AMG Writers

In my case, most of what I'm reviewing comes straight from my collection, so I'm usually well-disposed to it to begin with. ;-) There are a few things I've specifically torpedoed, though. If you want some of my more scathing assessments, the stuff Chrome did after Helios Creed is truly horrible, such as Live in Germany, truly one of the most useless albums of all time.

new answers

not necessary new answers

I don't think I ever gave anything an extended savaging. I'm sure I've contributed at least 200 reviews, though, that consist of a sentence or two saying things like "This is just a really bad emo band, and that's basically all you need to know."

Have you written bios?

I quite like AMG and use it a ton. My only qualms is that sometimes the record review doesn't seem to match the number of stars given,. And sometimes the album given the AMG check of approval isn't even the highest rated one in that artist's catalogue. But all in all, its a great site with an impressive breadth across genres.

bnw -- I must say that's always bugged me, too. The source of it is that many of the reviews are written by freelance contributors like me, while the ranking-and-checking material is provided internally. This can create some pretty funny listings: I recall reviewing one thoroughly god-awful piece of crap, giving it the lowest rating possible, then finding that someone else had given the band's next record a great review and a rating high enough to garner a star or two. To the reader, it might seem like the band got better. But I listened to that second album, and it was even worse than the first one.

The worst crap that I can remember reviewing for AMG was a band called Crazy Alice. I think my lack of enthusiasm shows pretty clearly in those entries, right down to not even being bothered to write them particularly well.

what's AMG?

All music guide.

How easy is it to begin freelancing for them?

The All-Music Guide, where you can find too many of my rants, ill-thought conclusions and ridiculous prose. Or so some might say. Dave Q is proud ;-) of the fact that I reviewed his band there.

How easy is it to begin freelancing for them?

Fairly easy, though you shouldn't expect major rates, and you don't have any rights to the use of your material elsewhere (which is fine by me, in that my regular reviewing style, as on my 136 list or on FT, is where more of my emotional investment is anyway). Treat it as a nice little side thing and you're fine, but my understanding is they have enough rock geeks like me to choke a horse and want more people in other genres, like various dance musics, hip-hop, non-Western musics, etc.

Yup, I whole-heartedly agree it's annoying to see a band's ratings and notice that the 'pick' doesn't have the highest rating. Occasionally it's not a mistake -- sometimes a band makes a great record that tops everything else they've done, but it might not be that representative, the best place to go. Or you'll have a situation where the record you should go to first is long OOP; the picks try to keep up with the times and what's easily available. However, with a database that big, there are bound to be things that slip through the cracks.

I can think of several records that I've given less than three stars; and I'm in total agreement with anyone who thinks the ratings run high. As high as they might be -- which is a major hazard when most of the reviewers are covering what suits their tastes -- I don't believe there are too many instances where the guide is all that misleading. The primary objective is to be fair, keeping the consumer in mind. (I will admit that the Smurfs' discography is a bit effusive.)

If you have an appetite for some one-star ratings, you can always take a look at the first six John Mellencamp records.

Here's where to look if you wish to freelance:

http://allmediaguide.com/jobs.html

The fella with the exposed midriff is Nitsuh.