AbsolutePunk.net
   Username
Password
 
Album Review - Page 11
Displaying posts 150 - 165 of 1031.
08:22 AM on 04/01/13
Chris_FirstTime
Spineless Yes Men
Offline
User Info.
Chris_FirstTime's Avatar
I just bought this, man, I hope I ended up disagreeing with this review!
08:23 AM on 04/01/13
Archael
listens to good music
Offline
User Info.
Archael's Avatar
I get that it's your opinion. How many times did you listen to this album before deciding to write this review?

I just don't appreciate a bad review that is entirely based off of what the artist had done in the past. That just makes no sense to me. You say in the very first line that you "Hold certain bands to a higher standard."

You also don't even explain what is so bad about the record. You state "It's bittersweet because those songs aren't very good and don't hold a candle to the best tracks on the band's last LP." What does that have to do with this new album?

also, you complain about the production but only state specifics like "smothered and stale" The last three paragraphs of the review are just dribble and add nothing to the topic at hand. The second to last paragraph barely makes sense and again has very little in the way of specifics about the album.
This album has everything to do with with the band's past. Otherwise, they wouldn't be going by the same name, and when they go on shows, they would no longer play songs from their earlier albums.

It really shouldn't take Thomas 10 paragraphs or whatever to express his opinion on how bad it is. But he knew he'd have to make it much longer and specific to express just how bad the album was to justify his rating for people who were going to inevitably complain such as you.
08:26 AM on 04/01/13
Archael
listens to good music
Offline
User Info.
Archael's Avatar
Why do no one ever complain about poorly written reviews that are positive?
No controversy. No problem.
08:27 AM on 04/01/13
KEB182
Pedestrian Verse
Offline
User Info.
KEB182's Avatar
This album has everything to do with with the band's past. Otherwise, they wouldn't be going by the same name, and when they go on shows, they would no longer play songs from their earlier albums.

It really shouldn't take Thomas 10 paragraphs or whatever to express his opinion on how bad it is. But he knew he'd have to make it much longer and specific to express just how bad the album was to justify his rating for people who were going to inevitably complain such as you.
So you're agreeing that the better half of this review was just filler to make it longer? There's no specifics in much of the review.
08:27 AM on 04/01/13
Thomas Nassiff
resuscitation of the year
Offline
User Info.
Thomas Nassiff's Avatar
I get that it's your opinion. How many times did you listen to this album before deciding to write this review?

I just don't appreciate a bad review that is entirely based off of what the artist had done in the past. That just makes no sense to me. You say in the very first line that you "Hold certain bands to a higher standard."

You also don't even explain what is so bad about the record. You state "It's bittersweet because those songs aren't very good and don't hold a candle to the best tracks on the band's last LP." What does that have to do with this new album?

also, you complain about the production but only state specifics like "smothered and stale" The last three paragraphs of the review are just dribble and add nothing to the topic at hand. The second to last paragraph barely makes sense and again has very little in the way of specifics about the album.
Going to respond point by point:
How many times did you listen to this album before deciding to write this review?

About six before starting to write and about two or three times while writing.
I just don't appreciate a bad review that is entirely based off of what the artist had done in the past. That just makes no sense to me. You say in the very first line that you "Hold certain bands to a higher standard."

So when good bands release good records, we shouldn't expect another good record? KTTY was not as good as L&F. I was expecting something that good again. Not something that SOUNDED THE SAME - just something on that level. That's fair to Transit, and I think Transit would not appreciate it if I didn't recognize them for their past successes and hold them to a higher standard. Being held to a higher standard is a GOOD thing - wouldn't it be weird if we were surprised every time Lebron scored 30 points?
You also don't even explain what is so bad about the record. You state "It's bittersweet because those songs aren't very good and don't hold a candle to the best tracks on the band's last LP." What does that have to do with this new album?

Did you read past that line? There are three healthy-sized paragraphs where I literally only talk about songs from the new record. Literally right after the line you quoted comes: "The former offers a healthy hook with uplifting guitar work, while the latter borrows melodies from Listen and Forgive even while the production sounds smothered and stale. This is a decent first song to listen to because the verses present an insight into just how bad Joe Boynton’s vocals sound on this record. He’s never been a great vocalist, but has always sounded great in the studio - at least good enough that vocals were never a troubling point. Setting aside the song’s infectious chorus, it should be about a minute shorter and otherwise comes up completely dull, which is a theme throughout Young New England."

That's a good example of using one song to define a problem throughout the whole album. Later: "More overarching themes begin here: Out-of-key vocals, musicianship that constantly trips over its own feet, borderline terrible production, and songwriting so bad that you wonder what this group of talented young men were shooting for while crafting this album."

Again using one example to illustrate problems with the whole album. Later still: "“Sleep,” “Hang It Up” and “Summer, ME” are tracks that don’t deserve to be finished, while songs like “So Long, So Long” and closer “Lake Q” offer merely fleeting moments of enjoyability. It doesn’t get much worse than “Hazy,” which wanders along, never providing an indication of a final destination. For the most part, Young New England is embarrassingly lost in itself, a superfluous output that floats along at a frustratingly slow pace and lacks even a slight resemblance of direction."

Sooooo?
also, you complain about the production but only state specifics like "smothered and stale" The last three paragraphs of the review are just dribble and add nothing to the topic at hand. The second to last paragraph barely makes sense and again has very little in the way of specifics about the album.

"the production on this album sounds unforgivably bad, with the vocals out of whack and Daniel Frazier’s terrific drumming criminally underutilized"

What about the second to last paragraph doesn't make sense? The final paragraphs aren't "dribble," it's me taking my thesis and explaining it. Not everything has to be specifics about the album - that comes earlier in the review. I had a point to make and I made it. If you want to read a track-by-track review of the record....read someone else's review.
I mean I told him that once a day.

~memories~
this was funny
I knew as soon as I heard Nothing Lasts Forever that this album would earn a 4/10. I don't get why people are so into that song. It's remedial in both songwriting and delivery.

I will give this album props for Weathered Souls and Bright Lights, Dark Shadows though. Those really stood out to me.
that's really interesting, because I didn't.
08:32 AM on 04/01/13
Archael
listens to good music
Offline
User Info.
Archael's Avatar
So you're agreeing that the better half of this review was just filler to make it longer? There's no specifics in much of the review.
When having a negative review for a band that's typically loved, reviewers tend make the review overly long because otherwise people would constantly complain that the review is too short and doesn't satisfy the people love the album/band. Even though, if the review was positive and still very short, there'd be no problems for the readers because they like to read (and read into) what they want to read.

It's very much understandable that he'd right a long review, even if part of it is filler. Comparisons to previous albums are not moot points, they are valid as reviewers can assume that the readers have listened to said album and therefore provide descriptions from there on, rather than having to describe each and every song, aspect, etc.
08:32 AM on 04/01/13
phaynes1
AP.NET ILLUMINATI
Offline
User Info.
phaynes1's Avatar
Going to respond point by point:
How many times did you listen to this album before deciding to write this review?

About six before starting to write and about two or three times while writing.
I just don't appreciate a bad review that is entirely based off of what the artist had done in the past. That just makes no sense to me. You say in the very first line that you "Hold certain bands to a higher standard."

So when good bands release good records, we shouldn't expect another good record? KTTY was not as good as L&F. I was expecting something that good again. Not something that SOUNDED THE SAME - just something on that level. That's fair to Transit, and I think Transit would not appreciate it if I didn't recognize them for their past successes and hold them to a higher standard. Being held to a higher standard is a GOOD thing - wouldn't it be weird if we were surprised every time Lebron scored 30 points?
You also don't even explain what is so bad about the record. You state "It's bittersweet because those songs aren't very good and don't hold a candle to the best tracks on the band's last LP." What does that have to do with this new album?

Did you read past that line? There are three healthy-sized paragraphs where I literally only talk about songs from the new record. Literally right after the line you quoted comes: "The former offers a healthy hook with uplifting guitar work, while the latter borrows melodies from Listen and Forgive even while the production sounds smothered and stale. This is a decent first song to listen to because the verses present an insight into just how bad Joe Boynton’s vocals sound on this record. He’s never been a great vocalist, but has always sounded great in the studio - at least good enough that vocals were never a troubling point. Setting aside the song’s infectious chorus, it should be about a minute shorter and otherwise comes up completely dull, which is a theme throughout Young New England."

That's a good example of using one song to define a problem throughout the whole album. Later: "More overarching themes begin here: Out-of-key vocals, musicianship that constantly trips over its own feet, borderline terrible production, and songwriting so bad that you wonder what this group of talented young men were shooting for while crafting this album."

Again using one example to illustrate problems with the whole album. Later still: "“Sleep,” “Hang It Up” and “Summer, ME” are tracks that don’t deserve to be finished, while songs like “So Long, So Long” and closer “Lake Q” offer merely fleeting moments of enjoyability. It doesn’t get much worse than “Hazy,” which wanders along, never providing an indication of a final destination. For the most part, Young New England is embarrassingly lost in itself, a superfluous output that floats along at a frustratingly slow pace and lacks even a slight resemblance of direction."

Sooooo?
also, you complain about the production but only state specifics like "smothered and stale" The last three paragraphs of the review are just dribble and add nothing to the topic at hand. The second to last paragraph barely makes sense and again has very little in the way of specifics about the album.

"the production on this album sounds unforgivably bad, with the vocals out of whack and Daniel Frazier’s terrific drumming criminally underutilized"

What about the second to last paragraph doesn't make sense? The final paragraphs aren't "dribble," it's me taking my thesis and explaining it. Not everything has to be specifics about the album - that comes earlier in the review. I had a point to make and I made it. If you want to read a track-by-track review of the record....read someone else's review.

this was funny

that's really interesting, because I didn't.
Thanks!
08:32 AM on 04/01/13
markyconnolly
Regular Member
Offline
User Info.
markyconnolly's Avatar
i love transit, like really love transit. this record could be a lot worse. but its definitely super disappointing. I definitely wish i listened first and than read the review. bummer.
08:34 AM on 04/01/13
Born_For_This
Registered Member
Offline
User Info.
Born_For_This's Avatar
God this is disappointing, I got into L&F over christmas so I was really hoping this lived up to it. Very, very, gutted.
08:35 AM on 04/01/13
mka12992
I called in sick from your funeral
Offline
User Info.
mka12992's Avatar
I want the scale to be: recommend, neutral, don't recommend.

But I always get out voted on that idea.
Fuck democracy, this is the way to go. haha
08:36 AM on 04/01/13
Big_Guy
Idle Will Kill
Online
User Info.
Big_Guy's Avatar
Maybe this band should go back to writing Stay Home style songs. While some people would see that as a regression, that's when they were at their best
08:36 AM on 04/01/13
UnderMyDreams
Offline
User Info.
No Avatar Selected
Lol tweeting the review is terrible.

Stop making shitty music, then.
08:38 AM on 04/01/13
KEB182
Pedestrian Verse
Offline
User Info.
KEB182's Avatar
I still don't think you were specific enough in your review..What exactly is so bad about the production?

"That's a good example of using one song to define a problem throughout the whole album. Later: "More overarching themes begin here: Out-of-key vocals, musicianship that constantly trips over its own feet, borderline terrible production, and songwriting so bad that you wonder what this group of talented young men were shooting for while crafting this album."

Pretty harsh for someone who as far as I know has never written a record or produced one?
08:42 AM on 04/01/13
Thomas Nassiff
resuscitation of the year
Offline
User Info.
Thomas Nassiff's Avatar
I still don't think you were specific enough in your review..What exactly is so bad about the production?

"That's a good example of using one song to define a problem throughout the whole album. Later: "More overarching themes begin here: Out-of-key vocals, musicianship that constantly trips over its own feet, borderline terrible production, and songwriting so bad that you wonder what this group of talented young men were shooting for while crafting this album."

Pretty harsh for someone who as far as I know has never written a record or produced one?
I don't have to be a chef to know when I'm eating bad food
08:46 AM on 04/01/13
Micah511
Let's Talk About Your Hair
Offline
User Info.
Micah511's Avatar
Maybe this band should go back to writing Stay Home style songs. While some people would see that as a regression, that's when they were at their best
i dont think that they should write songs like that always; all their styles since then have been great also. I just wish they pulled off this style a lot better.
Options
More From This Author
Buy the Music

NEWS, MUSIC & MORE
Search News
Release Dates
Exclusives
Best New Music
Submit News
CONNECT
Forums
Contests
RSS
Mobile Version
Banners, Flyers, Widgets
HIDDEN TREASURES
Free Music
Video News
Sports Forum
AP.net Related News
Recommendations
INFORMATION
FAQ
Contact Us
Copyright Policy
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
FOLLOW
Twitter | Facebook
PropertyOfZack
PunkNews.org
UnderTheGun
Chorus.fm