Album Rating: 3.5
in this case i semi agree but i also see a trend of atavanhalen complaining about any review that doesnt divert from the "THIS ALBUM IS BLANK BLANK HERES WHY" formula
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
You're saying that wanting reviews to stay on topic isn't a valid request?
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
yes that is exactly what i am saying
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
Cannot tell if you are kidding or not.
|
| |
I wholeheartedly believe that reviews should be interesting to read, which is why I enjoy reading reviews like your concept review of F#A#. This whole 'straight-to-the-point thing that people expect is retarded and can get very boring and tedious at times.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off
tl;dr:
issues beyond the direct impact of the songs on offer are sometimes more important than the songs themselves!
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
a nice balance between the two styles is best imo, but both reviews like this and extremely technical ones can get the point across
|
| |
Kingsoby is the best reviewer on this site, imo
|
| |
Yah i know Chan
And I probably take back that statement anyway, Med for the win
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
revert back to track by track
impress atavan
Not what was said at all, but COOL!
my objective is to get people to listen to the album, which i accomplished here based on some of the comments. i can understand why some people might not like this style i guess but i think i'm warranted in wondering why anyone would call it bad writing.
It's not bad writing, Chan. It's overlong, rambling and unfocused, but it's not bad. And you know it's not bad. You certainly know how to engage your readers. I just find it incredibly dense and difficult to get through - the first few paragraphs read more like Chan's Plans than an actual review.
I wholeheartedly believe that reviews should be interesting to read, which is why I enjoy reading reviews like your concept review of F#A#. This whole 'straight-to-the-point thing that people expect is retarded and can get very boring and tedious at times.
Okay, then - why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't a review that is direct and to the point be interesting to read?
A good review will sit me down, shut me up, tell me something I didn't already know and put forward a strong case for the record in question, whether that's good or bad. It doesn't need to be thousands and thousands of words to do that.
|
| |
Okay, then - why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't a review that is direct and to the point be interesting to read?
I guess it really all depends. A review can both be both engaging and to the point, but I don't see anything wrong with this particular review. It's engaging.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off
I see what people are saying about it being long and not focusing on what the album sounds like, but I don't think that's a huge deal. I liked the background info, sure it made the review long as hell but I mean cmon, it's chan
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
of course it doesn't need to be really long to do that. but if i feel like writing a review that's longer because i've got a lot to say, then i'm going to do it.
And more power to you. What I'm saying is that there's a difference between having a lot to say and having too much to say.
sometimes i've just got a lot that i want to put in writing about a particular artist.
"A particular artist," sure. But you spend the first paragraph talking about Glee and Dexter. It has absolutely no bearing on the rest of the review and the entire time I was thinking "well, that's all well and good, but what does it have to do with Taylor Swift?" In the end, it was totally pointless - which adds to my point of this review rambling on for no particular reason.
I'm just trying to generate some discussion on this. You can think "lol atavan" all you want, but I just want to know how you guys feel about my views? I don't think I'm overreacting or anything like that.
|
| |
not taking sides bc both have valid points but this review was long, but i loved... like really loved... how it talked about TSwift in terms of other pop stars (Gaga, Beiber) and not just her... don't know if that makes it an incredibly good review but it was an engagin though provoking read about TSwift too, along with how it applies to her music at hand.
so yeah it was a great review fuck you atavan
|
| |
isn't sea jst the coolest chan 4real
|
| |
making fun of poor sea eno? : (
|
| |
no dude im not fa real ur the nig like not even joking dude like i might sound facetioes right now or whatever the wrod for it is but like i actually really like you and would let you touch thetip
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off
I'm just being honest with you, man. I think you've written a lot better, and if you cleaned this up a bit you'd really be onto something. As it stands now, though, I still find it's a bit of a mess.
RE: Glee. I just found it a bit of a clutching-at-straws comparison, and didn't feel it was all that necessary to your main point. Sure, if it was a blog or something about why you like Taylor Swift, totally fine. In a review, though, it just felt out of place.
Personally, I try and keep my reviews over 500 words but less than 1000. The first half of this is roughly 1200, so you can understand why I found it quite dense. CMG is a pretty awful site, too.
|
| |
read channing Taylor Swift review, read Atavan condemnation of of said review, read channing explain his motivations, read sea defend chan, projectile vomit, shoot self in head
|
| |
atavan u r a hunk i've seen your facebook fanpage rock on bro
|
| |
|
|
