1.2.12 Adam News and Info
Jan 2, 2012 21:07:07 GMT -5
Post by cassie on Jan 2, 2012 21:07:07 GMT -5
Comment by Maureen underneath the review, giving the reviewer a D and the song an A...
Maureen Holley: The reviewer kind of phoned this review in. Missed the great syncopation on the beat. Missed the lovely piano coming in counter to the melody line. Missed the sensitive interpretation of the lyrical content. Right about the falsetto, but forgot to mention the rich vocal tones in the lower notes. Oh, and not auto-tuned. This song is sung by a really good singer. I'd give the song an A and the reviewer a D.
Would have liked a 4 star at least, but honestly the comments section on these reviews make me die a little. Often I can recognize the same 5-7 glamberts...we really do him no favor by writing these comments. It really must be a joke amongst reviewers....*sigh*
Ok, I think I'm going to have to stick up for "Maureen" here. If you are going to complain about OTT comments there are plenty of others there now to complain about including the infamous "bull in a china shop" Rose, but Maureen only points out that the reviewer didn't look deep enough. She doesn't call the reviewer names or insult their credentials just questions the effort they put into the review and then proceeds to point out specific things she feels the reviewer missed. This is NOT the comment that I would choose to bitch about. Others here have pointed out that they felt the reviewer approached this from the "too cool for school" position with an apparent disdain for pop music. I don't see anything OTT about this comment at all.
You make some very good points. My viewpoint is that there is a big difference between reviewing and reporting. The latter requires the writer to put aside any personal biases and preferences and objectively state the facts. On the other hand, a review may be partially or totally based on the writer's opinions and preferences. For example, if I am a reviewer and I do not like the formulaic pop that is so prevalent on today's radio, if I find it generic and shallow, then if Adam's single is designed to be a big hit on top 40 pop radio I will probably hear some of the same things I dislike about other pop songs. Verdict? Don't like it. I don't have to say, "Don't like it because I am bored with pop. But, Lambert has the ability to sing his face off. Don't like it but Lambert does some more nuanced phrasing or complex technical things. Don't like it but Lambert is the most talented singer out there today." In fact, I might dislike it more than I dislike, for example, Katy, exactly because Adam can do so much more than a simple pop hit, so my expectations are higher. I don't want him to "sell out" to the lowest common denominator.
A reviewer is paid to express their opinion. The readers are free to disagree with that opinion. Controversy is good for readership. Good reviews of Adam's work are a delight to read. Criticism of his work because of personal preferences and opinions I try to roll with. As Adam said, "If you don't like it, buy the other guy's album." It is only when the reviewer criticizes Adam, the person, for things having nothing to do with the music being reviewed, that I think the reviewer has gone too far, and I need to challenge him/her.
IMO.
