On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Greg Clow wrote:
quoted 7 lines But that fact doesn't stop crybaby musicians from whining "oh> But that fact doesn't stop crybaby musicians from whining "oh
> yeah, why don't *you* do something better!" when they get a crappy
> review.
>
> Greg
> (who has on the receiving end of that situation several times)
>
I promise I'll never do that to you Greg. I do hope though that
you understand the time and effort people put into even the lamest
cack, and how producers really do try and make the best music they
can, and how annoying being criticized by people who don't know
what they're talking about can be. Not that I'm putting you in
that category, just that there are lots of people who really
have nothing to contribute except negativity.
I think that a really good review engages music from a couple of
perspectives -- whether or not it is successful with respect
to it's ambitions, whether it works in different contexts for the
listener (dancefloor, home listening, 4:20 club space-out
material), and whether it holds together architecturally. To do
a review like that you really need to meet the music half way,
and try and understand it before you dismiss it.
Whether, taken as a whole, you like a track can simply be a
personal preference. I'm not convinced that reviewing music
you don't like does anyone any favors -- do you dislike it
on it's own terms, or maybe does something about it rub you the
wrong way? Can you see how a listener who is more into that style
of music might like it better?
"Not my cup of tea" is more informative than "this track sucks."
We can't tell from the latter whether the track really does
deserve to be cast into the outer darkness, or whether the reviewer
just isn't feeling it for reasons of personal taste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org