avoid reviewers in irish music like the plague - they're all terrible.
You have siobhan long, who is half idiot, half thesaurus. How come every album gets pretty much the same star rating? 3-4.5? What's wrong with the other stars?
Or that Geoff Wallis, who just doesn't get it, so focuses in on factual information and gives little or no insight into the actual music.
Do as you said, listen to a couple of secs of the tracks on website/itunes and make your own mind up. Music is far too subjective to take on board the opinions of people you don't know personally, and, judging from reviews I've read, have questionable understanding of the music in the first place.
I have a fairly large collection of ITM CDs and probably read a magazine review on less than 5% of them before purchase. Most were purchased based on the artist (Kevin Burke, Martin Hayes, etc.), just seems interesting (a collection of traditional concertina music from County Clare, etc.), suggestions from friends ("Have you heard the Ceili Bandits?"), or pick up at a performance (numerous examples). I get most of my stuff from Custy's, which only have a very brief description.
So, magazine reviews have never been important to me. More often than not, the labels (Compass, Claddagh, etc.) send out notices of new releases or sales of the more popular artists. The independent "unkown" artists usually don't get reviewed in magazines anyway. These often turn out to be my favorites.
Audio tracks could be helpful to get a sense of the style, etc. Music should be heard and not read about.
Frank Zappa said, "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture". Most pop and rock "journalism" is just as useless; attempts to describe rock music mostly end up recycling the usual cliches, and the "factual" part of it usually involves invented feuds (Oasis v Blur; The Beatles v The Rolling Stones) dreamt up as part of some ridiculous publicity stunt.
Better to rely on your own judgment. Good taste comes from good breeding, and if you haven't got it you won't catch it off a journalist.
Damnit. Too late for me to go back and get some good breeding now.
Reviews, opinions - there are plenty of them on here so what's to fret about?
I bet if we were trying to get a CD to the market we'd be happy too see it reviewed in the press. All the more if a reviewer who's known to be harsh showers it with praise.
Geoff Wallis posts frequently on this forum, though not as "Geoff Wallis". Perhaps the insulting poster above already knows this, eh? One can suspect a bit of past friction and trollery here. Reviews of any kind are just another cog in the wheel. They are intended to be read with a degree of intelligent scepticism, and no reviewer worth his or her salt would refute that. If you have read a good few reviews from a particular reviewer you will build a level of trust or mistrust which will serve you quite well next time you read any of their reviews. Don't diss reviewers. Most of 'em do it for nothing and you can pick among the bones for titbits that may just help to inform your choice of buying/listening. Or just don't bother with 'em.
Sorry, didn't realise Wallis used this site, although if he doesn't post under his own name, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to have known this beforehand. I was only trying to give "real life" examples to justify my point.
My point is that the critic is almost an oxymoron of a position in real world utilisation. To criticise something, particularly in a professional context, you should be beyond reproach within the given field. But where are these 'perfect' albums from the aforementioned reviewers? I hold no weight in their words, I don't see them being able to justify their stance through their own abilities within the music.
It's all subjective, this is only my personal view. Obviously some people view them as beneficial, or they would all be out of a job! But, having read as many inaccurate reviews as accurate ones, I found the whole notion of critics within Irish music very strange - the vast majority being unable to play to a standard that warrants commercial release, they criticise musicians for money/notoriety. Leeches.
But the vast majority of commercial releases are made by people unable to play to a standard that warrants commercial release. That's why the vast majority of commercial releases are failures - in that they are uncommercial.
But heck, do we care if the music we play is uncommercial?
I'd be a bit more liberal- you don't have to be Shakespeare to write literary criticism, though you do need to have read enough to be able to appreciate the whole gamut.
Fanning's joke sums it up nicely, but in an imperfect world, you have to cut people some slack. The main thing is to be fair and balanced in any judgement, eh poo? And let's face it, most artists get some flak, and can maybe learn from it.
Does anyone expect a food critic to be a good cook? And who expects the guy who writes the match report in your sunday paper to be a great footballer?
My dad's the best critic of diddley music I've ever come accross ... and he can't play a note. He's just listened to it all his life, from being bounced on his grandad's knee to Coleman 78s.
Yeah, constructive criticism is of benefit to any artists, but the source of it should be in a position to help and nurture talent, which I don't think applies to the given subject matter.
I know I'll probably butt heads with a lot of people on this subject, but I wouldn't trust a critic's appraisal of a recording at all, which is the question that was originally asked by the first poster. It's just an opinion, but I see their role as completely antiquated once you have your own opinions on your musical taste and access to the music to listen before you buy, be that on a website, at a music store or any other source.
Fair point, poo, especially now that, as you say, you can access pretty much anything, listen to it, and make up your own mind before buying.
However, as far as written 'criticism' is concerned, a lot of artists are still desperate to be written about to get their names known, so it will always remain a bit of a trade off.
that's true enough as well. I suppose, if I were to look at it from the other side, it's a bit of a thankless job, like being a goalkeeper. If you get it right, no-one says much. If you get it wrong, people are up in arms.
Yeah, it can bring exposure to musicians, but all too often the review doesn't do this. Take for instance Long's reviews (I'll avoid criticising Wallis because, if he does use the site as suggested, that would be rude) - they seem to play safe with established acts all the time. Again, the usual 'star' rating, from 3-4.5 stars. It's kinda boring to read.
+constructive criticism is of benefit to any artists, but the source of it should be in a position to help and nurture talent+
Criticism isn't for the benefit of the artists, it's for the benefit of listeners, the readers, or in the case of CDs for sales, the " consumers".
Helping and nurturing talent may be a fine thing to do, but it's for PR or A&R, friends and supporters, not for critics and reviewers
Well you don't expect Paxman to "help and nurture" his subjects do you?
In any small incestuous scene, music, art, whatever, the "critics" - i.e. reviewers - are usually too close to the "artistes" to perform any function other than PR
Yep, which makes any critic prepared to tell it as he/she sees it a breath of fresh air.
As to the original question- maybe a lot of reviewing/recommending has now in effect moved on line, and is done by 'civilians' on blogs and websites like this.
Paxman is an over-rated windbag, even at his day job.
His interview style is always all about himself and grandstanding. He is hopeless at getting to the heart of the issue, chosing instead to try to provoke personalities.
Typical of modern tv, all about the drama and presentation. Celebrity over content.
If you want a tv journalist / news anchor that actually wants to discuss the issues tune into John Snow on C4. Leave that smug git paxman to present univesrity challenge, where he can sneerdown his nose at the contestants, safe in the knowlege that he can read the answers off the card.
Well, I thought Paxman's recent series on Victorian art was masterly. And he didn't just present it, he wrote it. Thou doth protest too much. If you didn't bother watching it because it was Paxo doing it, tough luck. You missed one of the best things on telly in months.
If I want to know what my playing is like I ask my wife. No holds barred, no punches pulled. If she says "something didn't sound quite right about it to me" she's always right and it's back to the shed. She can't sing or play anything and she reckons she's tone deaf (she isn't).
I didn't see the victorian art series, maybe twas good (though I'm just after reading it being shredded on a completely unrelated group).
I didn't boycott it because of Paxman. I rarely watch tele other than the news, or the fitba if I'm in myself. Even things I quite like I can rarely be bothered watching, I have very little interest in tv or film. I'd rather read. If I wanted to know about victorian art I'd read a relevant book. If I was tired and just wanted to be entertained I'd maybe switch on the tv.
I still think (my opinion) that Paxman has a completely undeserved reputation as a high class political interviewer. IMHO he is much more concerned with the personalities than the actual issues at stake. He'd rather grandstand & bluster as a bully that ask well thought out questions to a range of people representing various interests & positions. Compare & contrast Paxman's work with channel 4 news
We'll have to agree to differ. I think our cynical politicos need a few bulldogs snapping round their ankles and them being polite isn't high on my list of requirements. Not one of 'em is the be-all and end-all I admit, though they have a role. I don't watch much telly either, except WHEN LIVERPOOL ARE WIPING OUT REAL MADRID!! Oh bugger, sorry...got a bit carried away there...
My problem with Paxman is he appear to think aggressive mannerisms is a substitute for asking genuinely difficult & cutting questions. It isn't. He goes for the person, not the issue. It is showboating, and does not do justice to the issues at stake.
Give me questioning however polite ( and you could argue that being impolite often just lets the politicians off the hook) that goes to the heart of the matter over Paxman's style any day.
"To criticise something, particularly in a professional context, you should be beyond reproach within the given field. But where are these 'perfect' albums from the aforementioned reviewers? I hold no weight in their words, I don't see them being able to justify their stance through their own abilities within the music"
--flying fists of poo poo
Dear Mr. Poo Poo,
Please submit examples of your music criticism so I can determine whether I should give any weight to your criticism of music critics.
On a serious note, given the large volume of CDs being released (both ITM and other), critics can be useful simply by bringing new CDs to your attention that you would have otherwise missed. In addition, if you are familiar with the reviewer, you can seek out or avoid CDs based on their recommendations (whether to seek out or avoid is based on your opinion of the reviewer, of course; I can think of some critics whose recommended CDs I would very much avoid).
When you are reviewing something it's impossible to be impartial.
I remember reviewing an album for a magazine where I said I was disappointed with the unimaginative order of the tracks. It went: set of reels, set of jigs, song, reels, song, hornpipes, song, reels, song etc. I said that I'd prefer it if all the tunes were together and all the songs were together. Though I did say the playing and singing was excellent, I also said the arrangements were predictable and very similar. I said that grouping the tunes and songs would have focused the artists more into this, and made them make more of an effort.
Next time I saw them they said they were disappointed that I didn't like the songs. I'd never said that in the review, but the subtext was clear. They were right, I didn't like the songs.
In the days when I took Folk Roots, as was, before it disappeared up its World Music fundament (and all power to it), I used to regard Colin Irwin's reviews as pretty useful. He had (has?) a way of leaving lots of lines betweeen which you could read. I didn't agree with him a lot of the time (he got into hot water with readers, I recall, for slating Penguin Eggs for its political incorrectness over its whaling song ) but, once you got to know his wily way with words, you could glean useful stuff from many of his reviews. I wasn't often disappointed with records I bought on the strength of his opinions.
I can hardly listen to Penguin Eggs tearlessly. The whole thing is bloody magic. One fine day we might have Noah's Ark Trap on CD as well if that funny feller in Yorkshire ever sees the light. All I have is a crummy old copy of a copy of a copy on cassette. Ten Thousand Miles from that album is one of my desert island discs.
CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Didn't we have this debate fairly recently?
# Posted on March 10th 2009 by strayaway
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
avoid reviewers in irish music like the plague - they're all terrible.
You have siobhan long, who is half idiot, half thesaurus. How come every album gets pretty much the same star rating? 3-4.5? What's wrong with the other stars?
Or that Geoff Wallis, who just doesn't get it, so focuses in on factual information and gives little or no insight into the actual music.
Do as you said, listen to a couple of secs of the tracks on website/itunes and make your own mind up. Music is far too subjective to take on board the opinions of people you don't know personally, and, judging from reviews I've read, have questionable understanding of the music in the first place.
Be your own man!
# Posted on March 10th 2009 by flying fists of poo poo
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
I have a fairly large collection of ITM CDs and probably read a magazine review on less than 5% of them before purchase. Most were purchased based on the artist (Kevin Burke, Martin Hayes, etc.), just seems interesting (a collection of traditional concertina music from County Clare, etc.), suggestions from friends ("Have you heard the Ceili Bandits?"), or pick up at a performance (numerous examples). I get most of my stuff from Custy's, which only have a very brief description.
So, magazine reviews have never been important to me. More often than not, the labels (Compass, Claddagh, etc.) send out notices of new releases or sales of the more popular artists. The independent "unkown" artists usually don't get reviewed in magazines anyway. These often turn out to be my favorites.
Audio tracks could be helpful to get a sense of the style, etc. Music should be heard and not read about.
# Posted on March 10th 2009 by Jiml
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Frank Zappa said, "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture". Most pop and rock "journalism" is just as useless; attempts to describe rock music mostly end up recycling the usual cliches, and the "factual" part of it usually involves invented feuds (Oasis v Blur; The Beatles v The Rolling Stones) dreamt up as part of some ridiculous publicity stunt.
Better to rely on your own judgment. Good taste comes from good breeding, and if you haven't got it you won't catch it off a journalist.
# Posted on March 10th 2009 by Hammurabi Breathnach
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Damnit. Too late for me to go back and get some good breeding now.
Reviews, opinions - there are plenty of them on here so what's to fret about?
I bet if we were trying to get a CD to the market we'd be happy too see it reviewed in the press. All the more if a reviewer who's known to be harsh showers it with praise.
# Posted on March 10th 2009 by Bren
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Geoff Wallis posts frequently on this forum, though not as "Geoff Wallis". Perhaps the insulting poster above already knows this, eh? One can suspect a bit of past friction and trollery here. Reviews of any kind are just another cog in the wheel. They are intended to be read with a degree of intelligent scepticism, and no reviewer worth his or her salt would refute that. If you have read a good few reviews from a particular reviewer you will build a level of trust or mistrust which will serve you quite well next time you read any of their reviews. Don't diss reviewers. Most of 'em do it for nothing and you can pick among the bones for titbits that may just help to inform your choice of buying/listening. Or just don't bother with 'em.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Without meaning to be too critical about critics,
Q: What do eunuchs and critics have in common?
A: They both know perfectly well how it's supposed to be done.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Fanning
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
From what I've seen of Geoff's writing, he manages to be pretty even-handed, while remaining his own man. 'Just doesn't get it'? I don't think so.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Sorry, didn't realise Wallis used this site, although if he doesn't post under his own name, I'm not sure how I'm supposed to have known this beforehand. I was only trying to give "real life" examples to justify my point.
My point is that the critic is almost an oxymoron of a position in real world utilisation. To criticise something, particularly in a professional context, you should be beyond reproach within the given field. But where are these 'perfect' albums from the aforementioned reviewers? I hold no weight in their words, I don't see them being able to justify their stance through their own abilities within the music.
It's all subjective, this is only my personal view. Obviously some people view them as beneficial, or they would all be out of a job! But, having read as many inaccurate reviews as accurate ones, I found the whole notion of critics within Irish music very strange - the vast majority being unable to play to a standard that warrants commercial release, they criticise musicians for money/notoriety. Leeches.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by flying fists of poo poo
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
But the vast majority of commercial releases are made by people unable to play to a standard that warrants commercial release. That's why the vast majority of commercial releases are failures - in that they are uncommercial.
But heck, do we care if the music we play is uncommercial?
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
I'd be a bit more liberal- you don't have to be Shakespeare to write literary criticism, though you do need to have read enough to be able to appreciate the whole gamut.
Fanning's joke sums it up nicely, but in an imperfect world, you have to cut people some slack. The main thing is to be fair and balanced in any judgement, eh poo? And let's face it, most artists get some flak, and can maybe learn from it.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Does anyone expect a food critic to be a good cook? And who expects the guy who writes the match report in your sunday paper to be a great footballer?
My dad's the best critic of diddley music I've ever come accross ... and he can't play a note. He's just listened to it all his life, from being bounced on his grandad's knee to Coleman 78s.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Yeah, constructive criticism is of benefit to any artists, but the source of it should be in a position to help and nurture talent, which I don't think applies to the given subject matter.
I know I'll probably butt heads with a lot of people on this subject, but I wouldn't trust a critic's appraisal of a recording at all, which is the question that was originally asked by the first poster. It's just an opinion, but I see their role as completely antiquated once you have your own opinions on your musical taste and access to the music to listen before you buy, be that on a website, at a music store or any other source.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by flying fists of poo poo
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Fair point, poo, especially now that, as you say, you can access pretty much anything, listen to it, and make up your own mind before buying.
However, as far as written 'criticism' is concerned, a lot of artists are still desperate to be written about to get their names known, so it will always remain a bit of a trade off.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
that's true enough as well. I suppose, if I were to look at it from the other side, it's a bit of a thankless job, like being a goalkeeper. If you get it right, no-one says much. If you get it wrong, people are up in arms.
Yeah, it can bring exposure to musicians, but all too often the review doesn't do this. Take for instance Long's reviews (I'll avoid criticising Wallis because, if he does use the site as suggested, that would be rude) - they seem to play safe with established acts all the time. Again, the usual 'star' rating, from 3-4.5 stars. It's kinda boring to read.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by flying fists of poo poo
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Don't forget that a critic's critical role is to educate.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
You can say that you don't need no education, but I'd advise against such arrogant presumption
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
+constructive criticism is of benefit to any artists, but the source of it should be in a position to help and nurture talent+
Criticism isn't for the benefit of the artists, it's for the benefit of listeners, the readers, or in the case of CDs for sales, the " consumers".
Helping and nurturing talent may be a fine thing to do, but it's for PR or A&R, friends and supporters, not for critics and reviewers
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Bren
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Bren- as Jeremy Paxman might say, y-e-e-e-e-s-
i.e perhaps the distinction between 'criticism' and puff is not always that clear cut.
llig- see me afterwards.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
I don't need anyone to tell me what I like to listen to.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Original questions:
No
Yes
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by SWFL Fiddler
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Well you don't expect Paxman to "help and nurture" his subjects do you?
In any small incestuous scene, music, art, whatever, the "critics" - i.e. reviewers - are usually too close to the "artistes" to perform any function other than PR
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Bren
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Yep, which makes any critic prepared to tell it as he/she sees it a breath of fresh air.
As to the original question- maybe a lot of reviewing/recommending has now in effect moved on line, and is done by 'civilians' on blogs and websites like this.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Paxman is an over-rated windbag, even at his day job.
His interview style is always all about himself and grandstanding. He is hopeless at getting to the heart of the issue, chosing instead to try to provoke personalities.
Typical of modern tv, all about the drama and presentation. Celebrity over content.
If you want a tv journalist / news anchor that actually wants to discuss the issues tune into John Snow on C4. Leave that smug git paxman to present univesrity challenge, where he can sneerdown his nose at the contestants, safe in the knowlege that he can read the answers off the card.
- chris
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Yea, not particularly likeable, but that's showbiz- he puts bums on seats.
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Here Lyeth
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Well, I thought Paxman's recent series on Victorian art was masterly. And he didn't just present it, he wrote it. Thou doth protest too much. If you didn't bother watching it because it was Paxo doing it, tough luck. You missed one of the best things on telly in months.
If I want to know what my playing is like I ask my wife. No holds barred, no punches pulled. If she says "something didn't sound quite right about it to me" she's always right and it's back to the shed. She can't sing or play anything and she reckons she's tone deaf (she isn't).
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Steve, if your message was aimed at me.
I didn't see the victorian art series, maybe twas good (though I'm just after reading it being shredded on a completely unrelated group).
I didn't boycott it because of Paxman. I rarely watch tele other than the news, or the fitba if I'm in myself. Even things I quite like I can rarely be bothered watching, I have very little interest in tv or film. I'd rather read. If I wanted to know about victorian art I'd read a relevant book. If I was tired and just wanted to be entertained I'd maybe switch on the tv.
I still think (my opinion) that Paxman has a completely undeserved reputation as a high class political interviewer. IMHO he is much more concerned with the personalities than the actual issues at stake. He'd rather grandstand & bluster as a bully that ask well thought out questions to a range of people representing various interests & positions. Compare & contrast Paxman's work with channel 4 news
- chris
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
We'll have to agree to differ. I think our cynical politicos need a few bulldogs snapping round their ankles and them being polite isn't high on my list of requirements. Not one of 'em is the be-all and end-all I admit, though they have a role. I don't watch much telly either, except WHEN LIVERPOOL ARE WIPING OUT REAL MADRID!! Oh bugger, sorry...got a bit carried away there...
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
I guess I should have added "TV critics" to the list of music, art, whatever
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Bren
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
MY problem isn't with lack of politeness as such.
My problem with Paxman is he appear to think aggressive mannerisms is a substitute for asking genuinely difficult & cutting questions. It isn't. He goes for the person, not the issue. It is showboating, and does not do justice to the issues at stake.
Give me questioning however polite ( and you could argue that being impolite often just lets the politicians off the hook) that goes to the heart of the matter over Paxman's style any day.
But yes, I'm happy to agree to differ.
cheers - chris
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by ramblingpitchfork
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
"To criticise something, particularly in a professional context, you should be beyond reproach within the given field. But where are these 'perfect' albums from the aforementioned reviewers? I hold no weight in their words, I don't see them being able to justify their stance through their own abilities within the music"
--flying fists of poo poo
Dear Mr. Poo Poo,
Please submit examples of your music criticism so I can determine whether I should give any weight to your criticism of music critics.
Respectfully,
Jameson Stew
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by Jameson Stew
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
lol
# Posted on March 11th 2009 by flying fists of poo poo
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Just kidding, poo-poo.
On a serious note, given the large volume of CDs being released (both ITM and other), critics can be useful simply by bringing new CDs to your attention that you would have otherwise missed. In addition, if you are familiar with the reviewer, you can seek out or avoid CDs based on their recommendations (whether to seek out or avoid is based on your opinion of the reviewer, of course; I can think of some critics whose recommended CDs I would very much avoid).
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Jameson Stew
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
And unfortunately, praise from critics who uniformly praise everything that comes their way, carries no weight at all
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Bren
Unlike Ms Long of the Irish times
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by bazouki dave
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
ha ha ha sporting pitchfork. Intertextuality not your strong point eh?
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
http://www.thesession.org/recordings/display/218
How about the review I posted in full in the "Comments" for the above recording ?
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Kenny
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
When you are reviewing something it's impossible to be impartial.
I remember reviewing an album for a magazine where I said I was disappointed with the unimaginative order of the tracks. It went: set of reels, set of jigs, song, reels, song, hornpipes, song, reels, song etc. I said that I'd prefer it if all the tunes were together and all the songs were together. Though I did say the playing and singing was excellent, I also said the arrangements were predictable and very similar. I said that grouping the tunes and songs would have focused the artists more into this, and made them make more of an effort.
Next time I saw them they said they were disappointed that I didn't like the songs. I'd never said that in the review, but the subtext was clear. They were right, I didn't like the songs.
I gave reviewing up after that.
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
Hey, patrick toms, I'm getting a very odd feeling that I recognise your "style" of writing and punctuation. You're not....Clark Kent...are you...?
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
In the days when I took Folk Roots, as was, before it disappeared up its World Music fundament (and all power to it), I used to regard Colin Irwin's reviews as pretty useful. He had (has?) a way of leaving lots of lines betweeen which you could read. I didn't agree with him a lot of the time (he got into hot water with readers, I recall, for slating Penguin Eggs for its political incorrectness over its whaling song
) but, once you got to know his wily way with words, you could glean useful stuff from many of his reviews. I wasn't often disappointed with records I bought on the strength of his opinions.
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Steve Shaw
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
That whaling song on Penguin Eggs is bloody brilliant. It's twin diesels.
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by llig leahcim
Re: CD reviews of ITM,and website tracks
I can hardly listen to Penguin Eggs tearlessly. The whole thing is bloody magic. One fine day we might have Noah's Ark Trap on CD as well if that funny feller in Yorkshire ever sees the light. All I have is a crummy old copy of a copy of a copy on cassette. Ten Thousand Miles from that album is one of my desert island discs.
# Posted on March 12th 2009 by Steve Shaw