|
|
Post by fightthefascists on Mar 28, 2007 12:23:43 GMT
NME gave the album 8/10 'It's without a doubt the best thing the band have ever recorded'  brilliant |
|
|
|
Post by milkyjoe1 on Mar 28, 2007 13:53:08 GMT
nice, but i dont agree with NME sometimes. they gave maximo park 6/10. whats going on there?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lihllvmch on Mar 29, 2007 20:10:28 GMT
wow! Think I do.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoppy78 on Mar 29, 2007 20:15:04 GMT
NME gave the album 8/10 'It's without a doubt the best thing the band have ever recorded' brilliant if they think its without doubt the best thing they've done they should have given it more than 8/10 cause they gave 'manhood 9/10 saying its the best debut album of the last ten years!! |
|
|
|
Post by jessie on Mar 29, 2007 20:26:44 GMT
NME gave the album 8/10 'It's without a doubt the best thing the band have ever recorded' brilliant if they think its without doubt the best thing they've done they should have given it more than 8/10 cause they gave 'manhood 9/10 saying its the best debut album of the last ten years!! valid point |
|
|
|
Post by bigkolnut on Mar 29, 2007 22:10:23 GMT
yh i fink a few of u r right there, i fink it is the best album KOL have made (which in itself should get at least 9/10 in NME) and maximo park's 'our earthly pleasures' isnt THAT bad!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bigkolnut on Mar 29, 2007 22:13:49 GMT
any of yous got a favourite track, mine has to be on call, mcfearless or fans , ohh or ragoo or my party...oh sod it forget the question. in fact new question: who else thinks the album is not only the best of their genius so far but also the best album out so far this year?
|
|
|
|
Post by AccuratePassion on Mar 30, 2007 5:14:57 GMT
NME can suck it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mynameisdominic on Mar 30, 2007 6:37:54 GMT
don't you guys
|
|
|
|
Post by frankdog on Mar 30, 2007 11:29:22 GMT
all three albums for me are 9 outta 10,s. i also think that the band has a 10 outta 10 in them for the future. love their music, lyrics, the lot keep em coming
|
|
|
|
Post by PrickleyPorcupine on Mar 30, 2007 12:30:25 GMT
'It's without a doubt the best thing the band have ever recorded' Well I haven't even read the review & I already completely disagree with that! |
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Mar 30, 2007 12:54:14 GMT
i think reviews could do without all of that 9/10 rubbish. it doesnt really make sense to value an album on numbers out of 10. what is it? 10 bananas? 10 cows? ok so it might mean stars but what does a star count for?!
does anyone know what im talking about? surely no one should ever get a 10/10 if you dont know what a bands 'best' is
this isnt a personal attack. im just very confused and would like to challenge the marking system
|
|
|
|
Post by hoppy78 on Mar 30, 2007 13:47:14 GMT
personally i dont go by what the review says, im sure you lot dont either, we are all very capable of making up our own minds about what we like/love/hate etc..
its just as a fan of a band you like to see others like it too if you know what i mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Mar 30, 2007 14:32:24 GMT
you're right. i dont go by what reviews say - although sometimes i do get offended if a particular band get slagged off! it is intersting to see what others think despite reviews being personal opinions - they only reflect the views of the person who wrote it. its a bit like food or film critics, alot of music jouranlists can be quite snobby and start using long sentences and words that no one understands (i think there was a recent review of 'bott' and the guy used was just talking absolute nosense - anyone remember?)
*takes a breath*
yeah, i like reading reviews but i hate hate 'whatever' out of 10 - things
edit: 'On anthemic shitkickers like "Black Thumbnail," "My Party" and "On Call," they flare up like Black Oak Arkansas on a jag with the Ozark Mountain Daredevils and the Amazing Rhythm Aces.' (rolling stone magazine)
see what i mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by hoppy78 on Mar 30, 2007 17:35:44 GMT
yeah i see what you mean alright! i just dont bother reading them cause i sometimes think they dont really care about the music and that after all they are just doing their job and filling the pages of the mags they work for!
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Mar 30, 2007 17:43:24 GMT
yup
|
|
|
|
Post by nadius on Mar 30, 2007 18:25:16 GMT
Don't give it too much attention... Reviews, it's always gonna be like this, I honestly don't give a sh*t about reviews (sorry my language) you know that some of them sometimes are bought? For example movie reviews mostly are bought by the studios... (here, there and everywhere) I'm not sayin' they bought the reviews for christ sake all I'm tryin' say is that after all they don't really care do they? If you like something or not, you're gonna like it with or without 10 stars and if you don't there's no enough stars to convince you, don't get upset on reviews guys, let them say what they want if they believe they know so much...
|
|
|
|
Post by ellie on Mar 30, 2007 20:26:03 GMT
i think you guys misunderstood when i was complaining about the star thing. i was just saying it was a shitty way of evaluating an album or track i know i said i get offended, but i guess i am a proud person  i can imagine that theres alot of bribery and buying going on in the reviewing world .. talking about reviews they did a little review of on call tonight on gonzo. they were pretty complimentary about it but i remember zane not being over excited about it compared to the rest of the album. which i think is a fair point - on call isnt 'the best' track on bott |
|
|
|
Post by Twelvevolts on Mar 31, 2007 1:54:29 GMT
Reviews used to be useful when you hadn't heard the album and you were thinking whether you'd fork out the money. These days you usually hear the album well before the review so you tend to compare it against what you thought of the album.
|
|
