Metal Reviews

What nonsense, Ken. If by "in love with your own words", you mean "we spend a lot of time and effort trying to write as good reviews as possible, and secretly harbour hopes that people will, you know, read them", then guilty as charged.

I'm for scores. I read almost all reviews (time chases me), but usually I don't read them in order, I read them according to the band, genre, reviewer & score. That's why I found interesting a score.

I'm amazed how Goat changed the subject. The point wasn't if the scores should be dropped altogether but if other formats than full-legths should be scored too.
I still think everything should be scored (except for live reviews, of course).
Please, address the matter at hand and do not stray from away from it.

One other thing, wouldn't it be a good idea to have a new category for express reviews (short ones that is) so that MR would cover the actuality of metal in a more efficient way?

Please, address the matter at hand and do not stray away from it.



I don't think that's a bad idea, as such. I wouldn't want to see a whole new category because it would probably just get neglected. But sometimes it is hard to write a typical-length review about some albums.

Oh, what a wicked subject-changer that I am! I brought that up to make the point that I completely disagree with you (and Ken, who seems to be in Husker mode at the moment). You think more things should be scored - I think less things should be. Apparently I'm not allowed to give my own personal view on the topic, however, so let me answer your points in order.

Re "everything being scored" - why? The whole point of a numerical score is that it sums the album up in numerical form, adding the pros and minusing the cons until you get a number that adequately represents its quality. EPs and demos by their very nature are less than albums - less content, less significant, and generally less quality. Yes, I realise that there are bands that make an artform out of the ep format itself, but why should they be an exception, and how do you tell the difference between those and 'normal' EPs? The site was started with a heavy Power/True metal slant, remember, and Power Metal bands aren't known for their single long tracks generally. And why should live reviews not get scores if everything else does? Bit inconsistent if you ask me.

Re "Express reviews" - I'm even more against the idea of this than I am of, say, numerical scores, or a fascist/communist government. It will introduce laziness and mean that albums aren't reviewed properly. And what if someone wants to do an express review, and someone else wants to do a proper review of the same album? And it's nonsense anyways, we're not so far behind the curve that we can only catch up by slashing review length and summarising rather than discussing.

Goat, I do agree with you, largely, re: express reviews. We already do have some "express" reviews- e.g. Your thrash review the other week... what was it, I forget the name, that thing that sounded like Slayer. They just aren't sorted into some seperate category.

What I don't think is a bad idea in principle though maybe it could be in practice, is use the editorial function to do a kind of "round up" of smaller releases from smaller labels. For example, there are a couple of labels where I have access to a load of downloads from of consistently-decent death and black metal acts. I try to get through them but they can be hard to write large amounts about because the albums can be quite generic and I try to concentrate more on writing detailed reviews of things I am enthused about.

Rio, I wouldn't have called my Nuclear review 'express', just shorter than usual by a hundred words or so. Didn't feel like waffling that time, is all.

I can see where you're coming from on the death metal - lots of promos all received at once with very similar sounds can be hard to write about. Surely the answer is to pass them out to different reviewers, however, rather than one guy writing about them all and quickly losing his mind? I'm very wary of instituting something like what you described because it places bands/labels on two different tiers and the decision to write a proper review vs throw them into the general, quick-fire pit is so arbitrary... again, leading to laziness and not giving a band its due. I'd have thought that you'd be against class-based systems, anyways. I know Terrorizer does it and makes it work, but they get many more promos than we do, and write much shorter reviews in general anyways. Look at Alex, he pretty much reviews small label-stuff all the time. Is he to continue writing long reviews whilst others do 'express' reviews? Too many complications.

It could lead to that but not if reviewers were disciplined and fair minded about it.

But yes, just thinking aloud really. Probably something I'd never do when it came to practice anyway.

Nothing wrong with that at all, but you guys expect everyone to have the time to read those reviews. That's what my comment refers to. Suggesting people are lazy for liking the scores is fucking arrogant.

Christ. You're ignorant.

EP's and Demos should be scored. Definitely.

How could you not score DEATHCRUSH or Wolf's Lair Abyss?

If EP's and demos were just preludes to the album containing a handful of songs from the full length I could understand, but they aren't. Some EP's are perfect, and perfect in length.

Agreed. After I review an album I typically wish that I had given it a higher / lower score a few weeks later, even though I still agree with everything I said in the review. The problem with taking away scores, though, is that the site would likely lose more than a few readers who want nothing more than instant gratification, a quick graze through a review and a glance at the score. Then again, it would also ensure that more people READ the actual review.

Oh, and to stay at least somewhat on-topic, I don't see why EPs or singles shouldn't be scored if full-lengths are. Less songs does not equal less quality.

Igor, fetch the sackcloth and ashes! Woe is us! Oh, forgive us, mighty Ken, for running a metal website that doesn't cater to people who don't have time to read metal websites! My god, we must immediately slash everything to the bone so that people who have no time can skim it all within their precious few seconds!

Seriously, I'm a democratic sort of guy, more people clearly want scores than don't, but I think the argument against scores deserves to be put more clearly. Honestly. If you look at a number and use that for the basis of an album purchase, without looking at all the words beforehand, then woe betides you when said album turns out to not have been adequately summed up by a score out of a hundred. Presumably that's how such people buy household appliances, computers and cars as well, without stopping to consider whether it fits their needs or no? Wish I had that money to throw away.

Wouldn't be against scores for EPs and demos and live albums. Especially live albums since there's stuff about them that can be objectively rated like sound and performance quality that can vary a lot.

Scoring system is fine. Could replace it with classic/good/ok/bad rankings. Whatever.

I like the idea of shorter reviews because they lead to better writing and are more fun to read. They don't really cut down on discussion because unless someone is an expert on an album, they won't have more to say than a paragraph or two.

It basically boils down to reviewer preference that determines how long a review is. But then again, it really wouldn't make since for one reviewer to write 250 word average reviews while another consistently writes 800 word reviews. For me and most of the other reviewers here on MR, it seems like the average review count is anywhere between 500 and 700 words; perhaps that's just a number we feel comfortable with, or maybe we're only following in other reviewers' footsteps.

Two-paragraph reviews would indeed make for better writing, plus more reviews per week. But as Metalreviews has been running for so long, I think that our readership expects longer, in depth reviews, if only because that's the way it's been for years. Maybe someday that will change, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

Sometimes I score EPs/demos and sometimes I don't, for the site that is. In my head I have the "score" in mind, but who cares what happens in there. Whether the score is posted or not depends on particular circumstances. And within the review I often provide a tad bit of explanation for the decision to score or not. There is no rigid policy on this front for any reviewer, so everybody is free to follow his gut feeling.

On the usefulness of the overall score. It will never go away, and I am OK with that. However, I know of the site, just as do-it-yourself as MR which does not score, and I respect them a lot. A guy I know runs it, and he wanted me to "switch teams" long time ago, but I am going to stick by my guns here, until I last as a reviewer anyway.

Lets say one week there are 5 power metal reviews. I don't like power metal, so typically I wouldn't read any of them. However if an album of those 5 was scored 99/100 I'm more likely to read that review. Doesn't mean I'll buy it just because it got a high score, but it does give valuable information for my choice on whether to read that review or not.

You could argue that demos and EPs need to be scored MORE than full-lengths. There are bands out there that have written incredible demos and EPs that are higher quality than other bands full-lengths. But there are also demos and EPs that are hilariously shit. A score would simply act as a shorthand hint as to whether, say, a black metal band is worth seeking out or is a generic fucking Darkthrone clone.

You guys argue that all we want is to not read the reviews. I for one don't read them all. I don't read reviews of genres I don't like, and I am not likely to read a black metal review if it scored 20/100. Why would I waste my time reading about something that if it's shit and I'm never going to want to hear it?

Finally, split albums are widely scored here, yet aren't they for a large part simply two Eps stuck together?

So scores are a guide as to which reviews to read? Eh, perhaps. Still, remember a lot of Power Metal got scored >95 around here.

Re shit demos/great demos, I think this is part of the great cultural divide between black metal and other genres. In those others, it's not usual that I know of for people to treat demos as importantly in a band's discog as albums - they generally don't represent the band at their best, and so it's rather unfair to treat them by the same guidelines as one would an album.

Re splits, I never score them, although I see from a search that Alex does. I could argue like rio said elsewhere, that they're a way for two bands to share costs and get their eps out together, so like you said, two eps = no score. I don't know.

Haha!

Basically, what I try to do and I assume the other reviewers do also is write reviews aimed at the person who does have time to read something in depth, and is interested in doing so. In deference to the people who don't fit into those categories, I give them a score and sometimes a little skeleton. Then occasionally I will repeatedly make posts around the forum to the effect of "you people ought to be interested in this, here is a link you can click on to hear it". So if they don't want to read it, at least they can hear the band I am talking about.

My 2 cents:

EPs - definitely.

Demos - I don't like this term at all to describe a recording, simply because demos are no longer demos when they are commercially available and should either be regarded as albums, EPs or singles. And if the material was re-recorded later, it seems to silly to even worry with them at all unless it is actually in the time-frame of it making the rounds as a CD-R or whatever.

Live albums - Why not? It is very hard to do though in my experience, especially when I don't hold live albums, any of them, in as much regard as albums.

Singles - Yes, I would score the ones with at least 3 tracks with an overall score. A/B's with a score for each "co-single" and digital one song singles with a score too.

Compilations - Definitely. Again, I don't see the point unless a good deal of the material is original to the compilation. Alice In Chains Music Bank deserves to be considered because it virtually contains a whole unreleased album on it.