Opinions!

Today I received an email notifying me of a review for Joshua's Creed.  After reading the review I wasn't quite sure what to say or feel.  Below is a link to the review and you're so inclined to read it, let me know what you think/feel about it.

I'm not implying that the review is bad and that I need affirmation.  I'm a big boy and am learning to take criticism for what it's worth.  I'd just like to hear what others think about the review.

Thanks in advance!

http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/products/Joshuas_Creed/Joshuas_Creed/166459/

My humble opinion...taking negative criticism from something you work really hard on is something I struggle with. But I sometimes realize that my music is a result of my upbringing, the stuff I listened to, and my guitar playing ability. People listening to my music might not have the same taste. They may prefer a particular sub-genre over another, etc. For the author to say it sounds like early basic thrash metal (in a negative sort of way)...well that is some of the music a lot of us grew up on and still love to this day. So what's wrong with that?!

There is this article/video I was reading the other day about how to make it in today's music business. I'll link to it here. The very last two points in this article are:

- Lot's of people won't like your music...Accept it!

- If half the people hate you and half the people like you, then good job!

http://diymusician.cdbaby.com/musician-tips/make-new-music-business/?utm_source=cdbaby&utm_medium=email&utm_content=DIY&utm_campaign=DIY092817&spMailingID=55027444&spUserID=MjQyNzU3NTUyNzM5S0&spJobID=1248121130&spReportId=MTI0ODEyMTEzMAS2

I think those points are true and as the music creator it's the tough pill we have to swallow when putting ourselves out there for others to judge.

Don't let it get you down Xid. Do what the rest of us do and write a song about it!

One thing to mention is that it's one guys opinion.  A lot of reviews end up being just someones personal taste and may miss what the artist is trying to do.  Crossrhythms are a good website, but they do sometimes get caught in the 'I don't like it because it's not my style' type of review.  So I wouldn't take it too seriously.

Oh, I'm not taking it seriously, and I'm certainly not down about it.

What I'm asking for folks to do, whether or not you like Joshua's Creed aside, is to review the review.

Fundy wrote:

One thing to mention is that it's one guys opinion.  A lot of reviews end up being just someones personal taste and may miss what the artist is trying to do.  Crossrhythms are a good website, but they do sometimes get caught in the 'I don't like it because it's not my style' type of review.  So I wouldn't take it too seriously.

This is exactly my thoughts on your review, Xid.  This particular site does tend to go a bit negative when it isn't their taste of music.  With your review, I feel that this is reflected.  The last sentence is where they got you with that telling people that it is like the egg with good and bad parts and that they wouldn't go overboard on it unless you were a fan of angst filled primordial metal.  They are essentially saying, in an educated way, that they wouldn't listen to it because it sounds angry and is an outdated musical form.  That's my take.

I didn't fair any better at Crossrhythms:

http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/products/Big_Chris__DBare_Bones_Band/When_Your_Time_Comes/166093/

Just be glad that Sieto didn't review the album . . . he was harsh on The World Will Burn's album

My problem with the review is that it's not really a review.  It's like the reviewer didn't listen to the album.   He said that it's good and bad but fails to highlight either.  He only really compared the songs to other bands, and he's way off the mark on that.

Alive - Nothing thrash about it.

It Is Finished - Black Sabbath?  I would tag Four Horsemen as more Black Sabbath.

The Sky is Falling - Judas Priest opener?  When I recorded the opening riff and listened to it I thought I had completely ripped off AC/DC's Long Way to the Top.  I had to go listen to their song to make sure.  It's similar but not the same.  Then he calls it an apocalyptic tale when it actually lists a bunch of the things the media says we're supposed to fear and they're running around like Chicken Little screaming, "The sky is falling!"

My point is that he wrote a bunch of words and didn't really say anything.  At least the reviewer of Big Chris got a little descriptive of the music and pointed out the highlights.

I guess what I'm really driving at is if you're going to critique, dig into it and do a good job rather than just compare what you're reviewing to other works.

I can see how you would get that conclusion from the review.  They really didn't give one.  They did a bare bones review almost like it was an inconvenience to even listen to it.

Through The Dark Radio wrote:

Just be glad that Sieto didn't review the album . . . he was harsh on The World Will Burn's album

Haha, was I that harsh?    I don't think Dale Thompson was all that happy with my review. 
I agree with what has been said already. In a way it's a matter of taste. I do wonder how much the reviewer has listened through the album. I say that mostly because I only read his comments on intros comparing to famous mainstream acts. He doesn't say a whole lot about the background, the sound quality, its diversity, the lyrical content (he only says what not to expect). Also Crossrythms is from the U.K. People from EU tend to be more upfront in their options than people from the US I believe. Anyway I can't say much about it, since I've not listened to the album.

If I were to review an album that wasn't my taste or style I would preface it with that information and then proceed to review the album on quality, lyrical content, style, etc.

Xid wrote:

If I were to review an album that wasn't my taste or style I would preface it with that information and then proceed to review the album on quality, lyrical content, style, etc.

I've seen Andy do that on his Angelic Warlord site.  I think it's only fair.

Quote :

I've seen Andy do that on his Angelic Warlord site.  I think it's only fair.

Thanks- I am currently at work on a review of the Minier re-release on Retroactive.  As many of your know, I am not exactly a connoisseur of thrash, but I also felt it would be a double standard not to review Minier in light of recent reviews I have done of Deliverance (Weapons...) and Disciples of God.

I think I could use those two as a basis of comparison when putting together the Minier review.

Staybrite wrote:

Xid wrote:

If I were to review an album that wasn't my taste or style I would preface it with that information and then proceed to review the album on quality, lyrical content, style, etc.

I've seen Andy do that on his Angelic Warlord site.  I think it's only fair.

Angelic Warlord does great reviews!

I wonder if this reviewer learned from some of the reviewers for HM

Dynamis wrote:

Quote :

I've seen Andy do that on his Angelic Warlord site.  I think it's only fair.

Thanks- I am currently at work on a review of the Minier re-release on Retroactive.  As many of your know, I am not exactly a connoisseur of thrash, but I also felt it would be a double standard not to review Minier in light of recent reviews I have done of Deliverance (Weapons...) and Disciples of God.

I think I could use those two as a basis of comparison when putting together the Minier review.

I had the cassette many years ago and have had the opportunity to buy the CD a few times over the years.  I was disappointed that they didn't add the bass to the recording.  I didn't mind it when I was younger, but this album sounds SO incomplete now.

Xid, that review is crap.  I don't say that as a matter of whether or not I agree with it, I'm talking about it as a review.  It's like the kind of thing I see when my students throw together their assignments at the last minute--a lot of cliches, a lot of words that make it sound like they are saying something, and very little in terms of substance.

Alldat, your's doesn't really seem to be all that negative.  Ok, so he didn't like the more "fun" tracks (clearly he's never been to a Walmart) and somehow he was completely unfamiliar with "Bad to the Bone," but the 6/10 really didn't jive with what was written.

messiaen77 wrote:

Xid, that review is crap.  I don't say that as a matter of whether or not I agree with it, I'm talking about it as a review.

Exactly!

Xid wrote:

messiaen77 wrote:

Xid, that review is crap.  I don't say that as a matter of whether or not I agree with it, I'm talking about it as a review.

Exactly!

And Messiaen77 knows a thing or two about doing reviews 

The reviewer seems to focus solely on the lyric content...and even that's only a basic (mis?)interpretation. I find it odd that there's nothing there about the performance.

I reviewed a song today.  I didn't like the vocals (screamo) and the middle change was weird.  I said so in the review.  But I did like the intro groove and the overall production was good, too.

I finally read the review and all it did was make me think the reviewer had no clue about heavy metal music.  He compared most of the tracks to other bands that weren't good fits for the same style.  All it did was leave me with the feeling that I couldn't trust the reviewer to make an accurate description or evaluation of any style of heavy metal music.  Bummer.
What the heck is "primitive thrash" or "primordial metal" anyway?  Confusing review (or possibly just confusing description?)

Primitive Thrash:

I read some of his other reviews.  He seems to like metalcore and modern rock.  And P&W.