I think someone else had this argument but is it really the production or is it the mixing? The songs themselves are superbly written but the choice of tones (I guess this is the producers doing?) and mixing is what gets me. I don't think it's bad, it's just different. I'm listening to the dope beat now and the breakdown part at 2:37 sounds awesome. It's a bit bass heavy but the more I listen, the more I get it. It's not muddy, or lacking clarity and it was definitely a conscious choice, it's just not what I was expecting or used to for this type of music.
i kind of included mixing in there when i said "production." there were probably some mistakes made on the mastering side. but the drums sound horrible and the guitar tones are muddy, which is the producers doing.
Yeah, I'd say this is a producer's job as well - there's plenty of hands-off producers who don't touch the songs, structurally.
The most telling aspect to me is my consistent need to turn up the volume during my favorite parts. I should feel surrounded by the music - not that it's being blasted at me. But, at the end of the day, it doesn't affect my love for the record.
i think its pretty telling how strong the songs themselves are that they're able to (for the most part) overshadow the production end.
Not to keep adding to the score debate...but I will anyways. If you're trying to give a true objective review of an album I think it's important for individual components to be scored. If the production is crap then it should be reflected in the score for it does have an effect on the overall enjoyment for many people. A better option for the new AP should be to axe the "Reviewer Tilt" and have every album given an objective rating (with the same categories sans RT) and a subjective score (with no categories). This would satiate both those looking for a technical look as well as those more concerned with basic enjoyment.
Would be easy, useful, and crowd pleasing IMO and then there would be no more conversations derailed like this.
that isnt going to happen. none of the reviewers like the categories because we all put different stock into different things. one absolute score is easily the best way to score something, and at the end of the day (i really cant believe i have to say this) a score is completely arbitrary.
Disagree personally, I feel unless you cover your ground these "discussions" will never end and a dual score would be (sort of) innovative and appeasing. And obviously the score is arbitrary but it's an important measure for people to be able to glance at and say this is either good or bad.
isnt that what the actual review is for? covering your ground and justifying your score? why do you need different scoring categories when it will all be laid out for you in actual words, which are much much more powerful than just numbers?
Yes, but it's a nice component IMO. Sometimes people on the go don't have time to read immediately but place value on the score. For example, years ago I bought Moneen's Red Tree based on the AP score without reading the review. Foolish (but was a superb buy) and rare maybe, but it happens.
And, not to be mean, but sometimes AP reviews get a little long winded when you just want a general opinion.
why should we cater to an occurrence that, as you admitted, is foolish and rare?
exactly. like, what even is the difference between an 8 and a 9, really? the only point of the score is to catch the eye, so that the viewer digs deeper, reads the review, and checks out the record. This is why I like the idea of "not recommended/recommended/highly recommended" as opposed to a score.
But I guess I do get that there's something enchanting about seeing an album you love or are looking forward to get a 9.5 or higher, but it's so unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
i'll tell you right now i put maybe 10-20 seconds of thought into my score. it just doesnt matter to me, im much more concerned about the 5-6 paragraphs i just spent 3 hours writing.
i think a 5 star scale or a letter grade scale would be best.
Album is just alright. Not quite as strong as Fake History. Either that or the band's novelty has just worn thin for me. I'll have to go back to FH to find out. Some of the tracks here are downright unlistenable. That being said, I would say Virgin Dirt and 27 Club are probably their strongest songs to date.
Production is just atrocious and I have a really hard time believing it's intentional. Sure, they tried to stray from the norm of the "everything-level-and-clean" style and go for something a bit more raw but the levels are so out of sync with this is so many places that make absolutely no sense. I'm chalking it up to it being self-produced and just possibly trial-and-error.
yeah like, there's a way to go for the raw unhinged production sound and still make it sound good. this album sounds like shit. there is no way around it.