Nit Picks Pet Peeves and Guilty Pleasures #1.1

Reviewing the Review: Part 2

The "Unbiased" Review

Most reviewers of any type claim that their reviews are "Unbiased," and many readers get upset when a review seems to rely on the reviewer's previous conceptions about a certain genre or a certain band. The more I read reviews and delve into my own feelings about music, the more I'm convinced that there really is no such thing as an "Unbiased" review. Any one person's opinion about music is going to be based on what they like and don't like, not based on some universal standard of what is and isn't enjoyable music. I happen to really like the complexity and creativity of progressive rock, so I might give a progressive rock album a score of 8.5, while another reviewer might give the same album a 6.5 saying that it was overly complex, unbearably pretentious and unlistenable. Neither review is "right" or "wrong," we each have different takes on what makes music good.

This brings me to the argument over "good" and "bad" music. Some people would posit that since each person experiences music differently, there isn't actually good and bad music. As a musician, I respectfully disagree with this. Each person is entitled to their own ideas of what makes music good and bad, but I think there is music that is by definition good, and music that is by definition, bad. The most important thing to remember when speaking to the quality of a piece of music, is whether or not it is in anyway advancing music as a whole. Now an album can do this in any number of ways, it doesn't just have to be musically 'complex,' but it needs to add something, whether that be a new way of conveying a message or story through music, or conveying a certain feeling or emotion, or even just being incredibly sonically pleasing. It is in these different styles of advancing music that much of the disagreement takes place. One reviewer might like it when music creates one type of mood, and therefore will like a band that successfully creates that kind of mood. A different reviewer, might not like that mood, and therefore might not like that band, but the second reviewer might likely agree that the band is good at invoking that mood. Another disagreement occurs when one reviewer points out that a band does a very good job of moving past the usual boundaries of music, while a different reviewer might posit that the band advances beyond overused song structures at the cost of creating a coherent and appealing sound. In this case neither reviewer is wrong, they just have different opinions on how best to combine the aspects of good music. In order to quantify these different aspects of good and bad music, I have created a simple rubric that I use for every album that I review that addresses each way in which I believe an album can succeed.

In reviewing an album, I always attempt to stay clearly rooted in whether or not the album contains good music, and outside of that my reviews can be terribly biased, because I think reviews should be biased. After all, an album review is one person's opinion on an album, not a bottom line that lays out how every person should feel about that album. A review should always attempt to speak to whether or not an album contains good music, while at the same time describing how much that particular reviewer enjoyed the album.

Stay Tuned for Reviewing the Review Part 3: The Score and The Rubric