Inspired by my thread in a completely different forum!
I remember many years ago, FHM magazine reviewed the Metallica album, St. Anger and i felt that that reviewer hadnt listened to the album either at all or in full. He commented on the loud over bearing guitar solos despite the fact there are no solos on the album.
It got me thinking about album reviews. to me, it can take time for an album to grow on me. So while i might hate it at first, after a few listens i become accustomed to it and then decide how i like it. Sometimes a short time after, it may grow dust in er, the confines of my mp3 player, never to be played again!
So how to music reviews rate in your opinion? each to their own? Do you feel the reviewers really listen before reviewing or listen briefly and post a review in their mag just to meet a deadline?