Metal Reviews

Post-grunge is eminently reviewable here. However much MetalStorm might cry about it and use it as a stick to beat Fridgey, it is part of the broad "hard rock" family tree, even if it nearly all sucks.

It does all suck, of course. I'd complain if it got a good review, but not about it being reviewed in the first place

I would say because a review is more than just a description of the music, which is by definition inadequate. It's band background, interesting facts, comparisons, humor etc. If you ignore all of that, you have yourself a bland review.

And that particular fact is kind of interesting, because perhaps one can speculate what, if any, influence metal bands have had on Nickelback.

But then it's like you're making excuses for the band's music.

They're basically a commercial amalgam of Alice In Chains, Nirvana and Soundgarden, with modern techniques borrowed from a variety of genres including metal thrown in to make it more interesting.

Nah, then you're merely analyzing it.

That.

But the musicians' private listening habits are irrelevant to the music at hand.

I don't see the problem with that, tbh. IMO a review should work out and describe what influences the band is using and what sound they are aiming for, and then argue whether they are successful or not.

How about focusing on metal and not everything it has influenced?

Because there's already so much metal that dedicating a little attention to its influenced offspring won't hurt.

Sometimes it's kinda interesting, like how the dude from Mountain Goats likes Marduk and Between the Buried and Me.

I make it a point to see if and when you fine people are look for new reviewers and sadly I missed my 2nd opportunity. Ah well one day I will have my chance but if your brilliant staff ever wants look at a few credentials or ask me a few questions, feel free to inquire and I can post them here or via e-mail. til then take it easy...I'm off to play some more Brutal Legend!

RF309 aka Dale