 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zero! My "ear" will decide what I collect.
Same with films really. If I really want to see a film, no bad reviews are going to keep me away and similarly, if I don't want to see a film no amount of great reviews, Oscars etc. are going to get me to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow... maybe I'm a bit of an anomaly here. In defense of reviews, however, I'll point out that I've picked up some fabulous scores that I would never have thought to check out as a result of a glowing review and have found aspects of scores I already owned that I hadn't perceived as a result of an well written review.
Chris.
Your post suggests these were positive reviews. It's the negative ones that tend to do the damage.
I don't read them, but I favour the reviews that analytically examine the music and what it tries to achieve. Then you have criteria for actually judging it. I may well be wrong but I think reviewers are much more revered in the US than in the UK. I dunno really if they're so in Europe as a whole. You always imagine the French would be more attuned to analysis.
There are some good, fair reviewers, like FSM's own Tim Burden for example, who has made something of a lifestyle of always concentrating on the POSITIVE elements of music, and of people in general. In the long term you get more out of it that way, it's fairer on the music, and you don't alienate either your readers, the composers, or the people out there in the ether. In Tim's case he's not just being professional, he's really like that!
But out there today, on the internet, everyone and his pimples is a critic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow... maybe I'm a bit of an anomaly here. In defense of reviews, however, I'll point out that I've picked up some fabulous scores that I would never have thought to check out as a result of a glowing review and have found aspects of scores I already owned that I hadn't perceived as a result of an well written review.
Chris.
Your post suggests these were positive reviews. It's the negative ones that tend to do the damage.
I don't read them, but I favour the reviews that analytically examine the music and what it tries to achieve. Then you have criteria for actually judging it. I may well be wrong but I think reviewers are much more revered in the US than in the UK. I dunno really if they're so in Europe as a whole. You always imagine the French would be more attuned to analysis.
There are some good, fair reviewers, like FSM's own Tim Burden for example, who has made something of a lifestyle of always concentrating on the POSITIVE elements of music, and of people in general. In the long term you get more out of it that way, it's fairer on the music, and you don't alienate either your readers, the composers, or the people out there in the ether. In Tim's case he's not just being professional, he's really like that! All the FSM reviewers tend to be fair and engaging.
But out there today, on the internet, everyone and his pimples is a critic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
