Comments on: Bad Reviews?

By: David Meadows

David Meadows — Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:23:39 +0000

Your reviews always seem fair to me. Sure, they’re always positive, but at the same time if there’s something you think hasn’t worked then you say so. Don’t start second-guessing yourself, what you do works just fine as it is.

By: Ian Massey

Ian Massey — Sun, 27 Oct 2013 08:17:55 +0000

There is one magazine I know of (SF/Fantasy book reviews) that public ally said they only publish good reviews. I can’t remember the reason but it is likely to be along the lines of them not wanting to put people off buying books that their reviewers didn’t like. Everybody has different tastes.

Personally, I’m nowhere near as “close” to anywhere near as many bands as you are and, therefore, if I don’t like something I’m perhaps more comfortable saying so. (It’s also easier to criticise a live performance as external factors can have greater effects.)

I once said in a review that, basically, I hated a support band – didn’t like the music, the performance was over the top, etc – only to find the review posted onto their FB page a few days later. Most commentors thought I was an idiot but as none of them would be able to pick me out of a crowd, I didn’t care – I had expressed an honest opinion.

In answer to your question – do what you feel comfortable with. If you can stand the potential heat, step into the kitchen-of-less-positive-reviews.

By: BaldySlaphead

BaldySlaphead — Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:14:19 +0000

I would be slightly wary of someone that posted exclusively positive reviews; it smacks of either moonie-ism or a lack of critical faculties. There is nothing wrong with genuine criticisms, even quite severe ones, but it comes down to how they are expressed. A formal review should ideally give me some sense of the reviewer’s knowledge and insight into what s/he’s reviewing as well as their tastes (though necessarily broadly) and that includes demonstrating that they do actually appreciate good from bad (or less good).

I do think there’s little point in going to see things you know in advance you’ll hate then duly reviewing it negatively (makes me think of the now deceased Steven Wells of the NME).

By: Amanda

Amanda — Sat, 26 Oct 2013 23:58:21 +0000

Actual all out bad reviews aren’t really very helpful. A review should say what is good, bad and vaguely reminiscent of something else about the subject under review. F’rinstance, if I were an All About Eve fan, and came across a review that said “a bit of a curate’s egg, but if you are missing the Eves, you might like it”, well, I’d be buying that Ruby Blue* LP right away.

*Not the rap artiste.

By: Mark H

Mark H — Sat, 26 Oct 2013 22:41:17 +0000

Interesting question Tim. I think I see it slightly different to your other responders. I think there is a balance between supporting a genre of music that needs all the help it can get and blind support. It is your blog and up to you to decide which side to fall on. I think if you ask the question who are you actually writing for, who is your intended audience – the bands and their potential gratitude – or record buyers looking for a well informed opinion. But we can’t all buy everything that is recommended – one of my minor complaints about the (excellent) Progressive rock mag is when everything seems to get a good review – sorry only so much cash in the old wallet!!

Another way of approaching this is to ask a question about a band we both seem to love – Panic Room. In all honesty, what would they have to do before you offered a critical assessment? If I ran a blog I would find it hard to be critical of them because I want to support this type of band – surely they deserve it? But despite liking Skin, I thought it was a slight drop from their previous album. I can’t see why a positive review can’t be given while gentle pointing out potential flaws as you the reviewer sees it – it doesn’t have to be a bitchy, go for the throat type of effort. I also think that an honest review adds a touch of integrity. Still easy for me to say because I don’t know any band members! Whichever way you go, I’ll always return here because I thoroughly enjoy your blog!

By: Tim Hall

Tim Hall — Wed, 23 Oct 2013 13:16:28 +0000

I tend to listen to something at least five or six times before I’m a position to review it fairly, and sometimes it takes a lot more than that.

By: Tom B

Tom B — Wed, 23 Oct 2013 12:49:33 +0000

I was going to say that perhaps you ought to include them but then I read jamie’s comment and I changed my mind, as I totally agree with him. Having said that I think you should be honest though and if you don’t particularly like the latest release by one of your favourites you should say so but taking care to explain why it’s not up to their usual standard.
How many listens do you normally give something before deciding you’re able to make a good judgement?

By: Graham Meigh

Graham Meigh — Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:14:01 +0000

I personally don’t like negative reviews. They seem to fall into one of three camps: malicious reviews written for entertainment (A. A. Gill), “I don’t like them” or “I hate everyone with more talent than me”. Well written subjective reviews are rare.

By: Jamie

Jamie — Mon, 21 Oct 2013 20:48:22 +0000

I don’t honestly see the need to change anything, Tim. I’ve always felt the role of the reviewer should be to encourage listeners to explore music they might not otherwise get to experience. Your positive reviews make me want to hear the albums under consideration because you’re so enthusiastic about them – and sometimes I agree with you and like what I hear, and sometimes, well, not so much. But the point is your review made me go and listen in the first place. Negative reviews would encourage me less to seek out the albums – and, as you say, with taste being highly subjective, I may miss out on something that didn’t quite float your boat, but might have launched mine