Re: there's no accounting for taste.daicerio_blueNovember 15 2006, 22:38:11 UTC
Pop music is probably the most difficult thing to review because it's so subjective, like you say. It seems like you can either give an album a good/bad rating and attract an audience with similar opinions, or you can be more descriptivist and hope you're helping the reader make their own decisions. I have mixed feelings about both.
Re: there's no accounting for taste.day_walkerNovember 15 2006, 22:44:39 UTC
and i think being a descriptivist music reviewer is lazy. too many music journalists take the easy out of using similar bands to describe a band's sound. if i have to hear one more band described as sounding like gang of 4/my bloody valentine/wire/joy division i am going to eat my fucking hat.
Re: there's no accounting for taste.daicerio_blueNovember 15 2006, 23:02:51 UTC
Lester is pretty much the only reason why I think it's possible to write engaging music criticism.
I think direct comparison to other bands is usually misleading and always boring. By descriptivist, I mean more like a discussion of the instruments used, the feeling of the music, the composition, or the technical quality. You can say "you can hear an influence from X, because they use Y in such-and-such a way," but if you say "sounds like X," you need to get poked with a spork.
Re: there's no accounting for taste.day_walkerNovember 16 2006, 21:56:40 UTC
I agree. One must have a good feeling for general semantics to write a decent review. Removing the word "is" and "are" from all descriptions seems necessary. Also important is to back up one's observations with discernable substance, as you said (influence of X because of Y's particular use).
Otherwise your just setting yourself up for mad spork pokes.
there are certain critics i can always count on to steer me the right way, and other critics who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
that being said, i read any review with a grain of salt.
Reply
Reply
do you like lester bangs?
Reply
I think direct comparison to other bands is usually misleading and always boring. By descriptivist, I mean more like a discussion of the instruments used, the feeling of the music, the composition, or the technical quality. You can say "you can hear an influence from X, because they use Y in such-and-such a way," but if you say "sounds like X," you need to get poked with a spork.
Reply
Reply
Otherwise your just setting yourself up for mad spork pokes.
-Nate
Reply
Leave a comment