An easy target, but nontheless....

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2475

djdee2005 (djdee2005), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Pretty on point (especially about the NME). Disagree about Spin, however.

The Good Dr. Bill (Andrew Unterberger), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:16 (twenty-one years ago)

The 'RS' website has started really sucking since they started furtively replacing the original record reviews with retrospective ones

dave q (listerine), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:17 (twenty-one years ago)

That was reasonably funny. Then I read the archives of his other writing and oh fuck he's like every obnoxiously smug moment of ILM personified.

MC Transmaniacon (natepatrin), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Heheh, yeah I noticed them pull the retrospective rating somewhere... I think it was either on a pavement album or a talk talk one. They jacked up the score like 2 stars.

sleep (sleep), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:41 (twenty-one years ago)

did they change the Bjork rating on Debut from 1 1/2 stars?

Riot Gear! (Gear!), Friday, 12 November 2004 20:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Very funny article!

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Friday, 12 November 2004 21:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Something Awful *****

latetotheparty (latetotheparty), Friday, 12 November 2004 22:36 (twenty-one years ago)

I remember Wowee Zowee getting 2 1/2 stars.

Hi, I am a genius. a big one. (AaronHz), Friday, 12 November 2004 22:45 (twenty-one years ago)

That was reasonably funny. Then I read the archives of his other writing and oh fuck he's like every obnoxiously smug moment of ILM personified.
-- MC Transmaniacon (natepatri...), November 12th, 2004.

i wrote a half-ass "angry email" to that dude about some comment he made about MBV, he replied back and made clear he's just taking the piss mostly.

latebloomer (latebloomer), Friday, 12 November 2004 22:48 (twenty-one years ago)

which is probably obvious.

latebloomer (latebloomer), Friday, 12 November 2004 22:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Other Features of Note: A feature on the “New Folk Eccentrics” like Devandra Banhart, Sufjan Stevens and Animal Collective. You know, the kind of shit that girls are always burning you CDs of. The ones that end up in your “CDs of charming folk music that some girl burned for me but that I’m never, ever in a million years going to listen to” pile. Early on, the article advises us: “…just because they dig acoustic instruments and sing about rabbits, spiders, and bean sprouts, that’s no reason to call them hippies.” Yeah, well fuck that, I’m calling them hippies.

heh.

Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Friday, 12 November 2004 22:57 (twenty-one years ago)

"Other Features of Note: There is, for some reason, an exceedingly poorly-written review of a Transformers game for the PlayStation 2. Why? Because people who listen to death metal are gigantic fucking nerds, and gigantic fucking nerds are also interested in video games about Transformers. Aside from this, the main attraction of Pit Magazine is flipping through it to look at the advertisements for black metal bands. You wouldn’t believe some of the hilarious names these retards come up with."

heh heh

Masked Gazza, Friday, 12 November 2004 23:38 (twenty-one years ago)

A feature on the “New Folk Eccentrics” like Devandra Banhart, Sufjan Stevens and Animal Collective. You know, the kind of shit that girls are always burning you CDs of.

Women never burn me CDs. The musical exchange between womankind and I is strictly one-way.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Friday, 12 November 2004 23:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Everything gets three or three and a half stars. If it’s a reissue, it’s probably going to get five stars, even if they gave it three stars when it first came out. Out of 27 reviews, 20 had either three or three and a half stars. Meaning that they were either "good" or somewhere between "good" and "excellent." Jesus Christ, Rolling Stone, grow a pair. We’re not going to think any less of you if you give the new Simple Plan record one star instead of three stars. In fact, we would absolutely love it if you gave it one star. Tear some shit apart! You people are supposed to be professionals, and yet you honestly expect us to believe that you consider The Donnas "good"?

OTM

Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 13 November 2004 00:07 (twenty-one years ago)

did they change the Bjork rating on Debut from 1 1/2 stars?

Same review, different score. Bastards!

Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 13 November 2004 00:13 (twenty-one years ago)

god, that Bjork review is one of the most painful I've ever read. "God, Bjork, why didn't you stick to rock and roll!?"

Riot Gear! (Gear!), Saturday, 13 November 2004 00:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh lord, it's worse than I feared:
"Rather than sticking to rock & roll, Debut is painfully eclectic"

DAMN YOU BJORK, FOR DARING TO BE CREATIVE!

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 13 November 2004 07:13 (twenty-one years ago)

haha, i saw a Terris record in a charity shop yesterday for 50p.

zappi (joni), Saturday, 13 November 2004 07:36 (twenty-one years ago)

"The musical exchange between me and woman is strictly one-way": Kevin, did you ever hear back from that girl you burned all that jazz and blues for, after incautiously asking ILM for advice?

don, Saturday, 13 November 2004 08:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Their original reviews of Janis Joplin would need to be rewritten, not just re-starred, not to mention original review of Stooges, Sabs, many others. But i'm sure this has been done. (Which messes up the George Smith way of rock, via the albums that got *no* stars. Damn!)

don, Saturday, 13 November 2004 08:12 (twenty-one years ago)

From the same site, this extremely funny experiment in Sims character dadaism:

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2392

the music mole (colin s barrow), Saturday, 13 November 2004 08:42 (twenty-one years ago)

That Bjork review singlehandedly stopped me from buying Debut when I was a wee one.

jaymc (jaymc), Saturday, 13 November 2004 08:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Let's save them here, before they all disappear!

AC/DC 'High Voltage'

Those concerned with the future of hard rock may take solace in knowing that with the release of the first U.S. album by these Australian gross-out champions, the genre has unquestionably hit its all-time low. Things can only get better (at least I hope so). A band whose live act features a lead guitarist (Angus Young) leering menacingly while dressed in schoolboy beanie and knickers, AC/DC has nothing to say musically (two guitars, bass and drums all goose-stepping together in mindless three-chord formations). Lyrically, their universe begins and ends with the words "I," "me" and "mine." Lead singer Bon Scott spits out his vocals with a truly annoying aggression which, I suppose, is the only way to do it when all you seem to care about is being a star so that you can get laid every night. And that, friends, comprises the sum total of themes discussed on this record. Stupidity bothers me. Calculated stupidity offends me. (RS 228)

- BILLY ALTMAN

dave q (listerine), Saturday, 13 November 2004 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)

...and the best review ever...

URIAH HEEP

If this group makes it I'll have to commit suicide. From the first note you know you don't want to hear any more. Uriah is watered down, tenth-rate Jethro Tull, only even more boring and inane. UH is composed of five members: vocals, organ, guitar, bass, and drums. They fail to create a distinctive sound tonally; the other factor in their uninteresting style is that everything they play is based on repetitive chord riffs.

According to the enclosed promo information, Uriah Heep spent the past year in the studio, rehearsing and writing songs. No doubt their lack of performing experience contributed to the quality of the record; if they had played live in clubs they would have been thrown off the stage and we'd have been saved the waste of time, money, and vinyl. (RS 67)

MELISSA MILLS

dave q (listerine), Saturday, 13 November 2004 17:14 (twenty-one years ago)

In place of the original Gordon Fletcher massacre of 'Houses of the Holy' ("limp blimp") there's some mewling piece of shit by GAY-vin Edwards, whoever the fuck he is!! 4 Stars!! "D'yer Mak'er" a 'swinging take on reggae'! "Rain Song" 'seven minutes of exquisite heartache'!

dave q (listerine), Saturday, 13 November 2004 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

'The epic scale suited Zeppelin: They had the largest crowds, the loudest rock songs, the most groupies, the fullest manes of hair'. WHAT A FUCKING ORIGINAL TAKE ON ZEPPELIN especially 30 years later!!! (There is one funny 'retrospective' review, they give 'Back in Black' four stars [over the original '3'] but call it in 'wince-inducing stew of mean-spirited sexism')

dave q (listerine), Saturday, 13 November 2004 17:25 (twenty-one years ago)

classic: finding one of your old reviews reprinted on the RS website and thinking "hey, that's no so bad after all."
dud: clicking an original review you vaguely recall writing in the 80s and finding a "retrospective" review by some bright young thing.

lovebug starski (lovebug starski), Saturday, 13 November 2004 17:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Wow! I'd forgotten how thump-thump those old reviews were. Thump-thump as thee music they claim to find so repugnantly Other! So many reviewers are so kissass now, I'm probably overvaluing the old stuff,as usual.

don, Saturday, 13 November 2004 19:18 (twenty-one years ago)

the real classic was Rolling Stone's review of Nevermind. A patronizing three-star review that basically said "AS IF this shit could ever go mainstream." Couple years later, after Kurt died, RS published a book of every Nirvana scrap including a revised version of the Nevermind review with a sort of "gee, how could anybody have known?" disclaimer.

lovebug starski (lovebug starski), Saturday, 13 November 2004 19:28 (twenty-one years ago)

A band whose live act features a lead guitarist (Angus Young) leering menacingly while dressed in schoolboy beanie and knickers

i'm still trying to understand how someone could think this was a BAD thing! leering menacingly in schoolboy knickers is cool!

M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Saturday, 13 November 2004 19:48 (twenty-one years ago)

What he said about Magnet was pretty retarded.

steve hise, Saturday, 13 November 2004 19:51 (twenty-one years ago)

the real classic was Rolling Stone's review of Nevermind. A patronizing three-star review that basically said "AS IF this shit could ever go mainstream." Couple years later, after Kurt died, RS published a book of every Nirvana scrap including a revised version of the Nevermind review with a sort of "gee, how could anybody have known?" disclaimer.

Funny bit -- said review was by Ira Robbins of Trouser Press fame.

i'm still trying to understand how someone could think this was a BAD thing! leering menacingly in schoolboy knickers is cool!

Well remember, the symbol of manhood then was James Taylor.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:25 (twenty-one years ago)

james taylor was a popular symbol of manhood, and he still is.

M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:28 (twenty-one years ago)

also, that ac/dc review would be great for that thread about "negative reviews that make an album sound awesome"

M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:29 (twenty-one years ago)

x-post
You'd think Ira Robbins would've predicted Nirvana, right? But the conventional indie wisdom just before Nevermind's release was that Geffen pissed away $200,000 or whatever it was. Right around that time I talked to a well-known indie label maven (for a Details article that never got published) who laughed himself sick over the idea that a major label could do anything w/Nirvana.
And now nobody would dare give the Nirvana box set a lousy review or question the rec co's motives. Irony sucks.

lovebug starski (lovebug starski), Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:39 (twenty-one years ago)

(This is when I realize I should have tried to figure out who Lovebug is by now but then again he/she is anonymous here for a reason and it would be rude to ask further.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:55 (twenty-one years ago)

i was going to post that nevermind review!

latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 13 November 2004 21:00 (twenty-one years ago)

So how *is* the Nirvana box??

don, Saturday, 13 November 2004 22:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Search doesn't work right now, but there was a thread once upon a time about the entire Black Sabbath catalog getting one-star reviews from the start through 1984.


Ian Christe (Ian Christe), Saturday, 13 November 2004 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Funny, search just worked right now for me fine, though now I need to narrow down and find the thread in particular.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 13 November 2004 22:25 (twenty-one years ago)

two weeks pass...
Part 2!!!
http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2506

He discusses The Source.

djdee2005 (djdee2005), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 16:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Also he doesn't like the Streets. [/provocation]

djdee2005 (djdee2005), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

eight months pass...
That old Billy Altman review is dismaying. "Stupidity bothers me. Calculated stupidity offends me" - this is coming from one of the alltime Ramones boosters for chrissakes! WTF?!

Myonga Von Bontee (Myonga Von Bontee), Monday, 29 August 2005 20:06 (twenty years ago)

eight months pass...
In place of the original Gordon Fletcher massacre of 'Houses of the Holy' ("limp blimp") there's some mewling piece of shit by GAY-vin Edwards, whoever the fuck he is!!

Holy crap!:

June 7, 1973

Today's safe Led Zeppelin, sans blues: A limp blimp

Houses of the Holy

Led Zeppelin

Atlantic SD7255

For me, Led Zeppelin began as the epitome of everything good about rock: solid guitar work, forceful vocals and rhythmic backing, devotion to primal blues forms, and most of all, thunderous excitement on stage and vinyl. But as superstardom came to them, so too came the gradual evaporation of those qualities from their sound. In the same way that the Rolling Stones evolved into a senior, "safe" bizarro-perversion band, Led Zeppelin has become a senior, "safe" heavy-metal band. But by it's very nature safety cannot coexist with heavy-metal fire and macho intensity (or bizarro-perversion, for that matter), which is probably why Houses of the Holy is one of the dullest and most confusing albums I've heard this year.

Even after a hundred listening I'm still not convinced this album is by the same group that brought us the likes of "Communication Breakdown," "Heartbreaker" and "Black Dog." The powerfully simplistic rhythms and surging adrenaline drive that made those songs so compelling is nowhere to be found. Only once is it attempted, on "The Ocean," but there it's so diluted with pointless humor that the necessary musical tension never develops. Jimmy Page's guitar spits jagged fireballs with John Paul Jones and John Bonham riffing along behind him, but the effect is destroyed by ridiculous backup cooings and an overbearing "killer" coda that's so blatant it can only be taken as a mock of straight rock & roll. "Rock 'n' Roll" to the contrary, Led Zeppelin's forte has always been rockin' the blues; if they took themselves seriously they'd realize that they are foolish to step outside that genre.

The only other Zep tune approaching the Zep's past triumph's is "The Song Remains the Same," a slice of Who-dom that works solely as a vehicle for Page's guitar antics. And that's really what Led Zeppelin's been about from the start. Interesting things abound in what amounts to a 5:24 guitar solo -- groin-rattling riffing, a clever fuzz run, and some finger-picked figures executed with a finesse that belies their macho origin. And Page manages to run through this hefty gamut without once being self-indulgent. It's not the music that made Led Zeppelin famous (their style is hardly interchangeable with the Who's), but at least it's got more than an amp or two of the excitement that they're renowned for. And on this album, that alone is a major triumph.

Two songs are naked imitations, and they're easily the worst things this band has ever attempted. "The Crunge" reproduces James Brown so faithfully that it's every bit as boring, repetitive and cliched as "Good Foot." Yakety-yak guitar, boom-boom bass, astoundingly idiotic lyrics ("when she walks, she walks, and when she talks, she talks") -- it's all there. So is Jones' synthesizer, spinning absolutely superfluous electronic fills.

"D'yer Mak'er" is even worse, a pathetic stab at reggae that would probably get the Zep laughed off the island if they bothered playing it in Jamaica. Like every other band following rock's latest fad, Led Zeppelin shows little understanding of what reggae is about -- "D'yer Mak'er" is obnoxiously heavy-handed and totally devoid of the native form's sensibilities.

The truly original songs on Houses of the Holy again underscore Led Zeppelin's song-writing deficiencies. Their earliest successes came when they literally stole blues licks note for note, so I guess it should have been expected that there was something drastically wrong with their own material. So it is that "Dancing Days," "The Rain Song" and "No Quarter" fall flat on their respective faces -- the first is filler while the latter two are nothing more than drawn-out vehicles for further display of Jones' unknowledgeable use of mellotron and synthesizer.

"Over the Hills and Far Away" is cut from the same mold as "Stairway to Heaven," but without that song's torrid guitar solo it languishes in Dullsville -- just like the first five minutes of "Stairway." The whole premise of "graduated heaviness" (upon which both songs were built) really goes to show just how puerile and rudimentary this group can get when forced to scrounge for their own material. One would think that the group that stole "Whole Lotta Love," et al., might acquire an idea or two along the way, but evidently they weren't looking. Let's hear it for androids!

When you really get down to it Led Zeppelin hasn't come up with a consistent crop of heavy-metal spuds since their second album. Their last three efforts have been so uneven that had they started with Led Zeppelin III I'm convinced they wouldn't be here today. While they've been busy denying their blues-rock roots, Robert Plant's vocals have lost their power and the band's instrumental work has lost it's traces of spontaneity. In simple fact of matter, Houses of the Holy was 17 months in preparation, yet Led Zeppelin I (the product of a mere 15 hours) cuts it to shreds.

So all in all it's been two separate groups we've called Led Zeppelin, and I've tired of waiting for the only legitimate one to return. An occasional zinger like "When the Levee Breaks" isn't enough, especially when there are so many other groups today that don't bulls--- around with inferior tripe like "Stairway To Heaven." Beck, Bogert & Appice, Black Sabbath, the Groundhogs, Robin Trower -- the list is long and they all fare musically better than the Zep because they stick to what they do best. Page and friends should similarly realize their limitations and get back to playing the blues-rock that moves mountains. Until they do Led Zeppelin will remain Limp Blimp. (RS 136)

GORDON FLETCHER

Copyright 1973 Rolling Stone

Are there still people who think this?

Sundar (sundar), Monday, 1 May 2006 01:27 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, it seems pretty dead on to me.

js (honestengine), Monday, 1 May 2006 08:58 (twenty years ago)

It just goes to show that most music writing today might as well just be cut out entirely and replaced with X out of Y stars for buying guide purposes. That wasn't the best-written review ever, but it was interesting to read nonetheless. I wouldn't be bothered to see what they have up there now.

someone let this mitya out! (mitya), Monday, 1 May 2006 10:18 (twenty years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.