Jump to content

Alternative Press reviews ¡TRE!


tdlyon

Recommended Posts

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

Yeah I was just taking it as an example of people who listen to a very narrow range of music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

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.

Maybe I should have bolded the entire thing, then.

Depends on what you define as good music. Is good music strong songs that have a good melody and are easy to access? Or is good music something that is complex, intricate, with a lot of detail and attention put into it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I will say that comments like that aren't necessarily indications that the critic is bad at his/her job. But, as I said, if someone's personal music taste is at such blatant odds with the reviewer's personal taste (and disagreeing about a past album sucking would certainly fall into this category) then, obviously, they aren't going to value what that reviewer has to say very highly. And they shouldn't.

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.
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.

You are both so very wrong on this, it's not even funny. The average reviewer, as you put it, is nothing more than a fan with a journalism degree. Said degree means they are generally more qualified to write a competent, well-articulated review than a random poster on the internet, but their actual opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. It's part of the reason that critics generally tend to focus more on lyrics and subject matter because words are more familiar territory than music theory. I even happen to know, for a fact, that Alt Press has it's fair share of Green Day and MCR fanboys/fangirls working there. So you can stop with the false aggrandizing now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right down the middle? I won't let this colour my opinion of the album once I get it, but this sounds like the murmurings were true: Green Day could have made one great album instead of three okay ones =/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly think you guys should stop overlooking this ONE interview and wait for it to be released/leak so you can make your own opinion! Remember, it's your opinion that matters, not AP's. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people who are just complaining about the trilogy, made me so mad. damn it. They are just bitchin' around. "Ohh they are not the sameee" "oHHH They are so comercial" "Oohh They are no longer the punk band that i used to love" "This trilogy sucks, ¡UNO! and ¡DOS! are their worst record". DAMN IT, WTF ITS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!. I bet if some new band of MTV had release ¡UNO! and/or ¡DOS! like their debut album. It would be a hit. I respect the opinion of this kind of people and i know no one its talking about this, but i had to say it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people who are just complaining about the trilogy, made me so mad. damn it. They are just bitchin' around. "Ohh they are not the sameee" "oHHH They are so comercial" "Oohzh They are no longer the punk band that i used to love" "This trilogy sucks, ¡UNO! and ¡DOS! are their worst record". DAMN IT, WTF ITS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!. I bet if some new band of MTV had release ¡UNO! and/or ¡DOS! like their debut album. It would be a hit. I respect the opinion of this kind of people and i know no one its talking about this, but i had to say it..

If you respect their opinion, then why berate them over it? And that's BS. Typically a mainstream band will recieve more acclaim for a piece of music than an indie band because they're going against their peers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that comments like that aren't necessarily indications that the critic is bad at his/her job. But, as I said, if someone's personal music taste is at such blatant odds with the reviewer's personal taste (and disagreeing about a past album sucking would certainly fall into this category) then, obviously, they aren't going to value what that reviewer has to say very highly. And they shouldn't.

You are both so very wrong on this, it's not even funny. The average reviewer, as you put it, is nothing more than a fan with a journalism degree. Said degree means they are generally more qualified to write a competent, well-articulated review than a random poster on the internet, but their actual opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. It's part of the reason that critics generally tend to focus more on lyrics and subject matter because words are more familiar territory than music theory. I even happen to know, for a fact, that Alt Press has it's fair share of Green Day and MCR fanboys/fangirls working there. So you can stop with the false aggrandizing now.

You are really selling the critics short. Maybe you don't like them or what they have to say about some artists but this is just plain ridiculous. The average reviewer is in a better position to judge music than the average person even if it's only out of practice. To assume that reviews are written based on such strong bias shows a lack of understanding. It's also closed minded to say that if a reviewer has ever disagreed wit you then you should ignore them. Why? Did they disagree with you because they put more weight on a certain song, lyrics, style? Is someone automatically invalidated in the future if they disagreed with you in the past? A lot of people on here seem to think critics are just assholes bred to hate green day. That's why people tend to ignore the bad reviews and heap praise upon the good ones. The reaction to a 3/5 here was ridiculous. No one had even heard the record yet and they were already disagreeing. How can you even do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what you define as good music. Is good music strong songs that have a good melody and are easy to access? Or is good music something that is complex, intricate, with a lot of detail and attention put into it?

You're right, absolutely. Everybody has their own definition of what is good and what is not, to say that a critic is better equipped to judge whether something is good or not, is just wrong.

I will say that comments like that aren't necessarily indications that the critic is bad at his/her job. But, as I said, if someone's personal music taste is at such blatant odds with the reviewer's personal taste (and disagreeing about a past album sucking would certainly fall into this category) then, obviously, they aren't going to value what that reviewer has to say very highly. And they shouldn't.

You are both so very wrong on this, it's not even funny. The average reviewer, as you put it, is nothing more than a fan with a journalism degree. Said degree means they are generally more qualified to write a competent, well-articulated review than a random poster on the internet, but their actual opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's. It's part of the reason that critics generally tend to focus more on lyrics and subject matter because words are more familiar territory than music theory. I even happen to know, for a fact, that Alt Press has it's fair share of Green Day and MCR fanboys/fangirls working there. So you can stop with the false aggrandizing now.

Agreed, totally.

You are really selling the critics short. Maybe you don't like them or what they have to say about some artists but this is just plain ridiculous. The average reviewer is in a better position to judge music than the average person even if it's only out of practice. To assume that reviews are written based on such strong bias shows a lack of understanding. It's also closed minded to say that if a reviewer has ever disagreed wit you then you should ignore them. Why? Did they disagree with you because they put more weight on a certain song, lyrics, style? Is someone automatically invalidated in the future if they disagreed with you in the past? A lot of people on here seem to think critics are just assholes bred to hate green day. That's why people tend to ignore the bad reviews and heap praise upon the good ones. The reaction to a 3/5 here was ridiculous. No one had even heard the record yet and they were already disagreeing. How can you even do that?

Nobody is selling anyone short. The fact of the matter is music journalists are really just writing what they think is good/bad, and going to school for the subject does not make their opinion more valid. Their opinion is as valid as ANYONE'S. No more, no less. Maybe you tend to agree with critics, that's fine. But for people to say that their opinion is more valid than anyone else's, even a fanboy, is false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is selling anyone short. The fact of the matter is music journalists are really just writing what they think is good/bad, and going to school for the subject does not make their opinion more valid. Their opinion is as valid as ANYONE'S. No more, no less. Maybe you tend to agree with critics, that's fine. But for people to say that their opinion is more valid than anyone else's, even a fanboy, is false.

That's ludicrous. Whose opinion would you trust more on engineering-- Someone who has studied the subject or a kid who likes math? Not all opinions are created equal. Everyone can have one, but that doesn't make them equal. I'm not suggesting that if you disagree with a critic, you're wrong. However, the average person's opinion does and should hold less weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's ludicrous. Whose opinion would you trust more on engineering-- Someone who has studied the subject or a kid who likes math?

Music and engineering are not even close to the same thing, that comparison is what's ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to get into a discussion, but ¡Uno! and ¡Dos! are way better than Days Go By, I mean, I like The Offspring, but that album has some good songs, that's all.

I was just using a punk revival album to compare it to. I also like the Offspring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Music and engineering are not even close to the same thing, that comparison is what's ludicrous.

Actually they have a great deal in common. But if you want to believe that a fanboy and a professional critic are on the same level I'm not going to stop you. I just thought you should know that this idea of everyone's opinion being equal is ridiculous at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually they have a great deal in common. But if you want to believe that a fanboy and a professional critic are on the same level I'm not going to stop you. I just thought you should know that this idea of everyone's opinion being equal is ridiculous at best.

They really really do not. There's not one specific formula that works with music, that makes it perfect. None of it is. It is not math, it is an art form that is open for interpretation. Two critics with the same amount of education could have polar opposite opinions of it. Nobody's opinion is better than somebody else's with something like this. A critic's opinion just might be more in tune with the general public, but this is a case where it's literally different for everybody. A fanboy's opinion and a critic's opinion are absolutely both totally and equally valid. It's art.

I feel very strongly about this. There's absolutely nothing wrong with YOU thinking a certain critic's opinion holds more weight than a fanboy's, because you personally know that you don't generally agree with fanboys. But to say that a fanboy's opinion is unequal to a critic's is wrong. Any amount of education they received would not make that true. Now a professional opinion on an issue that is more black and white, I'd say could be trusted more. But music is not that black and white, there's not one solid way to judge it, because everybody likes different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They really really do not. There's not one specific formula that works with music, that makes it perfect. None of it is. It is not math, it is an art form that is open for interpretation. Two critics with the same amount of education could have polar opposite opinions of it. Nobody's opinion is better than somebody else's with something like this. A critic's opinion just might be more in tune with the general public, but this is a case where it's literally different for everybody. A fanboy's opinion and a critic's opinion are absolutely both totally and equally valid. It's art.

I feel very strongly about this. There's absolutely nothing wrong with YOU thinking a certain critic's opinion holds more weight than a fanboy's, because you personally know that you don't generally agree with fanboys. But to say that a fanboy's opinion is unequal to a critic's is wrong. Any amount of education they received would not make that true. Now a professional opinion on an issue that is more black and white, I'd say could be trusted more. But music is not that black and white, there's not one solid way to judge it, because everybody likes different things.

In time you'll know better. There is a difference between an opinion backed by knowledge, experience, and facts ad an opinionated because of unbridled love for a band. Music is in fact very mathematical and scientific. Just about any well trained musician would be able to tell you that playing Canon in D is a simple way to score a pop music hit. Music critics are more often than not well verse in these sorts of things so they can appraise a certain song in a much deeper way from various angles. There is a scientific study out that suggests tear jerker songs are rife with Appogiatura with additional shifts in volume and timbre. These are things that casual listeners and fanboys aren't going to be aware of or take into account. I'm sorry to say that equating the opinions of fanboys and critics is simply wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baboon you're wrong...

Most of the reviewers I've met are actually dumbasses in real life...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In time you'll know better. There is a difference between an opinion backed by knowledge, experience, and facts ad an opinionated because of unbridled love for a band. Music is in fact very mathematical and scientific. Just about any well trained musician would be able to tell you that playing Canon in D is a simple way to score a pop music hit. Music critics are more often than not well verse in these sorts of things so they can appraise a certain song in a much deeper way from various angles. There is a scientific study out that suggests tear jerker songs are rife with Appogiatura with additional shifts in volume and timbre. These are things that casual listeners and fanboys aren't going to be aware of or take into account. I'm sorry to say that equating the opinions of fanboys and critics is simply wrong.

In time I'll know better? I've read studies about forumulaic pop songs, but I also know that that formula guarantees absolutely nothing in music. There are plenty of songs that were structured and written scientifically and given all the right steps that never made it even close to big. There are also plenty of songs that were not written with that in mind, and are absolutely major hits.

I'm going to lay this out clearly for you

o·pin·ion- a personal view, attitude, or appraisal

There are no wrong or right opinions. Science may prove that certain types of songs are usually bigger hits, but that doesn't equal quality necessarily. Everybody has their own reasons for liking or disliking something, it's not the same for anybody. A critic's opinion holds no more strength than a fanboy's and that's that. Major pop hits regularly are critically panned, and albums that don't sell much are sometimes praised. This is not a science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In time I'll know better? I've read studies about forumulaic pop songs, but I also know that that formula guarantees absolutely nothing in music. There are plenty of songs that were structured and written scientifically and given all the right steps that never made it even close to big. There are also plenty of songs that were not written with that in mind, and are absolutely major hits.

I'm going to lay this out clearly for you

o·pin·ion- a personal view, attitude, or appraisal

There are no wrong or right opinions. Science may prove that certain types of songs are usually bigger hits, but that doesn't equal quality necessarily. Everybody has their own reasons for liking or disliking something, it's not the same for anybody. A critic's opinion holds no more strength than a fanboy's and that's that. Major pop hits regularly are critically panned, and albums that don't sell much are sometimes praised. This is not a science.

There are no wrong or right opinions, there are more qualified and less qualified opinions. I didn't say anything about things becoming hits or not I was referring to critics outside knowledge of what takes more time to create and what is more innovative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no wrong or right opinions, there are more qualified and less qualified opinions. I didn't say anything about things becoming hits or not I was referring to critics outside knowledge of what takes more time to create and what is more innovative.

You mentioned scientific studies that all point out how to create a hit song. I'm going to have to disagree with you on this too, I'd say opinions on music can't be more or less qualified, it just comes down to what you like, and what you don't like. It doesn't matter how long it took to create, nor how innovative someone thinks it is. It might be cool that something's innovative or well thought out, but if a critic praises it and a casual music fan hates it, neither of their opinions matter more than the other one. A critic's opinion might be more widespead because they have a bigger platform that reaches more people, but that doesn't make what they say any more real or 'qualified' than what anyone else has to say.

So when can I expect a tre leak?

I'm expecting one the week after next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A school that has a good journalism program.

They don't teach reviewing in journalism though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...