[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index][
Thread Index][
Author Index]
Re: my first bad review/ALBUM inquery
My last post (RE:AdrennaLinn for Sale) was obviously meant just for
Mark, this is what I get for trying to eat a muffin and type at the
same time...
> > it's funny, i always think of "mindless guitar wankery" as
>> bad EVH clones and stuff from the 80's--didn't think i was even
>> close to doing that, but who knows.
>
>...which of course is the problem with reviews... people's reference
>points
>are so skewed by what they listen to, or more importantly, by what they
>DON'T listen to, that if you are working in an area that people don't get,
>then they will latch onto whatever the nearest reference point they can
>relate to...
>
>I remember playing a Metheny Group CD to a friend of mine who said 'oh
>yes,
>it sounds like Shakatak'... Shakatak??? doesn't sound anything like
>Shakatak, but that for him was the only reference point he has for
>electric
>instrumental stuff with tunes!
I had this happen at the record store yesterday, I was playing the
new Herbie Hancock box set, and a customer told me it sounded just
like Zappa's Joe's Garage. For a lot of people my generation and
older, Zappa is the leftmost reference point for "weird" music,
anything out of the ordinary, especially if there's serious chops
involved, becomes "Zappa-like".
As far as reviews go, good or bad, you have to remember that most
reviewers are pretty much deluged with new music. I was a music
director at a college radio for about 5 years, and the amount of
music we had to review every week was really daunting. I had to
listen to between 20 and 50 discs a week. Just imagine that for a
second. I know musicians who own fewer than 50 records total! It's
just an overwhelming amount of music, and I got severely burned out
on dealing with it. Some of you may think this is a dream job (I did
when I got it, though it certainly didn't pay all that well), but I
almost grew to dread the stack of records that came to my desk every
day. Plus, you find out very quickly that Sturgeon's Law (95% of
everything is crap) is very true, and perhaps even a bit too generous!
Not to excuse the original reviewer, had it been me and I honestly
felt that way about the record, I wouldn't have published the review.
But we all have to remember, when we send out our record to the
reviewers, that the music we've poured our hearts into to make the
disc is just another record in the stack for the reviewer. When I get
positive reviews, I'm happy. When I get positive reviews from critics
that actually seemed to listen to the record and wrote about with
some intelligence, I'm ecstatic. If I get a bad review that has
something perceptive to say, I try to learn from it (harder than you
may think!). But ultimately, you've got to let it slide. If you feel
that your music is real and honest and all that, and the reviewer
hated it, screw 'em.
>
>I was recently dismissed in a review (albeit a review of the headline act,
>not really of me) as doing 'frippertronics on a bass', with the following
>comment along the lines of 'oh well, I guess it pays the bills'...
Oh man, that's hilarious. Yeah Steve, we all know you're doing this
Frippertronics on the bass thing for the cash, while you secretly
dream of starting a N'Sync cover band!