am very grateful. My observations are exactly that..observations. I'm not making a big deal out of it. My questions are more out of curiosity than anything else.

Sorry about the name change thing. I imagine that did throw you off a bit there.

I really wasn't directing alot of that towards you, sorry. Most of the time, people don't state their observations with as much civility as you do, as you might have noticed. I can remember many times that someone will say something to the effect of "Why are you reviewing this shit band when the new (insert popular band name here) hasn't been reviewed yet?" That kind of post chaps my ass.

I do appreciate what you're saying though, and if its a major release in a field I enjoy (doom, thrash, death, etc) I will always try my best to make sure to get on it if no one else has.

No worries about the name change. I was typing my last reply and thinking: "Who the hell is Spaceman Spiff and when did he get into this conversation?" That has to be the first name change mid conversation on this board that I can remember.