|
|
Post by Galactus on Oct 23, 2005 16:13:37 GMT -5
AMG has awful reviews. I think that part of their problem is that they are so huge, the only way they can review all of those bands is to find people who actually like those bands. Which is why damn near EVERY SINGLE BAND EVER has a four or five star album, according to AMG. The reason for this is becuase they weigh the albums against other albums by the same band...in a general sense. That is to say that a four star album by say Nickelback does not mean it's as good as a four star album from Led Zeppelin or better then a three star album by The Stones. I think it's a really good system. I don't think they should rate everything on a unversal scale...I don't even think it's possible. Personally I use AMG as a tool to figure out where to start with a band I'm not that famialar with...outside of generally being pretty spot on about which albums are better then other albums by the same band, their reveiws are just as pointless (to me) as any other sites reveiws...though I do like that most of them try to place the album in a historical context. I hate Stephen Thomas Erlewhine. |
|
|
|
Post by luke on Oct 24, 2005 8:25:40 GMT -5
Gotta disagree, Mantis. I don't think you should weigh an album by Britney Spears against one by the Beatles, but you SHOULD weigh an album by Lindsey Lohan against one by Britney Spears. This is what Rolling Stone does, and that's why I've never had a problem with their reviews as some people do.
But AMG doesn't even do this, and it makes their reviews useless and unreliable. If you're just making the assumption that the reader is already a fan of the band, then what's the fucking point of a write-up?
|
|
|
|
Post by riley on Oct 24, 2005 8:59:01 GMT -5
I use AMG as a pretty impressive database with optional loose instructions. I rarely read the reviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Oct 24, 2005 9:38:43 GMT -5
AMG's reviews are often useless, but sometimes it actually has some of the funniest stuff out there. Not often, but when they hit on something hilarious, they really nail it. For example, check out the reviews of the self-titled album by Attila, as well as the all-time classic review of Limp Bizkit's Results May Vary, which starts off kind of mean, and then really picks up steam as it goes along.
|
|
|
|
Post by PC on Oct 25, 2005 15:52:05 GMT -5
Radiohead. I went through a phase where I was into them and now I just think they're fucking boring. This doesn't bother me in the least though.
I love AMG because it's highly informative. I don't read it for the reviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Nov 4, 2005 16:52:40 GMT -5
Radiohead sort of fell off my listener radar, as well.
I mean, I got almost all their albums pretty much.
Haven't listened to a one of them in at least a year.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmike4 on Nov 5, 2005 15:36:03 GMT -5
The only Radiohead I have ever owned is The Bends. I never got completely enamoured. I like the Bneds, but don't listen to it much.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Nov 5, 2005 16:02:14 GMT -5
You shoulda started with OK Computer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Nov 9, 2005 9:30:27 GMT -5
I'd rather listen to the Wallflowers than Radiohead.
There, I said it
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Nov 10, 2005 23:42:27 GMT -5
Dylan
Stones
Doors
Pixies
VU
MBV
Arcade Fire
Syd Barrett Pink Floyd
MBV in particular is the some of the most dreaful dreck I've ever heard.
|
|
|
|
Post by JesusLooksLikeMe on Nov 11, 2005 12:46:00 GMT -5
Shinsy, I'll second you on The Doors and Barrett-era Floyd. Or any Floyd, for that matter.
This got me nodding sagely too:
MBV in particular is the some of the most dreaful dreck I've ever heard.
"Loveless" really is wank, isn't it? Which is a shame, because "Isn't Anything" was a great debut album.
|
|
|
|
Post by JesusLooksLikeMe on Nov 11, 2005 12:47:47 GMT -5
John Cale White Stripes BRMC ...dammit, pretty much Rocky's entire record collection.  |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 11, 2005 13:52:12 GMT -5
I'm not much for Floyd regardless of whether Barrett was around or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Dec 7, 2005 15:23:40 GMT -5
I haven't been able to fully embrace the following:
Pink Floyd
Incubus
White Stripes, or any two piece band for that matter....
Soundgarden
The Strokes
REM
...there are many others, just can't think of them right now. The above mentioned bands I don't really dislike, they just don't strike that certain chord w/ me. I own albums from all of the above, but rarely listen...
Incubus is the one I have the most difficulty getting into. I got one of their albums b/c some friends recommended it, and to me they just sound very formulated. I have the album Morning View, and [almost] every song follows the same pattern. Plus the lead singers voice really isn't my cup 'o tea; oh, and that damn DJ has got to go.....that makes the music sound very cheesy IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rit on Dec 7, 2005 19:11:46 GMT -5
Dylan Stones Doors Pixies VU MBV Arcade Fire Syd Barrett Pink Floyd MBV in particular is the some of the most dreaful dreck I've ever heard. holy mother of mary! i didn't see this post before. Shin, you're aware that your list of hates are some of my fondest bands? (well, except for the Doors. and perhaps Arcade Fire.) What's to hate about lovable Syd? or the 1965 era Rolling Stones? or *yikes!* Bob Dylan? OR THE VELVETS? |
|
