Alternative Press reviews ¡TRE!

[Jon Benjamin]

Those aren't b-sides. Those are names of songs we know of that haven't been officially released.

They were obviously intended for the albums if they were playing them at the shows and they didn't make it, making them b-sides

[Cob]

They were obviously intended for the albums if they were playing them at the shows and they didn't make it, making them b-sides

B-Sides aren't songs that are cut from an album; they're songs that are cut from the final track-listing of an album and then released along with a single, hence the term b-side. None of those songs have been formally released alongside anything, so they're not b-sides, just unreleased or cut songs.

[WrongWayToSalvation]

They did say that they wrote over 60 songs. They did the same for Nimrod, and if I recall correctly, for Warning as well.

Okay. Good to know you have an opinion too.

I know they wrote songs, I was talking about how that person above thought they were b-sides, even though we have no official recordings of any of them. And I'm pretty sure any review that isn't glowing is going to get more negative tinged comments to them. Ever noticed that in the iDos! review section that whenever someone posted a review and said the review was great it was a super positive one? Some people here aren't very good at taking critisism, they always come up with excuses, or try to find something in the review to almost invalidate it.

[Stan Dellone]

There's something about that song that will always be...off. I can't explain it either.

On the subject of the review, I can't say if I agree or not, seeing as I haven't heard it; although it has only made me more excited for the album, since this is the first description we have heard about many of these songs. The reviewer seems to contradict themselves a bit, at least to me, and I feel that they may have missed the point of a ballad like The Forgotten. Otherwise it's a decent review, I think I'll give it a solid 3/5. Reviewception.

A review within a review... how do you know what it's over?

I want to say I'm cautiously optimistic about ¡TRE! because of songs like X-Kid and 8th Ave, but I also really don't like The Forgotten or Drama Queen at all. The rest is a big unknown for me, but I'm looking forward to finally hearing Dirty Rotten Bastards. Some of the descriptions sound awesome, even though they're presented as negatives by the reviewer. There are far too many unknowns for me to make a call yet. I waited for the previous two albums to be released (leak...) before actually passing judgement on them, so I'm going to have to do the same with ¡TRE!. The reviewers main complaint seems to be a lack of commonality between the tracks, but to be honest, it wasn't a lack of cohesion that bothered me with the last two. It's the lack of quality...

[Cob]

I know they wrote songs, I was talking about how that person above thought they were b-sides, even though we have no official recordings of any of them. And I'm pretty sure any review that isn't glowing is going to get more negative tinged comments to them. Ever noticed that in the iDos! review section that whenever someone posted a review and said the review was great it was a super positive one? Some people here aren't very good at taking critisism, they always come up with excuses, or try to find something in the review to almost invalidate it.

Sorry I misinterpreted your post then.

And I understand that the review isn't going to be glowing, I don't care that it isn't positive and I realize that it is mixed and that a 3 out of 5 is still a good score. I just personally don't like the way it was written and I disagree with the comments on The Forgotten, that's all.

[spacesauce]

This review recognizes what the trilogy has allowed Green Day to do; experiment. Had this been one album there would likely be no Fuck Time, Kill the DJ, Nightlife, See You Tonight, and likely a couple from Tre too. Will this be the bands most popular era? No. But I appreciate this experimentation that many other bands wouldn't touch today. I've always agreed with Billie's philosophy on song writing and this trilogy allows him to follow it more freely. Overall I think lyrically he has been stronger (especially compared to the last two albums), but this trilogy does show his strength through variety. Not many bands could do this.

[Cob]

A review within a review... how do you know what it's over?

I want to say I'm cautiously optimistic about ¡TRE! because of songs like X-Kid and 8th Ave, but I also really don't like The Forgotten or Drama Queen at all. The rest is a big unknown for me, but I'm looking forward to finally hearing Dirty Rotten Bastards. Some of the descriptions sound awesome, even though they're presented as negatives by the reviewer. There are far too many unknowns for me to make a call yet. I waited for the previous two albums to be released (leak...) before actually passing judgement on them, so I'm going to have to do the same with ¡TRE!. The reviewers main complaint seems to be a lack of commonality between the tracks, but to be honest, it wasn't a lack of cohesion that bothered me with the last two. It's the lack of quality...

When the top stops spinning? I didn't think that through.

I think Tre will likely be my favorite of the 3 albums. I really enjoy Amanda, 8th Avenue Serenade, and that preview of X-Kid. Drama Queen is a good track in my opinion, I really dig that folky, Credence Clearwater-type music that backs it up. The Forgotten is okay to me; I enjoy it because it's Green Day's first ballad since AI that isn't trying to be epic, but then again I've never really been a fan of their ballads outside of Wake Me Up When September Ends.

I'm the opposite of you, I really enjoy the songs on the past two records and I think there is nothing wrong with the quality. Are 100% all 25 songs, so far, amazing? No. But even the weaker tracks are still enjoyable, and the strong tracks (which in my opinion out number the weaker ones) are really great. In my honest opinion, the only problem with the Trilogy so far has been the cohesiveness of the albums, and I believe that's where a good part of the fan dissonance is coming from. Uno, for example, is almost too cohesive, to the point where it breezes by and blends together a bit. Dos, on the other hand, is hurt by how un-cohesive it is; every track is unique from the next but some of the transitions (see Makeout Party to Stray Heart/Stop When The Red Lights Flash to Wild One) are a bit jarring. But, for the most part, most of the songs on their own are really good, which is what, to my interpretation, has caused some of its mixed reception. The same can be said about Uno. Perhaps the albums would have benefited from different track lists that mixed them up more? But it's not my place to make such suggestions. Otherwise I think the Trilogy so far has been full of great, simple, fun music, and it's exactly what I wanted after 21st Century Breakdown.

[Homero]

7 pages of discussion of a review, the author must be proud

[Cob]

This review recognizes what the trilogy has allowed Green Day to do; experiment. Had this been one album there would likely be no Fuck Time, Kill the DJ, Nightlife, See You Tonight, and likely a couple from Tre too. Will this be the bands most popular era? No. But I appreciate this experimentation that many other bands wouldn't touch today. I've always agreed with Billie's philosophy on song writing and this trilogy allows him to follow it more freely. Overall I think lyrically he has been stronger (especially compared to the last two albums), but this trilogy does show his strength through variety. Not many bands could do this.

I agree completely. Touching on your comment on the lyrics, I think that people are perhaps putting too much attention on the lyrics and ignoring some of the great music and melody that backs up the words. I also think that 21st Century Breakdown and American Idiot had music that required those kinds of lyrics; this simpler music, on the other hand, doesn't warrant it, and honestly I think it fits well (although Dos has plenty of metaphor and darkness behind that energetic exterior).

[Stan Dellone]

I'm the opposite of you, I really enjoy the songs on the past two records and I think there is nothing wrong with the quality. Are 100% all 25 songs, so far, amazing? No. But even the weaker tracks are still enjoyable, and the strong tracks (which in my opinion out number the weaker ones) are really great. In my honest opinion, the only problem with the Trilogy so far has been the cohesiveness of the albums, and I believe that's where a good part of the fan dissonance is coming from. Uno, for example, is almost too cohesive, to the point where it breezes by and blends together a bit. Dos, on the other hand, is hurt by how un-cohesive it is; every track is unique from the next but some of the transitions (see Makeout Party to Stray Heart/Stop When The Red Lights Flash to Wild One) are a bit jarring. But, for the most part, most of the songs on their own are really good, which is what, to my interpretation, has caused some of its mixed reception. The same can be said about Uno. Perhaps the albums would have benefited from different track lists that mixed them up more? But it's not my place to make such suggestions. Otherwise I think the Trilogy so far has been full of great, simple, fun music, and it's exactly what I wanted after 21st Century Breakdown.

Touching on your comment on the lyrics, I think that people are perhaps putting too much attention on the lyrics and ignoring some of the great music and melody that backs up the words. I also think that 21st Century Breakdown and American Idiot had music that required those kinds of lyrics; this simpler music, on the other hand, doesn't warrant it, and honestly I think it fits well (although Dos has plenty of metaphor and darkness behind that energetic exterior).

Uno is certainly the most cohesive of the three (assuming that part of the Tre review can be trusted). It's broken up and ended by 3 songs (DJ, Troublemaker, Oh Love) that don't fit the bill, but they serve more as accents than distractions from the rest of the pop-punk-itude. Musically, it's not a bad album, unless you count the few songs that seem to suffer from sound alike syndrome with each other, and alarmingly with Green Days cover of I Fought The Law. I don't think there's anything wrong with expecting something more from in the lyric department. I don't think anyone is asking for lyrics akin to AI or 21CB. Just something slightly more meaningful and articulate than "Stab my heart like a stick in the mud/Cut my chest just to see the blood", or "Asleep on the floor on cardboard, stab out my heart like a dart board". Sure, you have Rusty James. That's as close to the kind of lyrics Billie Joe should be writing as the album gets. Or Stay The Night. Just something that doesn't sound like a first draft that you do just to get the melody and rhythm in place. "Woke up in a pool of sweat/First I thought that I'd pissed the bed"?

I agree with you on Dos for the most part. Incredibly disjointed. I really think Dos is a better album than Uno. Maybe because it doesn't feel like it's trying to recapture something that the band lost (for better or worse). With the exception of the hard rockers (Fuck Time, etc.), and Wow!, this album seems to my ear to be a more apt snapshot of the state of the band/Billie's mind. This is where it gets a little tough to explain. I like most of the tracks on this album, but I only like a few of them as actual album tracks. I'd love most as b-sides, but they don't give you anything to grab onto in the context of an album (or this album, at least). No cohesion... Maybe it's not so hard to explain after all. At the very least, with the exception of the hard rockers, again, the lyrics on Dos are an awful lot better than Uno.

[Cob]

Uno is certainly the most cohesive of the three (assuming that part of the Tre review can be trusted). It's broken up and ended by 3 songs (DJ, Troublemaker, Oh Love) that don't fit the bill, but they serve more as accents than distractions from the rest of the pop-punk-itude. Musically, it's not a bad album, unless you count the few songs that seem to suffer from sound alike syndrome with each other, and alarmingly with Green Days cover of I Fought The Law. I don't think there's anything wrong with expecting something more from in the lyric department. I don't think anyone is asking for lyrics akin to AI or 21CB. Just something slightly more meaningful and articulate than "Stab my heart like a stick in the mud/Cut my chest just to see the blood", or "Asleep on the floor on cardboard, stab out my heart like a dart board". Sure, you have Rusty James. That's as close to the kind of lyrics Billie Joe should be writing as the album gets. Or Stay The Night. Just something that doesn't sound like a first draft that you do just to get the melody and rhythm in place. "Woke up in a pool of sweat/First I thought that I'd pissed the bed"?

I agree with you on Dos for the most part. Incredibly disjointed. I really think Dos is a better album than Uno. Maybe because it doesn't feel like it's trying to recapture something that the band lost (for better or worse). With the exception of the hard rockers (Fuck Time, etc.), and Wow!, this album seems to my ear to be a more apt snapshot of the state of the band/Billie's mind. This is where it gets a little tough to explain. I like most of the tracks on this album, but I only like a few of them as actual album tracks. I'd love most as b-sides, but they don't give you anything to grab onto in the context of an album (or this album, at least). No cohesion... Maybe it's not so hard to explain after all. At the very least, with the exception of the hard rockers, again, the lyrics on Dos are an awful lot better than Uno.

I don't hear the "recapturing" aspect of Uno, to me it sounds like the band is genuinely having fun, especially on Angel Blue, Troublemaker, and Kill the DJ. Honestly, I think it's their most fun album; my only real complaint being the lack of variety with only a few breaks (the three songs you mentioned) and the lack of pure Mike Dirnt harmonies. The sound alike syndrome is a bit of an issue, but I blame that on the fact that the songs were grouped based on style, genre, and composition (mixing it up from the start would have definitely made Uno a great album, not just a good one, like another Nimrod maybe).

Otherwise, I agree that Uno has very straightforward lyrics, but I don't think it's as big an issue as some of us are making it out to be (or Sputnik Music, for that matter). Green Day, in my opinion, have never really tried to hide their messages and meanings, the only albums that really have that complexity and meaning are American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown. The rest of their albums are fairly straightforward forward for the most part, especially with teen angst (I found out what it takes to be a man/No mom and dad will never understand). I think people just got used to it, though after two lyrically complex (and "deep") albums, I'll admit that the rhyme schemes do come off as bit crude. I also think that a lot of us maybe got used to Billie Joe writing about "deep" subjects; and as a result we have initially reacted negatively to Uno's subjects that mostly focus on pure candy cane love. But I think the focus here is definitely on melody, energy, and music; Billie Joe purposely tried to distance himself from that type of poetic writing because he realized it doesn't match the simpler music very well. I realize that's not for everyone, but in my opinion it works.

[Ryder556]

There have been lots of B-sides from the trilogy? State Of Shock, Gabriella, Dreamcatcher, Olivia, Soda Pop Curtis, pretty sure theres 1 or 2 more I just can't think of them now.

State of Shock, from what I've heard and seen online, is Little Boy Named Train, Soda Pop Curtis is X-Kid I believe, and Olivia was supposed to be on Cigarettes and Valentines(supposedly).

Dreamcatcher was unfinished when they played it during that one soundcheck, or they never rehersed it. You can tell as it gets really sloppy near the end. Still I'm hoping for an eventual studio release someday.

That just leaves Gabriella. Honestly I don't know what could of happened to it. At first I thought it'd be Baby Eyes when I saw the albums track lists at the Echoplex show I believe, but that was short lived when Dos! was released/leaked. I have the thought that it may have been renamed. Maybe Brutal Love. Or maybe the song was never called Gabriella. It could be Walk Away, which to me sounds like it'll be a song about leaving a girl.

And on to my last part. The other two songs you're thinking about are very likely Crushing Bastards and Last Gang in Town. Which are Loss of Control and Rusty James respectively.

Also one thing that baffles me is how Stray Heart managed to come out of the Tiki Bar show with amazing audio, but the others didn't. Did the guy who recorded Stray Heart record just that one song only?

[Stan Dellone]

I don't hear the "recapturing" aspect of Uno, to me it sounds like the band is genuinely having fun, especially on Angel Blue, Troublemaker, and Kill the DJ. Honestly, I think it's their most fun album; my only real complaint being the lack of variety with only a few breaks (the three songs you mentioned) and the lack of pure Mike Dirnt harmonies. The sound alike syndrome is a bit of an issue, but I blame that on the fact that the songs were grouped based on style, genre, and composition (mixing it up from the start would have definitely made Uno a great album, not just a good one, like another Nimrod maybe).

Otherwise, I agree that Uno has very straightforward lyrics, but I don't think it's as big an issue as some of us are making it out to be (or Sputnik Music, for that matter). Green Day, in my opinion, have never really tried to hide their messages and meanings, the only albums that really have that complexity and meaning are American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown. The rest of their albums are fairly straightforward forward for the most part, especially with teen angst (I found out what it takes to be a man/No mom and dad will never understand). I think people just got used to it, though after two lyrically complex (and "deep") albums, I'll admit that the rhyme schemes do come off as bit crude. I also think that a lot of us maybe got used to Billie Joe writing about "deep" subjects; and as a result we have initially reacted negatively to Uno's subjects that mostly focus on pure candy cane love. But I think the focus here is definitely on melody, energy, and music; Billie Joe purposely tried to distance himself from that type of poetic writing because he realized it doesn't match the simpler music very well. I realize that's not for everyone, but in my opinion it works.

It's getting harder to argue with what you have to say. I'm not converted, but I understand that we just see things differently, and that's great. I think i agree with you more emphatically on the lack of Mike on harmonies than anything else. Billie can sing, but double and triple tracking his own vocals over one another gives it a far more manufactured feel and a studio sheen that smacks of over-production. Mike compliments him so well that it's a real shame they didn't utilize him.

As for the lyrics, straight forward is fine with me. I'm not looking for complexity on the level of AI and 21CB in terms of narrative or anything like that at all. It's not that they aren't guarded or metaphorical enough. They just kind of suck. They seem incredibly sophomoric a lot of the time. Billie wrote Kerplunk-Warning without his lyrics ever really coming across as just dumb (with a few exceptions, including Warning's title track sadly). Something like the lyric you quoted is an example of completely unpretentious lyrics that say what they mean, but don't come across as just off the top of the head. Give me simple, but don't give me easy. That's all I ever want, really. There's a difference, maybe a small one, but a significant one nonetheless.

[Jon Benjamin]

State of Shock, from what I've heard and seen online, is Little Boy Named Train, Soda Pop Curtis is X-Kid I believe, and Olivia was supposed to be on Cigarettes and Valentines(supposedly).

Dreamcatcher was unfinished when they played it during that one soundcheck, or they never rehersed it. You can tell as it gets really sloppy near the end. Still I'm hoping for an eventual studio release someday.

That just leaves Gabriella. Honestly I don't know what could of happened to it. At first I thought it'd be Baby Eyes when I saw the albums track lists at the Echoplex show I believe, but that was short lived when Dos! was released/leaked. I have the thought that it may have been renamed. Maybe Brutal Love. Or maybe the song was never called Gabriella. It could be Walk Away, which to me sounds like it'll be a song about leaving a girl.

And on to my last part. The other two songs you're thinking about are very likely Crushing Bastards and Last Gang in Town. Which are Loss of Control and Rusty James respectively.

Also one thing that baffles me is how Stray Heart managed to come out of the Tiki Bar show with amazing audio, but the others didn't. Did the guy who recorded Stray Heart record just that one song only?

I wasn't thinking of Crushing Bastards or Last Gang In Town, I knew those were renamed, and we don't have any confirmation from anyone at the show that Soda Pop Curtis = X Kid or that State of Shock is Little Boy Named Train

[Cob]

It's getting harder to argue with what you have to say. I'm not converted, but I understand that we just see things differently, and that's great. I think i agree with you more emphatically on the lack of Mike on harmonies than anything else. Billie can sing, but double and triple tracking his own vocals over one another gives it a far more manufactured feel and a studio sheen that smacks of over-production. Mike compliments him so well that it's a real shame they didn't utilize him.

As for the lyrics, straight forward is fine with me. I'm not looking for complexity on the level of AI and 21CB in terms of narrative or anything like that at all. It's not that they aren't guarded or metaphorical enough. They just kind of suck. They seem incredibly sophomoric a lot of the time. Billie wrote Kerplunk-Warning without his lyrics ever really coming across as just dumb (with a few exceptions, including Warning's title track sadly). Something like the lyric you quoted is an example of completely unpretentious lyrics that say what they mean, but don't come across as just off the top of the head. Give me simple, but don't give me easy. That's all I ever want, really. There's a difference, maybe a small one, but a significant one nonetheless.

I see what you mean, there is a significant difference, yet a thin line, between straightforward and crude, especially in meaning and rhyme scheme. I guess ultimately the difference is that I accept it as part of Uno's music (because in my opinion it mostly works and doesn't bother me) while you can't help but let it get to you, which is perfectly fine of course.

Looks like once again we agree to disagree, but let me just say that you are the first person on this board that I have had a "disagreeing" discussion with where the argument did not go in an endless circle of ignorance and fallacy. For that, I high five you through the internet. I hope that one day in the future you will be able to look back on these two albums and see them as the quality works I see them as. I would suggest trying to mix or shuffle Uno and Dos together, maybe you'll get a better mix and start to see the quality? It may work, may not, but It's okay if you don't, after all to every man his own.

Although we do disagree on several key things, through the differences we also have several similarities: More Mike is always a good thing, and we're still excited, (even if cautiously on your end), for Tre. The way I see it, Tre has been the album that the band has amped up (and kept secret) the most, so it can definitely go either way. I wish you a Happy Holiday, and I pray that neither of us will be disappointed by Tre.

[Stan Dellone]

I see what you mean, there is a significant difference, yet a thin line, between straightforward and crude, especially in meaning and rhyme scheme. I guess ultimately the difference is that I accept it as part of Uno's music (because in my opinion it mostly works and doesn't bother me) while you can't help but let it get to you, which is perfectly fine of course.

Looks like once again we agree to disagree, but let me just say that you are the first person on this board that I have had a "disagreeing" discussion with where the argument did not go in an endless circle of ignorance and fallacy. For that, I high five you through the internet. I hope that one day in the future you will be able to look back on these two albums and see them as the quality works I see them as. I would suggest trying to mix or shuffle Uno and Dos together, maybe you'll get a better mix and start to see the quality? It may work, may not, but It's okay if you don't, after all to every man his own.

Although we do disagree on several key things, through the differences we also have several similarities: More Mike is always a good thing, and we're still excited, (even if cautiously on your end), for Tre. The way I see it, Tre has been the album that the band has amped up (and kept secret) the most, so it can definitely go either way. I wish you a Happy Holiday, and I pray that neither of us will be disappointed by Tre.

I might just do a shuffle playlist right now. If the day comes when I can look at these albums and love them equally with the rest of the Green Day catalogue, I'll welcome it with open arms. I can only hope that you grow jaded and come to absolutely despise them from Nuclear Family to The Forgotten so I can say, "I guess I told you so, but you took it a little too far. Calm down, they're not that bad. Jeez..."

I hope to disagree with you again sometime. High five, happy holidays, and may ¡Tre! save the trilogy.

[gerardsangel4977]

I know they wrote songs, I was talking about how that person above thought they were b-sides, even though we have no official recordings of any of them. And I'm pretty sure any review that isn't glowing is going to get more negative tinged comments to them. Ever noticed that in the iDos! review section that whenever someone posted a review and said the review was great it was a super positive one? Some people here aren't very good at taking critisism, they always come up with excuses, or try to find something in the review to almost invalidate it.

Here's the thing, though, with reviews: The entire key to using them effectively is to find a critic and/or publication whose views align with yours, not because of a need for validation or a resistance to criticism, but because, if someone seems to like the same things you do and to value similar qualities in music (or movies or what have you), you know you can trust their judgment on future recommendations.

So, if someone finds themselves strongly disagreeing with a review, for any reason, then the review *is* invalid for them. As it should be. To continue to put any stock in it, at that point, would be unproductive and ineffective.

I feel like people, collectively, have gotten the erroneous idea in their heads that critics are a breed apart; that their opinions are somehow better or worth more than the average person's; and that anyone who disagrees with the critical reception of anything either has "bad taste" (which is also a made-up concept) or is blinded by their own biases, even though there's no such thing as an unbiased opinion (including the reviewer's). It is true that critics, as cultural gatekeepers, have an impact on both sales and public perception, thus making their opinions "important" in that way, but that's only because we allow them to do so.

Dos, on the other hand, is hurt by how un-cohesive it is; every track is unique from the next but some of the transitions (see Makeout Party to Stray Heart/Stop When The Red Lights Flash to Wild One) are a bit jarring.

I actually think Makeout Party transitions into Stray Heart surprisingly well. From one bass-driven song to another Also, Stop When The Red Lights Flash doesn't go into Wild One; It goes into Lazy Bones, which, in turn, goes into Wild One. And my best friend and I both feel that the latter transition is one of the strongest on the album, if not *the* strongest.

In fact, I'd say the only part of Dos that feels anywhere close to jarring is Ashley and Baby Eyes. Both are excellent and transition well into each other, but the transitions from Stray Heart into Ashley and from Baby Eyes into Lady Cobra both feel somewhat abrupt. I love both tracks immensely, but I can't help but view them as a brief interlude or an aside before returning to the party.

. Also one thing that baffles me is how Stray Heart managed to come out of the Tiki Bar show with amazing audio, but the others didn't. Did the guy who recorded Stray Heart record just that one song only?

The Tiki Bar show was very strict about the no recording policy. The few pics, vids, and clips we got were done largely on the sly via cellphone. So, yes, the general quality is shit.The person who recorded "Stray Heart" managed to sneak a partial video of both it and "Goodbye to Romance", if memory serves, and the audio was ripped from that. The other recordings were audio only, recorded from people's cell phones that they were trying to keep hidden away from security. I can't remember if "Sweet 16", "Last Gang in Town", the full-length "Goodbye to Romance" cover, and "Amy were all recorded by the same person, or if it was a couple different people. And then we had another four short recordings from *outside* the venue, including "Oh Love", "Crushing Bastards", and two others that must be on Tre, if at all, since they haven't shown up in the trilogy yet.

[WrongWayToSalvation]

Here's the thing, though, with reviews: The entire key to using them effectively is to find a critic and/or publication whose views align with yours, not because of a need for validation or a resistance to criticism, but because, if someone seems to like the same things you do and to value similar qualities in music (or movies or what have you), you know you can trust their judgment on future recommendations.

So, if someone finds themselves strongly disagreeing with a review, for any reason, then the review *is* invalid for them. As it should be. To continue to put any stock in it, at that point, would be unproductive and ineffective.

I feel like people, collectively, have gotten the erroneous idea in their heads that critics are a breed apart; that their opinions are somehow better or worth more than the average person's; and that anyone who disagrees with the critical reception of anything either has "bad taste" (which is also a made-up concept) or is blinded by their own biases, even though there's no such thing as an unbiased opinion (including the reviewer's). It is true that critics, as cultural gatekeepers, have an impact on both sales and public perception, thus making their opinions "important" in that way, but that's only because we allow them to do so.

I actually think Makeout Party transitions into Stray Heart surprisingly well. From one bass-driven song to another ;)/> Also, Stop When The Red Lights Flash doesn't go into Wild One; It goes into Lazy Bones, which, in turn, goes into Wild One. And my best friend and I both feel that the latter transition is one of the strongest on the album, if not *the* strongest.

In fact, I'd say the only part of Dos that feels anywhere close to jarring is Ashley and Baby Eyes. Both are excellent and transition well into each other, but the transitions from Stray Heart into Ashley and from Baby Eyes into Lady Cobra both feel somewhat abrupt. I love both tracks immensely, but I can't help but view them as a brief interlude or an aside before returning to the party.

The Tiki Bar show was very strict about the no recording policy. The few pics, vids, and clips we got were done largely on the sly via cellphone. So, yes, the general quality is shit.The person who recorded "Stray Heart" managed to sneak a partial video of both it and "Goodbye to Romance", if memory serves, and the audio was ripped from that. The other recordings were audio only, recorded from people's cell phones that they were trying to keep hidden away from security. I can't remember if "Sweet 16", "Last Gang in Town", the full-length "Goodbye to Romance" cover, and "Amy were all recorded by the same person, or if it was a couple different people. And then we had another four short recordings from *outside* the venue, including "Oh Love", "Crushing Bastards", and two others that must be on Tre, if at all, since they haven't shown up in the trilogy yet.

I'm talking about invalidations like "Oh this reviewer rated that album higher than this one, and that album sucked. This reviewer doesn't have good tastes."

Or when the Alt Press review came out, some people tried to invalidate it because of who they chose as Artist of the Year. How would this review have anything to do with that? Obviously something like that would be voted on internally, but that doesn't mean this reviewer liked them, and if he does then so what? I find it cheap.

[Blond-O-Sonic Shimmer Trap]

The average reviewer is going to have a better idea of what is good music than the average person on here who listens to Green Day, MCR, All Time Low and Linkin Park. But the average person on here is going to have a better idea of what Green Day were aiming for than someone who knows nothing about the ideas behind it and just gets the finished product in front of them and are tasked with reviewing it. They're one of the easier bands to bash so most reviewers always err on that side rather than give any over-eager praise. And then people on here proudly proclaim to love everything the band do. Someone who dislikes most of the songs, and explains why, but notes a couple that they do like surely has a more legitimate opinion than blind fandom.

[BlackBaboon]

Here's the thing, though, with reviews: The entire key to using them effectively is to find a critic and/or publication whose views align with yours, not because of a need for validation or a resistance to criticism, but because, if someone seems to like the same things you do and to value similar qualities in music (or movies or what have you), you know you can trust their judgment on future recommendations.

So, if someone finds themselves strongly disagreeing with a review, for any reason, then the review *is* invalid for them. As it should be. To continue to put any stock in it, at that point, would be unproductive and ineffective.

I feel like people, collectively, have gotten the erroneous idea in their heads that critics are a breed apart; that their opinions are somehow better or worth more than the average person's; and that anyone who disagrees with the critical reception of anything either has "bad taste" (which is also a made-up concept) or is blinded by their own biases, even though there's no such thing as an unbiased opinion (including the reviewer's). It is true that critics, as cultural gatekeepers, have an impact on both sales and public perception, thus making their opinions "important" in that way, but that's only because we allow them to do so.

I actually think Makeout Party transitions into Stray Heart surprisingly well. From one bass-driven song to another ;)/> Also, Stop When The Red Lights Flash doesn't go into Wild One; It goes into Lazy Bones, which, in turn, goes into Wild One. And my best friend and I both feel that the latter transition is one of the strongest on the album, if not *the* strongest.

Well critics do have a better opinion than most people because they have to listen to a variety of music in order to do their reviews. Fans opinions are fine for commercial reception but they are not any good at critical assessment.

[Clockwise]

The average reviewer is going to have a better idea of what is good music than the average person on here who listens to Green Day, MCR, All Time Low and Linkin Park. But the average person on here is going to have a better idea of what Green Day were aiming for than someone who knows nothing about the ideas behind it and just gets the finished product in front of them and are tasked with reviewing it. They're one of the easier bands to bash so most reviewers always err on that side rather than give any over-eager praise. And then people on here proudly proclaim to love everything the band do. Someone who dislikes most of the songs, and explains why, but notes a couple that they do like surely has a more legitimate opinion than blind fandom.

False.

[BlackBaboon]

False.

Well you took that out of context. Read the rest of the sentence that you highlighted.

[Blond-O-Sonic Shimmer Trap]

Well if you're only going to put half the sentence in bold...how very Fox News.

[Homero]

The average reviewer is going to have a better idea of what is good music than the average person on here who listens to Green Day, MCR, All Time Low and Linkin Park. But the average person on here is going to have a better idea of what Green Day were aiming for than someone who knows nothing about the ideas behind it and just gets the finished product in front of them and are tasked with reviewing it. They're one of the easier bands to bash so most reviewers always err on that side rather than give any over-eager praise. And then people on here proudly proclaim to love everything the band do. Someone who dislikes most of the songs, and explains why, but notes a couple that they do like surely has a more legitimate opinion than blind fandom.

I completely agree with you, but not everybody on here listens to those bands you mentioned, I know it's just an example though.

[Clockwise]

Well you took that out of context. Read the rest of the sentence that you highlighted.

Of course I read the entire sentence/post. It's still totally wrong. Saying that anyone is more qualified to judge what is 'good music' or not is just wrong, it doesn't work that way.

Well if you're only going to put half the sentence in bold...how very Fox News.

Maybe I should have bolded the entire thing, then.