Album Rating: 5.0

Awful review, amazing album

Album Rating: 5.0

dat review

Album Rating: 5.0

Nope, sir. You're damn wrong. This is a effing masterpiece. And it was 1969, when all musicians could do was drugs. I can believe why one would give DSOTM or Abbey Road less than 4, but I wouldn't accept any good reason to give an insignificant 3 to CK. Neg'd hard.

Album Rating: 3.0

"Nope, sir. You're damn wrong. This is a effing masterpiece. And it was 1969, when all musicians could do was drugs. I can believe why one would give DSOTM or Abbey Road less than 4, but I wouldn't accept any good reason to give an insignificant 3 to CK. Neg'd hard."



that is a terrible reason to neg tbh

Album Rating: 3.0

yeah, the review is bad, but you shouldn't neg because of the rating

Album Rating: 5.0

Ummmmmmmm nope

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Review is real ersantz shit

Album Rating: 4.5

Review is as boring to read as it is to listen to Moonchild

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah sorry this is every bit as good as people hype it up to be

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

MSLG- the improv is shoddy, but chill. I dig it.

Album Rating: 3.0

Album rating is correct, it is a shame you don't understand the concept of fucking paragraphs however nobody on this close minded site would have read it anyway without negging so I guess it doesn't matter too much. Just stick to your guns friend.

Album Rating: 5.0

I would've read it if it was formatted properly, in it's current form it's really hard to read and it's very incoherent.

Album Rating: 5.0

Fixing the paragraphs wouldn't change the fact that there's run on sentences galore.

Album Rating: 4.5

saw this on the banner and thought, "gotta see this"



read the summary and scrolled over the mammoth paragraphs and realized, "nope, I really don't".

Album Rating: 4.5

There are actually a lot of arguments to give this a 3



But review still sucks, no matter the rating

Album Rating: 5.0

"Fixing the paragraphs wouldn't change the fact that there's run on sentences galore."



Agreed, like I said though, I would have actually read it had it been formatted correctly, rather than skimming it like I ended up doing.

Album Rating: 4.5

(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)(An exercise in self-indulgence)

Album Rating: 5.0

this review sucks, no matter the rating [2]

Album Rating: 4.5

this review was actually tolerable until the Yes comparison was made..... like wtf, they don't even sound remotely similar

nobody on this close minded site would have read it anyway without negging so I guess it doesn't matter too much. Just stick to your guns friend.

I think the formatting almost warrants a neg on its own, tbh.