Metal Reviews :: View topic - Crimson Glory (about reviews & other stuff)

There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff.

This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me.

How come there are no Crimson Glory reviews in MR?

I know they've made only 4 albums and the last was many years ago but I consider them to be a unique and very important band. I'd like to see some review of their work in MR. Especially now that some Digitally Remastered CDs are out, a DVD coming and a new album planned for summer 2007.

I know a few of us here are big fans and you know...before you pointed it out....I didn't realize that there weren't any CG reviews done here..Wow..can't believe that. I think we should at least do a couple of the older and more classic ones. I'll run it by the others...

Holy_Terror wrote:

Excuse me?? We review a lot of classic and old school metal. Very little of what I review falls into the Pantera, Metallica or COB "genre' that you're talking about. Same holds true for what people like Jeff, Mike, Ben, Chris and others review here. Maybe it's time to revisit the reviews database..one of the biggest on the net ...before you make sweeping and unfounded generalizations like that.

Holy_Terror wrote:

marty@metalreviews wrote:

Holy_Terror wrote:

You're of course talking about the classics section which amounts to about 1 review a month amidst a sea of weekly reviews which include everything from fairy metal to screamo and melodeth garbage from an already oversaturated urn of piss. That is my point. If there were more than one classic review a month then I wouldnt be saying these things. And I'm sorry, I live in the past. Deal with it.

Actually Hammerfall sounds more like Helloween than CG. So you're wrong. And I fail to see how making my first post in about a month means I lead a sad existence. I wish I was as smart as you, then I could say anything I wanted about anybody and assume it was true. Congratulations.

marty@metalreviews wrote:

Holy_Terror wrote:

To be honest, when I mentioned about the lack of reviews I didn't have only the "classics" section in mind. There could be also under "archives" as are 2 reviews this week. I think categorizing a review under "archives" is something nobody can complain about.

Antonakis wrote:

Yeah, I'm sure Marty is going to try his best to squeeze those in. Sometimes, I just don't think people understand how many reviews we all have that take precedence (promos we're sent by bands, labels, etc.). We all try to review older albums and fill in the gaps when we can, but it can be tough. I've been trying to work in a review of Forbidden and Neurosis for a good while now. I'll get to them, I'm just not quite sure when.

Adam wrote:

Antonakis wrote:

Exactly...why do archive reviews when most of us are always behind with the reviews for promos, new releases etc. ? If there ever is a slow down (not likely) then we will fill in the weekly reviews with a couple archives. We realize that there are some holes in the database as far as albums that have not been reviewed but should have. As well , there's many classics that haven't been done yet either...Number Of The Beast comes to mind. It's probably the most popular and best Maiden album by many accounts yet it isn't in the classics section. Then again, everyone already knows about that album so I'd rather see slightly more "obscure" gems like Running Wild's Black Hand Inn etc. I have a few on my list to do for classics but I never seem to get the time. I think our efforts are better served in handling the flood of new metal releases that seems to get bigger every year rather than dwelling on past releases that most metal fans already know about.

Author:	Antonakis [ Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Crimson Glory (about reviews & other stuff)
How come there are no Crimson Glory reviews in MR? I know they've made only 4 albums and the last was many years ago but I consider them to be a unique and very important band. I'd like to see some review of their work in MR. Especially now that some Digitally Remastered CDs are out, a DVD coming and a new album planned for summer 2007.

Author:	Spaceman Spiff [ Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:44 pm ]
Post subject:
If there's a band that deserves more pimping its CG.

Author:	Holy_Terror [ Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:19 pm ]
Post subject:
There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me.

Author:	noodles [ Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:38 pm ]
Post subject:
Holy_Terror wrote: There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me. LOL

Author:	leee [ Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:41 am ]
Post subject:
Crimson Glory might be ok if dudes vocals didn't annoy after the first 3 or 4 songs.

Metal Reviews https://www.metalreviews.com/phpBB/

Crimson Glory (about reviews & other stuff) https://www.metalreviews.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8403	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Anonymous [ Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:57 am ]
Post subject:
Holy_Terror wrote: There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me. Excuse me?? We review a lot of classic and old school metal. Very little of what I review falls into the Pantera, Metallica or COB "genre' that you're talking about. Same holds true for what people like Jeff, Mike, Ben, Chris and others review here. Maybe it's time to revisit the reviews database..one of the biggest on the net ...before you make sweeping and unfounded generalizations like that.

Author:	Anonymous [ Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:00 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Crimson Glory (about reviews & other stuff)
Antonakis wrote: How come there are no Crimson Glory reviews in MR? I know they've made only 4 albums and the last was many years ago but I consider them to be a unique and very important band. I'd like to see some review of their work in MR. Especially now that some Digitally Remastered CDs are out, a DVD coming and a new album planned for summer 2007. I know a few of us here are big fans and you know...before you pointed it out....I didn't realize that there weren't any CG reviews done here..Wow..can't believe that. I think we should at least do a couple of the older and more classic ones. I'll run it by the others...

Author:	Antonakis [ Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Crimson Glory (about reviews & other stuff)
marty@metalreviews wrote: I know a few of us here are big fans and you know...before you pointed it out....I didn't realize that there weren't any CG reviews done here..Wow..can't believe that. I think we should at least do a couple of the older and more classic ones. I'll run it by the others... Thanks! I don't like missing a new release by an active band but for me being ignorant of important albums or masterpieces of the past feels like a cultural tragedy. Especially when they don't get any publicity anymore since most of them are not active or don't exist nowadays. I myself discovered Crimson Glory about 1-2 years ago (and I still feel ashamed about it). I think there are a lot more buried names that need a bit or resurrecting.

Author:	Holy_Terror [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:30 am ]
Post subject:
marty@metalreviews wrote: Holy_Terror wrote: There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me. Excuse me?? We review a lot of classic and old school metal. Very little of what I review falls into the Pantera, Metallica or COB "genre' that you're talking about. Same holds true for what people like Jeff, Mike, Ben, Chris and others review here. Maybe it's time to revisit the reviews database..one of the biggest on the net ...before you make sweeping and unfounded generalizations like that. You're of course talking about the classics section which amounts to about 1 review a month amidst a sea of weekly reviews which include everything from fairy metal to screamo and melodeth garbage from an already oversaturated urn of piss. That is my point. If there were more than one classic review then I wouldnt be saying these things. And I'm sorry, I live in the past. Deal with it.

Author:	Anonymous [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:58 am ]
Post subject:
Holy_Terror wrote: marty@metalreviews wrote: Holy_Terror wrote: There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me. Excuse me?? We review a lot of classic and old school metal. Very little of what I review falls into the Pantera, Metallica or COB "genre' that you're talking about. Same holds true for what people like Jeff, Mike, Ben, Chris and others review here. Maybe it's time to revisit the reviews database..one of the biggest on the net ...before you make sweeping and unfounded generalizations like that. You're of course talking about the classics section which amounts to about 1 review a month amidst a sea of weekly reviews which include everything from fairy metal to screamo and melodeth garbage from an already oversaturated urn of piss. That is my point. If there were more than one classic review a month then I wouldnt be saying these things. And I'm sorry, I live in the past. Deal with it. You my friend must lead a sad existence....

Author:	leee [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:33 pm ]
Post subject:
He does, he thinks it is cool to dress like that guy in 85 we always threw in the garbage cans at school. Pay no attention to him. The mere fact that he gets his dick hard over Crimson Glory and "midnight" is more the enough to attest to this.......They were fucking Hammerfall before there was Hammerfall.

Author:	Holy_Terror [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:55 pm ]
Post subject:
Actually Hammerfall sounds more like Helloween than CG. So you're wrong. And I fail to see how making my first post in about a month means I lead a sad existence. I wish I was as smart as you, then I could say anything I wanted about anybody and assume it was true. Congratulations.

Author:	Anonymous [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:02 pm ]
Post subject:
Holy_Terror wrote: Actually Hammerfall sounds more like Helloween than CG. So you're wrong. And I fail to see how making my first post in about a month means I lead a sad existence. I wish I was as smart as you, then I could say anything I wanted about anybody and assume it was true. Congratulations. Thanks

Author:	Anonymous [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:51 pm ]
Post subject:
There was a review of Transcendence on this site. In fact it was in the classics section. It must have been a review by Max that got deleted.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC + 1 hour
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Adam [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Holy_Terror wrote: marty@metalreviews wrote: Holy_Terror wrote: There are no CG reviews on this website because they spend the majority of their time reviewing albums that are pure garbage and rehashing old arguments surrounding Pantera, Metallica, and Children of Bodom. If you want classic metal you've come to the wrong place. I suggest Brave Words Bloody Knuckles or Metal Rules for that kind of stuff. This post is for Eyesore. I hope I have lived up to everything he's ever thought of me. Excuse me?? We review a lot of classic and old school metal. Very little of what I review falls into the Pantera, Metallica or COB "genre' that you're talking about. Same holds true for what people like Jeff, Mike, Ben, Chris and others review here. Maybe it's time to revisit the reviews database..one of the biggest on the net ...before you make sweeping and unfounded generalizations like that. You're of course talking about the classics section which amounts to about 1 review a month amidst a sea of weekly reviews which include everything from fairy metal to screamo and melodeth garbage from an already oversaturated urn of piss. That is my point. If there were more than one classic review a month then I wouldnt be saying these things. And I'm sorry, I live in the past. Deal with it. Super Grande Mega- Dude, don't you ever get tired of playing the grumpy old grandpa on these forums? Tell you what, why don't you rattle off a few things you'd like to see reviewed (or reviews that would make you quit pissing and moaning), and I will seriously try to oblige where and when I can.

Author:	Antonakis [ Mon Jan 15, 2007 10:57 pm ]
Post subject:
To be honest, when I mentioned about the lack of reviews I didn't have only the "classics" section in mind. There could be also under "archives" as are 2 reviews this week. I think categorizing a review under "archives" is something nobody can complain about.

Author:	Adam [ Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:46 am ]
Post subject:
Antonakis wrote: To be honest, when I mentioned about the lack of reviews I didn't have only the "classics" section in mind. There could be also under "archives" as are 2 reviews this week. I think categorizing a review under "archives" is something nobody can complain about. Yeah, I'm sure Marty is going to try his best to squeeze those in. Sometimes, I just don't think people understand how many reviews we all have that take precedence (promos we're sent by bands, labels, etc.). We all try to review older albums and fill in the gaps when we can, but it can be tough. I've been trying to work in a review of Forbidden and Neurosis for a good while now. I'll get to them, I'm just not quite sure when.

Author:	Anonymous [ Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:28 am ]
Post subject:
Adam wrote: Antonakis wrote: To be honest, when I mentioned about the lack of reviews I didn't have only the "classics" section in mind. There could be also under "archives" as are 2 reviews this week. I think categorizing a review under "archives" is something nobody can complain about. Yeah, I'm sure Marty is going to try his best to squeeze those in. Sometimes, I just don't think people understand how many reviews we all have that take precedence (promos we're sent by bands, labels, etc.). We all try to review older albums and fill in the gaps when we can, but it can be tough. I've been trying to work in a review of Forbidden and Neurosis for a good while now. I'll get to them, I'm just not quite sure when. Exactly...why do archive reviews when most of us are always behind with the reviews for promos, new releases etc. ? If there ever is a slow down (not likely) then we will fill in the weekly reviews with a couple archives. We realize that there are some holes in the database as far as albums that have not been reviewed but should have. As well , there's many classics that haven't been done yet either...Number Of The Beast comes to mind. It's probably the most popular and best Maiden album by many accounts yet it isn't in the classics section. Then again, everyone already knows about that album so I'd rather see slightly more "obscure" gems like Running Wild's Black Hand Inn etc. I have a few on my list to do for classics but I never seem to get the time. I think our efforts are better served in handling the flood of new metal releases that seems to get bigger every year rather than dwelling on past releases that most metal fans already know about.

Author:	Antonakis [ Tue Jan 16, 2007 4:09 am ]
Post subject:
marty@metalreviews wrote: Adam wrote: Antonakis wrote: To be honest, when I mentioned about the lack of reviews I didn't have only the "classics" section in mind. There could be also under "archives" as are 2 reviews this week. I think categorizing a review under "archives" is something nobody can complain about. Yeah, I'm sure Marty is going to try his best to squeeze those in. Sometimes, I just don't think people understand how many reviews we all have that take precedence (promos we're sent by bands, labels, etc.). We all try to review older albums and fill in the gaps when we can, but it can be tough. I've been trying to work in a review of Forbidden and Neurosis for a good while now. I'll get to them, I'm just not quite sure when. Exactly...why do archive reviews when most of us are always behind with the reviews for promos, new releases etc. ? If there ever is a slow down (not likely) then we will fill in the weekly reviews with a couple archives. We realize that there are some holes in the database as far as albums that have not been reviewed but should have. As well , there's many classics that haven't been done yet either...Number Of The Beast comes to mind. It's probably the most popular and best Maiden album by many accounts yet it isn't in the classics section. Then again, everyone already knows about that album so I'd rather see slightly more "obscure" gems like Running Wild's Black Hand Inn etc. I have a few on my list to do for classics but I never seem to get the time. I think our efforts are better served in handling the flood of new metal releases that seems to get bigger every year rather than dwelling on past releases that most metal fans already know about. You're both totally right and I won't complain. It's just that sometimes people forget and take things as granted. Those people are me and the rest of the visitors here who bitch and complain all the time instead of thanking you guys for what you do. I know it's hard work and sometimes workload can gather up quickly. Good reviews require time and unfortunately time is not infinite. I also understand that newer releases are a priority. Moreover, I noticed that the number of weekly reviews has increased during the last weeks which is a very welcome sight! So thanks again for helping me expand my metal awareness during the last few years and please ignore all the bitching and negativism that comes from our part.