The Reviews!
To navigate this area, just choose a category below, and
you'll see a nice neat little overview. As you'll see, so far the bands are
listed alphabetically. Once there are more reviews, I *might* organize them
by genre, year... depending on my mood.
The picks of each album will be underlined. If you see a * next to the name
of the band, it means that I reviewed all 'official' albums by that particular
band (that means not including EP's, website-only albums, superfluous compilations,
and bootlegs).
Reader comments I get will not be edited, and e-mail addresses of the readers
who commented will not be disclosed without explicit permission! Enjoy the
reviews!
See an overview of my reviews:
-
Music Albums: not as many reviews yet as I would
like, but once I'm on a roll, I promise you I can keep going and going
and going...even after you tell me to shut up!
-
Various Artists Compilations, Benefits, Tributes,
Soundtracks and Other Stuff: pretty self-explanatory, I guess... Stuff
that doesn't really fit in the Music Album section ends up here.
-
Comedy and Spoken Word Albums: so far only one
George Carlin album has been reviewed. Expect a lot more soon, though!
You can also find reviews of live 'comedy' gigs in the Other
Stuff section...
-
Free Stuff and Demos: This concerns reviews about
stuff that was sent to me by record labels or musicians. Because it's
possible I'd never go out to buy these albums myself, and because it might
be possible that I'm not an expert at all on that particular kind of music
(as if I'm a rock expert in the first place!), I will refrain from giving
ratings here. However, I do point out why I (dis)like aspects of the albums
reviewed here, that's the least I can do.
Music Albums:
back to top
Various Artists Compilations, Benefits, Tributes,
Soundtracks and Other Stuff:
back to top
Comedy and Spoken Word Albums:
back to top
Free Stuff and Demos:
back to top
What the ratings stand for:
* Note: loosely based on Adrian Denning's rating system
10
an aural orgasm, created by a band at the top of its game, an album that
has the x-factor
9.5
a brilliant album, consistently challenging or just ear candy, a band at
its creative peak
9
an immensely consistent album, performed by a great band
8.5
an excellent album that may have a few less-than-marvellous tracks,
but which contains strong overall songwriting and performances.
8
a very good album
7.5
a strong album with consistently good song writing or some very good stuff
alternated with lesser songs (max. 1/3)
7
a good album
6.5
almost good, a bit of a hit-or-miss affair, that probably has quite some
filler, but may have some good stuff too
6
average album, with some decent stuff, but mainly interesting for fans,
and unlikely to have more than a few stand-out tracks
5.5
below average, mediocre song writing or some decent songs with lots of filler
(1/2 or more)
5
weak, the majority of the album is filler, and the best tracks aren’t
really interesting
4
so bland it’s boring
3
a bad album
2
a crap album
1
offensively bad, an insult
back to top
My ratings explained: a subjective approach
I won’t deny that my music reviews offer subjective
ideas and opinions. I’m not the one to tell you objectively which record
is interesting, captivating or good and which is not. Moreover, I don’t
believe in an objective approach. More than anything else, music is something
which I experience, not something which I can measure, capture or
control. I do know that some albums are more revolutionary than others,
or that some albums contain technical virtuosity while others could have been
played by almost anyone with a basic knowledge about music. I will
mention these elements in my reviews (if I’m aware of them, that is),
but in the end, these will not be the decisive factors. If we were to use
objective criteria and focus on technical prowess/virtuosity for example (which
can, in a way, be measured), then the best of-lists would probably
be crammed with loads of fusion and prog rock. Some albums (Zappa’s
Hot Rats or Steely Dan’s Countdown to Ecstasy, for
instance) do impress me because of the impeccable high standard of
playing, but there has to be more (and those two albums have more). I don’t
really know what element the decisive factor is, and it’s probably a
combination of several. For convenience sake, I will call it the x-factor.
Why do we like one band or album more than another one? This may be influenced
by our first music discoveries (if you were exposed (out of your free will)
to lots of hard rock, it’s very likely that you’ll still like
that genre 10 years later, when you’ve built up a larger music collection),
what you value most in music (I for one, I’m always looking for a certain…uh…
call it ‘sincerity’ in music, some sort of energy that makes an
album rock and roll, even if it’s a solo acoustic effort),
the degree to which it makes you feel good/bad/different after you heard it,
etc. So, I repeat: the reviews are subjective ‘stories’ of how
I experience certain albums, but maybe someone out there will agree.
This means it’s perfectly possible that I rate an album by a virtually
unknown artist (e.g. Johnny Dowd’s Pictures
from Life’s Other Side) higher than an album that’s considered
a revolutionary masterpiece (The Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely
Hearts Club Band). Of course, if I ever get to the latter, I will
stress that we’re dealing with an important (though flawed) album.
Aren’t your ratings a little high?
I don’t think so. Well, you may give some albums lower
grades, of course, and that’s your prerogative. I’m very glad
that the biggest part of my LP/CD-collection are items that I really like.
I discovered some artists by accident, some because a friend recommended one
of their albums, others I first listened to after I got them from the library,
and still others after I read a review written by a critic who I tend to agree
with. I simply don’t have the money to buy every friggin’ album
in the world, so I’d rather spend my money on an interesting album by
a small band, than a rotten tomato by a highly regarded rock band. I know
that some people may argue that I can’t get a complete idea
of a band’s history without carefully listening to all of a
band’s albums, but so be it. Why would I spend my money on albums I
don’t like? I don’t need the Stones’ Dirty Work.
I heard it, and it sucks. I am willing to complete a small catalogue
with some minor efforts, but a dozen weak albums by one artist? No, thanks.
Never heard of CD-R’s?
Well yeah, and I acquired a CD-burner sometime last year
(2002), and I have been using it to copy dozens of CD’s full of interesting
stuff, a lot of them albums I’d probably never buy. But in the end,
I’m one of those people who wants the actual product. If it’s
an album I really like, that is. I want to have it, feel it, smell it (well,
vinyl) and play with the booklet in my hands. Also, as a supporter of live
music (it can still be a much more profound experience than just listening
to an album) and lots of young talented bands, I’d rather copy an album
by a major artist than a young artist who needs the money. I’m not going
to waste 12-15 euros or dollars on a recent Phil Collins album. If I want
to have a good laugh, I’ll just copy the album.
back to top
Disclaimer:
All reviews and other written material on the entire site are copyright ©2002-2003
of Guy Peters. Webdesign and other
techie stuff is copyright ©2002-2003 of Els
De Clercq. Nothing on this site can be used without explicit permission
(which can easily be obtained by asking us). Don't steal our stuff! Photo's
and/or images are copyright of the respective bands and/or their label/music
reps, unless otherwise stated. All logos and trademarks in this site are property
of their respective owner. No infringment was intended. This is still a fansite!
The stats:
Total Amount of Music Reviews:
85
Total Amount of Bands/Artists:
29
Average Score of Albums Reviewed:
7.70/10
