Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
GO! GO! GO!
Make it interesting. Not academic.
the press release.
track-by-track run-throughs are boring.
so are lists of bands the reord sound like.
write what it makes you feel
I like his style.
I would say don't concentrate on the tracks too much, more on the feel of the album. Find the right superlatives and make sure you throw in some obscure bands as references to keep people guessing.
if you're going to include information not contained within the record/gig, be sure to make it relevant, and not just in a tenuous way.
try to keep the flow fast-paced. it's rarely that a long music review is given a lot of time.
and always, always, always be honest. it's much easier to justify yourself if you're honest.
1) go to youtube
2) search for "monkey pissing in mouth"
3) copy link into said review
Works a treat!
All such reviews should be entirely subjective. The review should be an expression of how the music affected you. It should not be balanced or fair.
You must assume that everyone reading the review is aware of the band who is being reviewed. Do not give basic information about the band within the review. (It can be placed at the end as a note.)
If you mention other music, in the manner of describing a similarity or comparison, this should be done only if the similarity to other music was part of your enjoyment or otherwise of the item under review.