Metal Reviews

The chap at Invisible Oranges (a great metal blog, if you're unaware) has written a post about, as the thread title says, are album reviews obsolete:

http://www.invisibleoranges.com/2011/06 ... -obsolete/

I disagree, for reasons I outlined in the comments there (more music + less time = the need for someone to tell you what's worth listening to) but I'd be interested in you guyses' thoughts on the matter.

I agree with everything you replied in your comment.
I'd like to add that I personally need a guru to tell me "hey man, you should really check this out. Yeah, no, I know you don't have the time or patience to listen to youtube video clips but seriously now, click on this one, you'll like it. Guaranteed. And if you don't, well, you know. Die." Because then, I click. And you know what ? The guru's often right. Proof is, I'm still alive.

You Zad and your fellow reviewers are that guru to me. If it wasn't for you, I'd still listen to Maiden, Blind guardian and Slayer exclusively. Or perhaps I would have given up metal completely. So, the answer is no. Reviews are not obsolete, they are much needed.

I can find out what a band sounds like in 30 seconds using the youtube, so agree that descriptive reviews are obsolete.

Other people telling me what's worth listening to doesn't work because other people are wrong a lot.

Reviews should be shorter.

I like reading reviews of stuff I've already listened to, hoping to have something true that I didn't notice pointed out.

People talk about artists more than art because artists are easier to talk about. It's hard to talk in depth about music unless you're all super educated and shit, and know the album like the back of your hand.

I would also like to add that for many albums, it's impossible to get a sense of whether you will ultimately like it from a 30 second clip because they are growers, or more complex than verse/chorus/verse.

Hopefully the reviewer has let the album sink in over many listens, and this is reflected in their opinion.

Albums that grow on you are overrated anyways.

Those have the greatest longevity, unlike whatever flukey band you're into as we speak.

Yes.

well i find that they can help me find some bands, like here ive found out about quite a few bands i wouldnt normally find

I've been coming here for years because the majority of the reviews done, I usually end up liking. It's crazy. But at the same time, I do have a habit of skipping over the lengthy reviews because honestly I just want the bottom line and the killer songs to look up on youtube. Mainly because you describing how a rift sounds in a review, isn't the same as me going and hearing it. I apologize if that sounded harsh.

I don't know whether or not they are "obsolete", but they don't hurt.

And ya if it wasn't for reviews I'd be listening to Iron Maiden, Guardian, and all the other real.....big? bands. never would have gotten into black metal and never would have bought the new Moonreich album which kicks total ass.

I got into stuff like Iced Earth thanks to reviews on the www.metal-reviews.com website (I found this website by accidentally ommitting the "-").

Stuff like Kataklysm and that sort of thing was thanks to reviews in Terrorizer.

So I find reviews to be useful. Sometimes the reviewer's enthusiasm or pessimism is overwhelming. There's a passion in the words that makes you want to either listen to the album or avoid it like a plague.

Then there's the entertainment value, especially when the reviewer hates the band with a passion.

Back in the day reviews were very good for me but now I definitely have to hear the album for myself to judge no matter how high the score might be. Reading reviews has one big advantage and that is: one gets a wider perspective on what the album contains and is about.

No.

By that definition I'd never buy an album. I never like an album instantly.

I have to get to know it and learn it's nuances before I can love it! This takes at least 5-10 spins.

If it doesn't work after 10 spins, I don't like it and it gets sold off.

I don't agree with this at all. There was tons of music that I wasn't as into as a younger teenager that I love now because once in a while I remember that everyone kept talking it up and I'd throw it on and eventually I fell in love with it.

I don't think that we should make significant changes to the way that www.metalreviews.com works - we clearly have enough of a good thing going that plenty of people enjoy it. One thing I didn't consider before, but have since, is that the difference between sites like Invisible Oranges and MR is that IO is a blog, and this isn't. Blogs by their very definition are the sort of site you spend five minutes on before browsing on, and so reviews of 400 words + may not be the right thing to catch someone's attention.

Being self-critical, I suppose my reluctance to cut review length is based on the fact that I don't see why writing about an album in 400 words instead of 100 is significantly worse. Just because a new breed of net users supposedly haven't the patience to read the whole thing, doesn't make it inherently useless in and of itself. People still read lengthy magazine articles and newspapers, and reading hasn't vanished as a pleasure or even a skill. I've tried to adapt with technology for a while now, including MySpace links in reviews especially. I'd want to look at taking that further, perhaps with YouTube links or embedded videos, before I significantly changed my style of writing. Especially when that's based on something as questionable as the idea that people have no patience to read any more.

*should have written an editorial*

I think it's harder to make a good short review than a good long one.
Zad, you should try to write a short one and show us how it went.

*clicked on this thread expecting to walk into one of Zad's existential crises*