|
|
Post by NYR on Feb 15, 2011 0:15:23 GMT -5
only prepare yourself for anything critics have to say about them and the album if you care about what critics have to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by supersonic8587 on Feb 15, 2011 0:21:29 GMT -5
only prepare yourself for anything critics have to say about them and the album if you care about what critics have to say. Those are my thoughts. What the critics say isn't going to impact my enjoyment of the album. |
|
|
|
Post by gdforever on Feb 15, 2011 0:26:53 GMT -5
They don't effect my opinion...but I for one love reading reviews...I do it incessantly!
I'm always interested to read reviews...even bad ones if written well. The Fly one was just stupid...but I sometimes find the critical ones even more interesting to read when they are well considered than glowing reviews which can be boring.
Unfortunately a well-written review is hard to find either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by lastfanstanding on Feb 15, 2011 1:56:02 GMT -5
*sets expectatons to 0*
There, I should be okay
|
|
|
|
Post by ToneBender on Feb 15, 2011 6:51:04 GMT -5
The only place that I really consider the reviews to be of any superior quality is Allmusic.com. They always know what they're talking about and avoid all forms of snark when writing. Even when giving something a bad review, their staff never resorts to putting a group or individual down. Pitchfork should take notice.
|
|
|
|
Post by SunshineLullaby on Feb 15, 2011 6:52:54 GMT -5
The only place that I really consider the reviews to be of any superior quality is Allmusic.com. They always know what they're talking about and avoid all forms of snark when writing. Even when giving something a bad review, their staff never resorts to putting a group or individual down. Pitchfork should take notice. I agree. I always trust Allmusic to be fair. |
|
|
|
Post by jackwmsmkii on Feb 15, 2011 6:57:30 GMT -5
^I have to agree, All music covers so many albums also.
They're great for recent albums, but It's always hard reviewing old records. Take The Stooges albums for example... they're rated high now due to the fact that hey have reached legend status (rightly so may I add) but back then they were the most unpopular thing in the US, I doubt they'd of got 10/10 reviews back then if Allmusic and other online reviewers would have been around.
That's a different matter though, cannot wait to listen to DGSS and make up my own ming on it, reviews it is untill now though.
|
|
|
|
Post by vespa on Feb 15, 2011 7:56:29 GMT -5
dont think the album will get bad reviews at all,its upbeat,fresh(yes they have taken influences from alot of places but its done quite brilliantly!)and what does ya head in the most is that some of these tracks must've been about for a few of the last oasis recording sessions and noel never used them!!its a brilliant album and has suprised alot of people i know who were doubting the band because noel wasnt in it
|
|
|
|
Post by letsmakebelieve on Feb 15, 2011 9:07:55 GMT -5
If memory serves me correctly, SPIN gave WTSMG and BHN 6/10 back when those respective albums were released in 1995 and 1997, so they're not gonna roll the red carpet for BDI either. And when Oasis was popular in the USA, Rolling Stone gave WTSMG and BHN both 4 stars out of 5. It was after their popularity waned that they started bashing them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 10:14:47 GMT -5
To be honest buddy who started this thread. "For Anyone" is a Beautiful song. This will be a Massive hit if its released. It may not be everyones cup of tea but this song has maximum potential to be a folky Smash hit. Gorgeous song. Songbirds baby sister. I wish people would quite claiming Songbird to be the biggest hit in the history of everything. It was the lowest selling single on HC. Thats right, HC, an album that most Oasis fans abhor. If "For Anyone" reaches that success and we call it huge, then our bar is officially non-existent its so low. The album does lack any serious hit songs, but thats okay. The Beatles released something like 5 or 6 albums with no singles on them!! I don't think an album has to have huge hits to be successful, but in our current download society it is really hard. |
|
|
|
Post by oasisfanboy on Feb 15, 2011 10:36:59 GMT -5
To be honest buddy who started this thread. "For Anyone" is a Beautiful song. This will be a Massive hit if its released. It may not be everyones cup of tea but this song has maximum potential to be a folky Smash hit. Gorgeous song. Songbirds baby sister. I wish people would quite claiming Songbird to be the biggest hit in the history of everything. It was the lowest selling single on HC. Thats right, HC, an album that most Oasis fans abhor. If "For Anyone" reaches that success and we call it huge, then our bar is officially non-existent its so low. The album does lack any serious hit songs, but thats okay. The Beatles released something like 5 or 6 albums with no singles on them!! I don't think an album has to have huge hits to be successful, but in our current download society it is really hard. To be fair, Songbird was the what, 4th single from that album? If BDI get a #3 single from the 4th single release then they're in business! Although - it's not about that anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Feb 15, 2011 11:01:59 GMT -5
Guess I'm missing the boat with this tune to begin with. Don't think it's that amazing, and I can see critics beating the hell out of it for its ultra-brevity and 6 yr-old lyrics.
I know, who cares about critics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iliad ♣ on Feb 15, 2011 11:09:02 GMT -5
If the reviews are negative, less people are gonna buy the record, which ultimately results in smaller, more intimate gigs and lower ticket prices. It's not all bad  That said, BE deserve to sell a lot of copies. |
|
face
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 90
|
Post by face on Feb 15, 2011 11:10:38 GMT -5
the critics are going to give it bad reviews because it's not a very good album.
|
|
|
|
Post by BEng on Feb 15, 2011 11:14:01 GMT -5
the critics are going to give it good reviews because it's a very good album.
|
|
face
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 90
|
Post by face on Feb 15, 2011 11:16:28 GMT -5
the critics are going to give it good reviews because it's a very good album. lol all in due time... |
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Feb 20, 2011 16:32:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:00:07 GMT -5
Spose this thread could become the unofficial clearing house for the reviews: NME 7/10. Bout as mixed as a review gets, but I guess the 7/10's about right for me. www.nme.com/reviews/beady-eye/11874 |
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:05:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:08:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:09:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:11:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:13:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by start at the end on Mar 1, 2011 10:16:31 GMT -5
Honestly I'd say these critiques in totality are about what I expected with a few that are a notch better in some parts.
1/3: "good" 1/3: "ok" 1/3: really not that great.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Mar 1, 2011 10:42:27 GMT -5
Metacritic seem to be missing quite a few of the good ones and bad ones thus far.
|
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5