RipFork

Ripping Music Critics Since 2009

Archive for category MusicOMH

Andrew Burgess’ Review of “Love Drunk” by Boys Like s

Apr 28

Posted by Matt Wendus in MusicOMH | 5 Comments

Artist: Boys Like s

Album: Love Drunk

Reviewer: Andrew Burgess

MusicOMH, 2010

Writing Disorders: Scorn Disease








Most Emo Phrases: “Where’s the ? Where’s anything that means anything?”

Stuffiest Phrase: “a pseudo-punk rock band to soundtrack those slumber parties when the mood calls for something (very) slightly edgier”




Andrew, I like probing the psychology of people who poop on art for kicks, and your review gave me ample opportunity. Like fellow music parasite Ian Roullier, you clearly detest millenials:

“That’s where Boys Like s comes in, filling that bouncing, trite, overproduced power(less)-pop niche for preteens who like to complain to Facebook about how Sharon So-and-so’s a bitch, and how, OMG, Johnny Football is just never going to ask them to the dance.”

Andrew, if some 6th grader said he’s picked boogers better than In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, would you say he wasn’t mature enough to appreciate its “lo-fi power?” Maybe there’s a similar age gap at work here. If this album is so obviously geared towards middle schoolers, why did you review it? Why didn’t you ask your editor to kindly send you a release that caters more to the married with tattooed forearms demographic?

That’s a question worth pondering. I figure there are three possible reasons you ended up with this album to review, even if your lengthy conniption really narrowed it to one:

  1. MusicOMH sends random CDs to writers with clearly defined tastes in their own site bios
  2. At a time when nearly every band has a website or page with song samples, you somehow unwittingly picked an album you ended up hating
  3. You picked an album you knew you’d just to squeeze word turds on it

So either your editor’s oblivious, you’re oblivious, or you’re kind of a dick. Take your pick. If you need help deciding, here are some butt bullets to illustrate:

“their defacto inclusion into the genre is something to cringe at”

“one radio-ready nugget of pop-rubbish after another”

“could have been honest and engaging if it weren’t so plagued with clichés”

Maybe I missed the memo where you’re God’s gift to music, but even if I did, I’d still think it’s rotten for a musician to write that junk about other musicians. Like some music lice, you actually play an instrument and record music when you’re not niggling others people’s. That actually brings me to my next point. Here’s your ninth insult:

“It’s positively begging to appear on an episode of Gray’s Anatomy.”

Andrew, I don’t know if you’ve ever listened to the music you’ve recorded and put up on , but midtempo acoustic numbers with barely audible vocals aren’t much further from a McSteamy montage. And while we’re on the subject, why is it so awful for a band of heterosexual males to land their song on a show watched primarily by women? Maybe it’s not as satisfying as the 73 plays your stuff has gotten, but I wouldn’t complain if my music got women thinking, “I want to go down on his voice with my ear.”

Here’s my beef, Andrew. You’re so hung up on carping in the most devastating way possible that you end up making a string of really dumb arguments. Here’s a taste:

“They’re not even emulating Bon Jovi’s heyday, opting instead for what must have been blaring from their own stereos in their mums’ basements at high school parties”

Whoa, musicians emulating music they enjoyed listening to in their formative years? That’s positively CRIMINAL. I know some children aren’t fortunate enough to “discover the meaning of life” from the 8 songs on Born to Run like you did, but berating someone for not emulating the “right” part of a catalog is pretty weak.

Here’s another bit that caught my eye:

“This album will get a lot of confused, reality-television-obsessed kids through breakups, hang-ups and prom night woes.”

How is that any worse than other music getting Cannes-obsessed 20-somethings through the travails of working life and online dating; or 30-somethings through the horror of weight gain, family life, and the discovery of infidelity through a spouse’s email? Every song has its audience, Andrew, and not every audience is you. Bear in mind you’re the grown-up who blew through six paragraphs explaining how this music isn’t for grown-ups. Now that’s something to cringe at.

Good luck with that novel.

Tags:

Camilla Pia’s Review of “Falcon” by The Courteeners

Mar 24

Posted by Matt Wendus in MusicOMH | 5 Comments

Artist: The Courteeners

Album: Falcon

Reviewer: Camilla Pia

MusicOMH, 2010

Writing Disorders: Infectious Punctuation, Detachment Syndrome








Longest Sentence: 66 words

Telltale Warts: “Wilde-esque musings,” “perhaps most puerile,” “obsessive Oasis-aping,” “dumb bravado anthems”

The Fame Monster: “so pitiful they make Lady GaGa’s pen to paper sound like poetry”




Camilla, I’m shocked you’re two years older than me. Reading this review, I got the impression you were still in high school. With that notion I had some hope you could be turned from the dark side, but it might be too late. This review has so many hallmarks of bad music writing that amputation might be the only cure.

Wow, where to begin. Tell you what; let’s start with your opening sentence and see how things flow.

“With Liam and Noel on trial separation for the time being (their ‘will they, won’t they’ over the years boasting more ups and downs than a Brangelina biog) there’s an opening for a gutsy rock ‘n’ roll boy band to keep the post-pub punters in good voice.”

Camilla, were you trying to write an introduction here or a matryoshka doll? Putting quotation marks inside parentheses inside a sentence filled to the brim with apostrophes and hyphens doesn’t exactly scream clarity. Try reading that sentence without the pointless parenthetical aside. Whoa…readability.

Throughout your review, I got the impression you’re so hung up on cramming sentences that you forget how nice readability can be. Take this next sentence, por ejemplo:

“As adoration goes it’s pretty baffling, but let’s not forget this place has a tendency to over-revel in a romantic nostalgia for all of its musical achievements past – the opening of Peter Hook’s Hacienda-alike The Factory most recent testament to that.”

Speaking of pretty baffling, what the hell’s with that last clause? Did you forget a verb somewhere in there? If you’re going to write a mad-lib, at least provide us a blank space. Aside from that minnow, there’s something else in that sentence that pinched a nerve, Camilla: the word “let’s”. Anyone who’s read RipFork past the first post probably already knows what I’m getting at, but just in case you’re inexperienced, I think some more of your plump prose might help to illustrate:

“We’re not asking for Wilde-esque musings here, but talk of a “space cadet dressed in fibreglass”, plans to ” right off into the middle of the sky” and perhaps most puerile “I’m still young/ I need life more than I need a wife/ the good times are calling me” are so pitiful they make Lady GaGa’s pen to paper sound like poetry.”

Well, what are “we” asking for here, Camilla? Since you didn’t specify who’s in the club, I’m going to assume I’m included. So, I’ve never met who lives thousands of miles away…how do you know I’m not asking for Wilde-esque musings here?

You know, Camilla, I’ve got a theory. I don’t think so many music critics are reluctant to use the first person singular primarily because they learned to avoid it like the plague at university. I think they’re uncomfortable writing such harsh words against another person with such a bare label of ownership. Read this:

“I’m not asking for Wilde-esque musings here”

Sounds different, huh? To me it sounds petulant and bossy; like you’re the center of the universe. But turn “I” into “we” and all of a sudden it sounds softer, more authoritative; like a consensus. I wouldn’t have made much of this tic if it was just a random occurrence, but…

“you can’t help but feel”

“let’s not forget”

“We know they can do it”

“we’ve got to ask”

“you can actually picture”

The way I see it, you’ve got a couple choices here, Camilla. Either you can keep writing other people’s opinions to insulate your own, or you could start writing only what you feel comfortable owning up to. You might find you focus more on the positives. Imagine that.

There’s still much to cover, Cammy, so feel free to get up and move around a bit. It was hard singling out just one example of your bent logic from so many, but here goes:

“there’s a painful attempt at disco”

I don’t understand the U-turn on disco in the past three decades. From what I’ve gleaned, disco was d by nearly all who couldn’t dance when it first came out. It was to music critics what Gossip is for religious fundamentalists today. And I get the feeling most of that distaste came from its manufactured feel – almost as if it had been programmed. Now after all that rancor, there’s considered a right and wrong way to make disco to the point where a band can actually it up? What exactly are the new rules, Camilla? I’m curious. You sure you didn’t mean you thought it was a bad disco song rather than a painful attempt? If there’s actually a book called “The Right Way to Make Disco,” I’ll relent, but otherwise I’m calling .

All right, Camilla, one more rope on the rump and we’ll call it a day. To cap this off, I’m going to put two statements side by side for comparison:

“The Courteeners, back from being brutally beaten into submission by critics over dreadfully retro debut St Jude”

“So we’ve got to ask: When will The Courteeners actually be themselves? We know they can do it; piano-backed Last Of The Ladies and thundering finale Will It Be This Way Forever are both striking in their stark honesty”

Let me see if I’ve got this straight. You’re basing your assessment of a band’s true self off of two songs from a two-album catalogue? Call me crazy, but maybe those are just two songs that you liked and represent how you want the band to sound overall. But hey, I guess “we” all agree with no matter what you think, so anything you write is in the bull’s eye. You must be proud to join the solemn ranks of those who “brutally beat” an album into submission. Ah, such a noble calling.

Work on your writing or please stop.

Tags: ,

Jude Clarke’s Review of “Fire Like This” by Red Shoes

Mar 15

Posted by Matt Wendus in MusicOMH | 7 Comments

Artist: Red Shoes

Album: Fire like This

Reviewer: Jude Clarke

MusicOMH, 2010

Writing Disorders: Idea Fever








Most Emo Phrase: “glammed-up, rocked-out tales of urban angst”

Most Sterile Phrase: “The most enjoyable moments are those that deviate from this pattern”




Hey Jude, you didn’t exactly take a sad song and make it BeEettttter. If I’d to pick, I’d say your writing’s a salty wet clam. A cold wet clam.

“Anyone familiar with their first one will certainly not be surprised by anything they find here, but will it sustain the interest of current fans, and is it likely to pick up any new ones along the way?”

What is this, Jude? A teaser for tomorrow’s episode of “One Life to Live?” As Stacey’s plot unfurls, Gigi has to give up Rex to save Shane. With the love of her life gone, is she likely to pick up any new ones along the way? Ooooh, I wanna know. What we got coming, Jude?

“Whereas somehow in 2008 the glammed-up, rocked-out tales of urban angst and Boredom By The Sea felt fresh and engaging, here the repetition of many of those tropes begins to seem more than a little, well, repetitious.”

Distance from “whereas” to “here?” 21 words. EH.

You got issues with clarity, Jude. But you know what? It’s got me thinking. How about I take you under my wing? You want to play Happy to my Chubbs and whittle down them thoughts? Maybe with a little practice, people’ll start reading your sentences instead of just skipping to the rating. Here’s how it works. I’m going to pair some of your phrases with a rewrite apiece and a few suggestions.

“A favoured device is that of taking a line of lyric”

“The band will often take a lyric”

Jude, you don’t have to attach a unit of measure to a lyric’s length. A line in a song is a lyric. And what’s with that marshmallow filling you stuffed in there? If Uncle Owen ever spied you for sale at the Jawa flea market, he’d have had this to say: “there’s too much coming out of her head.” Here’s something to try, Jude. After you finish writing your next review, go back through and trim it short as you can without losing your arguments. You might find you can do without “that of.”

Next!

“This is clearly used with the intent of capturing and reflecting a certain urgency, rage, ire, and as such can prove effective.”

“Proven effective, it captures urgency, ire, and rage.”

Jude, why the hell did you follow a comma with “and” at the end of a noun sequence? Rather, why’d you follow it with anything but another noun? I’m not saying what you wrote was grammatically inaccurate. It just confounds the brain. Also, if a band “captures” emotions in its music, that’s the same as reflecting them. You don’t need both. Honest to god, you don’t need any more conjunctions in this review. And come on, “a certain urgency?” Isn’t every urgency a certain urgency? Thought so. EDIT.

“The same influence can also be heard (as, indeed, is acknowledged by the band in the album’s accompanying press information) in forthcoming single Light It Up.”

“According to the band, new single Light It Up features the same influence.”

Jesus, dude. Why would a band dispute a claim taken from its own press release? I assume that’s why you included that giant parenthetical act of libel protection. You wouldn’t write it to sound like the band agreed with your brilliant assessment of its influence, would you? You know Jude, sometimes things sound ier when you don’t include the footnote.

And finally…

“Admittedly a more appealing (fresh sounding, enthusiastic, driven) live prospect than they now appear on record, the lack of anything very much in the way of originality or development thus far in their recorded material does not bode too positively for their future.”

“I think they’d sound fresher live than on record, but their lack of originality might not bode well.”

Jude, I don’t need a reminder that a band’s future is what’s affected by the present. Read the phrase “bodes well for their past” and you get the picture. By the way, stuffing 3 adjectives in a display case to explain what you meant by the word “appealing” is ridiculous. Just pick one of those words and roll with it. I chose “fresher” and trimmed that bloated bit about originality and development you stuffed in there. Bear in mind this is your conclusion. If you can’t thump your shield without a lengthy baton twirl, I can’t imagine anyone staying that late to tremble.

Keep these suggestions in mind, Jude. If anything, the world needs more folks of few words.

Tags:

Ian Roullier’s Review of “For the Masses” by Hadouken!

Feb 7

Posted by Matt Wendus in MusicOMH | 1 Comment

Artist: Hadouken!

Album: For the Masses

Reviewer: Ian Roullier

MusicOMH, 2010

Writing Disorders: Detachment Syndrome, Scorn Disease







Irony: “it should at least be joyful, unpretentious fun”




Ian, let me preface this by saying I thoroughly enjoyed picking over this review. And I want to thank you for all your online self-promotion. It really helps me to poke fun at a music critic when he’s written lengthy autobiographical tracts on several sites and runs a website bearing his own name. To show my gratitude before we begin, I’m going to give my audience a little reading aid. Sometimes it’s hard to imagine the species of human who writes such self-absorbed crap about musicians, so here’s a photo to place a face with the work.

Now, let’s begin. You didn’t really care for this album – I gathered that much from the empty rating circles. But let’s see if we can uncover a self-professed didgeridoo player’s motivation for hammering a band with boundless enthusiasm:

“Well, sometimes restraint and reason must be eschewed in a fit of seething rage. After hearing this latest set from Leeds-born London-based ‘dance-punk’ outfit, Hadouken!, feathers need to be spat.”

Or you could have just sent the album back to your editor and politely declined to write about it instead of throwing a word conniption. You were seriously thrown into a “seething rage” after listening to an album? Wow, I wouldn’t want to be a waitress who fudges your lunch order. Instead of a tip, I might get a frantic diatribe scrawled on napkins about my place in the sorry state of the food service industry.

Even though it’s omnipresent, I’m not even sure where your QWERTY rage is being directed half the time. At face value, this review seems to be more about your intense hatred of teenagers than your thoughts on the album.

“one amorphous clod of flaky, pubescent nothingness.”

“angst-ridden exuberance is all very exciting, but ultimately it’s a fruitless hormonal outburst”

“sounds like a bunch of teenagers screaming at themselves in the mirror in between squeezing their spots and wondering why nobody’s tweeted them for the past 18 seconds”

“they come across as snotty adolescents with an emotional range more limited than that of Paris Hilton”

Jesus man, I know it must be awkward being the only 33-year-old in the club, but you were a teenager at some point too. And just because most high schoolers listen to something other than “Jean Michel Jarre’s Franco-techno,” it doesn’t mean they deserve the ire of an older man’s tightly puckered hindsight.

While we’re on the subject of scrunched s, I loved this:

“Naming individual tracks and pinpointing their flaws is a foregone luxury”

Or maybe it’s something that men of a certain hue and a certain build have a pathological obsession with doing. I’m sure if pointing out flaws in individual tracks becomes an Olympic event, you’ll propel the UK to gold and glory, Ian. I for one was saddened that this record was “one amorphous clod” – an arena unfit to showcase your true prowess in that underground sport.

Speaking of pathological, if music criticism was a mental illness, you’ve got ample symptoms for a diagnosis. The ridiculous hyphenation…

“their drum-and-bass-castrated-for-mass-consumption sound”

The stupid metaphors…

“it’s about as hard as a knob of butter in a blast furnace”

The overreliance on adverbs…

“fantastically, stunningly groundbreaking”

The patronizing tone…

“everyone with half a brain sits and s ”

Capping it all off is your severe aversion to the capital “I” except when writing your own name. I’m still struggling to unravel why so many music critics lack the ability, but I think I understand why you’re so loath to write in the first person. Here’s something you wrote in your confusing, two-paragraph introduction before mentioning the band:

“Surely it’s a journalist’s duty to report back the truth”

By “truth,” I assume you mean your opinion about a purely subjective creation. Don’t get me wrong – I do cower in your gravitas.  You’ve written front-page articles on BOTH the Islington Gazette AND the Tottenham & Wood Green Journal, but in the land of subjective experience, you’re just one seven billionth. Use the first person, wuss.

I’m going to close on your opening here, Ian, because it’s still baffling. I don’t know if it was meant to be ironic or if you really have no self-awareness when it comes to writing.

“Some feel the need to proclaim their love or lay into a band merely because they want to form an extreme black/white opinion that they can then spout in a review, feeling it injects some kind of ‘personality’ into their prose.”

For all your effort, Ian, you don’t really stand out from that crowd.

Tags: ,