How should critics review a album?

[Comic_Mobsta]

Whats the standard that critics should compare the reviewed album to?,And if their is one is that comparison fair? For example is it fair to compare a Lil Jon CD to a Nas or Rakim cd? Or should they review the album within its on context of crunk music?

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

well i think the critic needs to keep that artist/s core fans in mind.ok so linkin park isn't "real metal" or whatever ok thats fine but is it a good album on its on merit? thats all i need to know.also will their fan base like the album or not.i think people should listen to the fans of that paticuler artists over any critic.when i say fans i mean normal fans,not the casual fans and not the hardcore fanatics.mostly because the casual fans probably have no real openion thats worth anything considering their casual listeners.hardcore fans can't be trusted because they have rediculous expectation and or will give the artis favorable reviews no matter what.normal fans however gives pretty honest diverse openions.they 'll either hate it,like it,or have a mixed view about it.

critics tend to bring up irrelevant things in their reviews that has nothing to due with the album at hand (especialy the all music guide critics).also some major critics seems biased or even unfairly dissmisive or spitefull towards certain artists.speaking of wich i'm gonna beat a dead horse here but i really don't like how they treat my favorite groups like PM Dawn,and Bone Thugs N Harmony,especialy the later.they said BTNH's art of war album sold poorly wich isn't true it actually went quadruple platinum.the only thing the AMG bio got right was the fact that the group members don't gel well together anymore wich is sad but true.

[Jonathan Bogart]

Critics should say whatever the hell they want to say. And everyone else should feel free to agree, disagree, or not care one way or the other.

[Ilash]

Critics should say whatever the hell they want to say. And everyone else should feel free to agree, disagree, or not care one way or the other.

Well, that's succinct and to the point. Also, it's very hard to dissagree with.

[blackdragon6]

i think critics rarely give honest reviews.it seems like their either just riding the bandwagon,or being politicaly correct by giving a vague nuetral review.

[KenK]

i think critics rarely give honest reviews.it seems like their either just riding the bandwagon,or being politicaly correct by giving a vague nuetral review.

Billboard does this all the time, and I hate it!

[Adam Crocker]

i think critics rarely give honest reviews.it seems like their either just riding the bandwagon,or being politicaly correct by giving a vague nuetral review.

So why do you think this?

[Shellhead]

Whether reviewing an album, a movie, a book or even a restaurant, a critic has a few basic duties to those who will be reading his review:

1. Identify clearly what you're reviewing.
2. Disclose any special bias, if applicable. For example, if your cousin wrote the book, mention that and also how well you get along with your cousin.
3. Describe this product in some detail. With music, identify the genre, and maybe try to guess at some influences on the music, or at least describe what other acts sound similar.
4. Express an opinion as to whether it was good or not, and more importantly, why you hold that opinion.
5. Attempt to guess how fans of that artist and/or genre might react to this album. The reviewer may not personally like it, but should still recognize that existing fans will probably like it (or perhaps dislike it) based on simiarity to existing works.

Of course, nobody is forcing a reviewer to do any of these things. But if he frequently skimps or even skips some of the above items, people may lose interest in his reviews.

[blackdragon6]

So why do you think this?
as far as the latter i always read reviews and don't never get a clear answer on wether they like the album or not.

[blackdragon6]

5. Attempt to guess how fans of that artist and/or genre might react to this album. The reviewer may not personally like it, but should still recognize that existing fans will probably like it (or perhaps dislike it) based on simiarity to existing works.
all reviews should atleast follow this format.

[Buried Alien]

Critics should say whatever the hell they want to say.

If they're being paid for the service, however, they should demonstrate some professionalism and expertise and not just write up a one-sided rant or gush that any of us could do here at the CBR Music Forum for free. Why would any publisher pay money for that?

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[elheffe]

If they're being paid for the service, however, they should demonstrate some professionalism and expertise and not just write up a one-sided rant or gush that any of us could do here at the CBR Music Forum for free. Why would any publisher pay money for that?

Sometimes they're not in print. Like Pitchfork, for instance. They're web based music site, that according to their reviews, like just about nothing they review.

[Voncaster]

Music Reviews should take one of two forms:

A. Praise an album so much that its almost impossible to live up to the hype once you get to hear it.
B. Pick a part an album piece by piece with cynical comments so that those who interested in the album feel guilty about checking it out.

[glue]

It's not really how a review should be written, but I always thought that the reviewer should say what they like or dislike including stuff other than what's being reviewed to put the reivew in some sort of context. No matter how in depth a review is, if I don't know what the reviewer tends to enjoy/dislike the review is really meaningless. I mean if he reviews the new KRS and gushes about it that doesn't really mean anything other than he liked it. I have no idea what else he likes, so the review is useless.

And, I'm not saying I base my purchases on reviews, but as it stands now they serve no purpose other than filling space in a magazine.

[blackdragon6]

Music Reviews should take one of two forms:

A. Praise an album so much that its almost impossible to live up to the hype once you get to hear it.
B. Pick a part an album piece by piece with cynical comments so that those who interested in the album feel guilty about checking it out.they already do this.


another thing that bothers me is the fact that some reviwers will trash a album only to give it a decent to good score/rating at the end.


WTF!? thats about :confused: