ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 3817
Jan 20 11 3:35 AM
Interact
Posts: 85
Jan 21 11 8:09 AM
Posts: 20
Feb 28 11 5:15 PM
Feb 28 11 5:18 PM
Posts: 77
Mar 2 11 6:13 PM
Mar 2 11 6:26 PM
Posts: 752
Mar 3 11 9:53 AM
adenning wrote: I'm quite offended by those saying I can't write, especially from people who more than likely haven't looked at my site for five years or so. Why still hold grudges? I didn't kill anybody, i just came to a close knit scene pretty late and immediately made an impact. Who was the guy who said they go to me for faggy british music? Well yeah, that's me. I found a niche! I never was great at grammar, but sod that. I looked to Paul Williams, founder of Crawdaddy. Really clever guy, great enthusiastic writer, huge beach boys fan. He got at the fun in music. He demonstrated that he loved it. Sometimes, I might write a review, mis-spell a word, do dodgy grammar. Somebody writes in to say, 'great review, you got me into this band.Music isn't science and reviewing it definitely isn't a way to make yourself famous or to get into the record industry. My entire site started as a bit of fun, i wanted to say how much i loved the music of the beach boys. yeah, i made an arse of myself on music babble, yet - who hasn't? By the way, somebody from Robbie Williams PR company a few years back sent me a nasty threat! Without my site, i couldn't have annoyed Robbie Williams. I've done my job.
Mar 3 11 10:09 AM
Posts: 931
Mar 4 11 9:24 AM
Mar 12 11 3:31 PM
Posts: 1327
Mar 12 11 9:36 PM
Posts: 270
Mar 14 11 6:43 PM
Mar 23 11 1:56 PM
Pancho wrote:Umm, the 'faggy british music' guy was me, Adrian. Sorry about that, I didn't mean for it to come off as backhandedly complimenting, I mean, I do love 'faggy british music' (by which I mostly mean 80's-90's indie/post-punk) myself, Felt, Stone Roses, the Fall, Pulp, Boo Radleys, etc. a lot of which I learned about from you. I guess it's a really broad (just now I notice your Maiden reviews) generalization that meant to say that I thought of you as specializing in that area, in the way Prindle 'specializes' in noisy indie/punk stuff and Starostin 'specializes' in classic rock stuff. Obviously just a big generalization, but still...yeah. If it counts, I must say I've always liked your journal-like writing style, it really adds a personal touch to the proceedings.PS: I don't know if you've done Soft Boys/Robyn Hitchcock or the Chameleons, if you haven't, it'd be befitting of my broad, generalized view of your site to house them. Yeah.
Apr 16 11 12:47 PM
Posts: 1069
Apr 16 11 2:08 PM
Sleepinthrustatic009 wrote:One thing I do hate about George is that he compares basically everything he hears to the Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Kinks, etc. He did this a lot especially on his page for The Jam. I'm also not too crazy about the people he's choosing to review on his new blog either. His rating system is pretty stupid too, and his philosophy about no album being good all the way through.
Apr 18 11 1:02 PM
Apr 19 11 1:52 PM
fiercerealities wrote:I don't know that I would compare everything to the Beatles, Stones, Dylan and the Kinks, but they all made incredible runs and it's very difficult to find artists who are that consistent in making good albums. I would argue to some extent on the Kinks though. Terrific songs, shitty production. Shel Talmy should've been fired. I'd like to know who's idiotic idea it was to make the tambourine as loud as every fucking thing else on those early remasters? I would also argue that there are very few albums that are good all the way through. I can honestly count about 40 out of my collection of over 800 that I would recommend to anyone, and most of them are fairly mainstream artists. I'm not necessarily defending him, but if you want an in depth review that covers more than just personal ranting and banter and maybe mentions one sentence about the album, then go there.
Apr 20 11 1:42 AM
Posts: 1320
Apr 20 11 4:47 AM
Il Duce wrote:i haven't been reading the newer reviews - they're just not the same without the numbers
Apr 20 11 12:05 PM
fiercerealities wrote:Ben, I think that reading those scores at face value creates the inherent problem now with interpreting most review sites. People put entirely too much stock into those rankings and numbers and then blurt out something like "These are the bands that he likes more than this band..." and that's not necessarily the case. I believe George explained this one time in his notes about comparing apples to oranges, but most people probably fell asleep reading it along with the rest of his articles. Not to stray from the topic Ben, but do you have a link to your website? I would like to see the logic and inner workings of a man who rates Face Dances higher than Quadrophenia. Yes I know, apples to oranges. So I'm a hypocrit. I'd still like to see it. No I'm not a stalker. No I don't have comments that you can post in the reader's hall of shame.....yet.
Somebody wrote to me asking how the hell i could rate the first four kings of leon albums higher than the first four led zeppelin albums. I don't 'rank' bands and it's all subjective, blah blah blah. I'm not saying who is more important, best, etc - i'm reviewing albums by bands that existed in entirely different eras and serve very different purposes. It's a pointless kind of comment you get a lot when reviewing albums. Then again, if you review a couple of thousand albums these things will inevitably crop up.
As for Macca, I have a soft spot for him
Share This