How do you do your reviews?

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

I find it intriguing how people write music reviews and I've always been interested in how professional critics do it. What their process is and stuff.

So for those of us who do or have written reviews for a blog, a website, or for here, what is your process?
Do you have a routine or requirement?
How many times do you listen to an album before writing a review?
How long does it take you to write a review?
Do you do any research on the artist or album before writing your review?
How do you select which albums or songs to review?

And perhaps most importantly for my curiosity, the rating.
Why do you use the rating system you do?
How do you determine what the rating ends up being?
Do you have set criteria for each interval in your rating system?

[surfy]

I listen to the album twice a day for two days. No particular routine. It usually takes me about an hour to get the album done and then about 30-45 minutes to write the full review. No review, I let the music do the talking 100%. I just choose the album that appears to be appealing to me at the time, or the most talked about.

I rank each track from 1-10, then the overall score is the average of each song's score. I use it because it seems to be pretty accurate and close to my overall feeling of the album. Not really, just how much I enjoyed the track.

[Kurt]

Part of my struggle lately in writing reviews is with the process - ideally, I can solidify my opinions about an album and figure out what to write in two or three listens, but it usually takes longer than that. I'm going to start reviewing again after a few months off, but earlier this year, my game plan was to give a first listen with little to no distraction, taking brief notes as I went on each song, overarching narratives, etc. Second and third listens would be while doing other things (browsing Pulse, working online, etc.) and seeing what popped out and what of my initial notes was reinforced or confirmed. Then it takes some time to piece things together and make it readable, which is the biggest issue for me since I don't find my writing that interesting, ha. I also think about whether or not to compare to other similar artists - sometimes it's useful, and sometimes it puts artists in boxes when you can approach their music better from other angles. I try to know a bit about the artist/album beforehand, but I try to avoid other reviews whenever possible because they influence me too much (to the point where I feel like I'm copying). Lastly, as for ratings, I was doing a five-point (0.5, 1.0 ... 4.5, 5.0) ratings system last year, but decided to do away with objective ratings because they felt too restrictive and difficult to accurately pin down.

[Deleted]

Oct 9, 2014 11:54:33 GMT -5 Devil Marlena Nylund said:

I find it intriguing how people write music reviews and I've always been interested in how professional critics do it. What their process is and stuff.

So for those of us who do or have written reviews for a blog, a website, or for here, what is your process?
Do you have a routine or requirement?
How many times do you listen to an album before writing a review?
How long does it take you to write a review?
Do you do any research on the artist or album before writing your review?
How do you select which albums or songs to review?

And perhaps most importantly for my curiosity, the rating.
Why do you use the rating system you do?
How do you determine what the rating ends up being?
Do you have set criteria for each interval in your rating system?

I dont worry about structure as you can tell. I just review it and write from my perspective. The only rules I have, is that I have to listen 3 times. The second time to get well a second opinion on the songs and the third time is the tie breaker on songs I'm not sure on. I don't read other reviews so my opinion stays true and honest.

I think its VERY important to review style of music you like, familiar with and know the best. It burns me when a review is done by someone who has zero interest or background on a specific genre. What makes a good pop album is different from r&b and is different from country.

[Flip]

I will do my first review today or tomorrow so I will tell ya then.

[Kurt]

Oh, yeah, what Coco said about reviewing genres you like is so true - I had to write a few jazz reviews for school and it's much harder when your interest in and knowledge of a genre is low.

[JOJO SIWA DERANGEMENT SYNDROME]

I listen to the song/album/remixes that I am reviewing at least once and note down things that come to mind first. Then I skim through all of the songs a second time for the ones that had something that caught my attention. For albums, I sometimes have to listen to them completely through and then make the notes during the second listen. Then I do some research to add some context and information to the review (like behind the scenes stuff or if there was anything particularly noteworthy about a particular song).

I am usually quick about writing a review once I have my notes together. So it could take as little as a few minutes to an hour. The latter happens with albums. I usually start the reviews either in Notes on my iPad using the 'speech to text' feature and then email it to myself so I can polish it up on my laptop, or I just do it in Blogger and then post it when it's done.

I assign grades on A, B, C, D, F basis that is similar to a grading system I had in school. I rarely award a grade below a C because I generally can find the good in most singles or albums.

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

I have to listen to an album in full at least two times before I write a review, and even then it can take 3, 4 or 6 times before I've really come to an opinion solid enough to write about. I like to go for a walk and listen to the album so I can listen without having distractions. I'll sometimes take notes about things that jump out at me, whether it's something specific about a song or a general thought about the album. It only took me 2 listens to decide Britney Jean was deserving of 1/5 but albums that take me a while to get into take me a lot more.

The actual review writing, when I sit down to write it takes me about an hour usually. I'll also play the album as I'm writing the review but usually just skimming tracks at that point.

I usually write a review with the lyrics in front of me so I can refer to them if I need them, and the wikipedia page so I can refer to it for background. Sometimes knowing about the album's creation can affect how I feel about it. Like Imogen Heap's recent album. I was kind of disappointed with it until I read about how it was made and the amazing techniques she used and it changed my whole perspective.

I usually only review albums I buy, which means since I'm only willing to pay money on something I want to listen to, my reviews tend to lean more toward good. So sometimes I will download or stream an album to kind of offset that but because I have a tendency to justify everything on behalf of everyone, it can be challenging to actually give a poor review to something.

I use a 5 star rating system and I don't do half stars. My reasoning for this is because it leaves less ambiguity between ratings and makes me have to actually think about a rating rather than copping out by giving a nice halfway 2.5/5 or something. I also have the option available to give a 0/5 rating but so far, I've ever given that yet.

I don't give many 5/5s. I consider 3/5 to be average but on the good side of average, while 2/5 is on the bad side of average but I don't consider either to be terribly awful.

When ranking an album, I take a lot of things into consideration. Does the album meet my expectations? How does it compare to the artist's previous albums? Is there growth? What do I perceive the intent of the album to be? The genre also affects it too. So, folk albums I know have a heavier focus on lyrics and not so much on melody so I'm less likely to ding points if it isn't catchy, while pop albums I can move past dumb lyrics if I don't feel the lyrics are the main point of the song. I also find it more of a challenge to review folk albums because I'm not a musician and I know I can't fully appreciate the instrumentation on them whereas pop albums are easy because I tend to be more about melody and production anyway.

So my rating system kind of goes like:
5/5 - pretty much an exceptional album. There isn't really anything I can think of that would make it better than it is.
4/5 - excellent. Might be too long, too short, the production throws it off a bit, the track order is uneven. Something minor.
3/5 - a solid record for the artist. might be a bit standard or unadventurous, or has a few songs that could have been left off, but not a terrible album
2/5 - i'd pass/only for the fans. there are more skippable songs than worthy songs, but it's not a total loss. there are redeemable qualities if you care to find them.
1/5 - a poor album. might have 1 or 2 decent songs. or it's a huge drop in quality, really missed my expectations.
0/5 - nothing about this album makes sense.

The closest I ever came to giving a 0/5 was the last MGMT album, and I only decided not to was in the chance that maybe I just REALLY didn't get it.

[Green Baron]

Well, Devil Marlena Nylund, I gave 18 albums a perfect score of 5/5. If you can guess one, just one, I'll be surprised.

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

A Rise Against album

[surfy]

Okay, so I suck at writing reviews.

I posted my first one, but in comparison to you guys, it's so amateur.

[Green Baron]

Oct 10, 2014 20:13:42 GMT -5 Devil Marlena Nylund said:

A Rise Against album

nope

[Green Baron]

Oct 10, 2014 20:21:33 GMT -5 surfy said:

Okay, so I suck at writing reviews.

I posted my first one, but in comparison to you guys, it's so amateur.

I'm a professional reviewer, it's okay Surfy

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

You get paid for your reviews?

[Green Baron]

Oct 10, 2014 20:26:06 GMT -5 Devil Marlena Nylund said:

You get paid for your reviews?

no

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

Oh. But...

nevermind

[JOJO SIWA DERANGEMENT SYNDROME]

I have some contacts in the Dance music industry so some of the artists and labels send me their releases to review. A number of the ones that I reviewed on my own ended up getting noticed by the artists and labels themselves and they let me know they noticed so that's always cool when it happens.

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

Oct 10, 2014 20:38:19 GMT -5 JOJO SIWA DERANGEMENT SYNDROME said:

I have some contacts in the Dance music industry so some of the artists and labels send me their releases to review. A number of the ones that I reviewed on my own ended up getting noticed by the artists and labels themselves and they let me know they noticed so that's always cool when it happens.

That would be kind of neat. Especially if it's in a genre that you're super familiar and comfortable with.

I also sometimes review music by local artists but it's kind of awkward because, while I don't know them personally, Halifax is still kind of a small city with a vibrant and supportive music scene so it almost wouldn't feel right giving a negative review to a local musician - luckily for me, I've never had to. But then sometimes I wonder, what if an artist who I've given a poor review to (someone like Jason Mraz) happened to stumble across my review? I'd feel really bad.... There is one review I wrote that I still regret even though it's been 4 years for a singer I've met a few times and actually sold merch for. Her last album really just didn't do it for me at all so I gave it a 1/5 and afterward I felt so bad. I could have changed it but I never did because once it's posted, it's done. I hope she never read it but there's a good chance she has. Her guy who does her marketing and promo (who is a longtime friend of mine) read it and messaged me about it.
I have had artists comment on my reviews on their social media channels though. Mostly smaller-scale artists like country singer Lindi Ortega (from Toronto but based in Nashville) and Halifax-based singer Meaghan Smith both posted my review on their Facebook pages by finding the reviews on their own. Sometimes I tag artists on Twitter when linking my review too and they'll like or reply to it. It's very rewarding.

[#LisaRinna]

I usually listen to the album twice before I start forming an opinion. Most of the times my first impression is what leads me to write about that particular album, what motivates me. But then I'll need to listen more to get ideas on how to write about the songs.

[Deleted]

I always let an album simmer a bit before reviewing it. I'll give a few listens to let it develop, then go through each song in order and try to dissect the individual parts as they relate to the whole. I usually end up giving the songs a grade from 0-10 (both of these extremes being given very rarely)-- although these numbers are adjusted as I continue listening if I feel a song may be more or less valuable relative to the entire body of work. From there, I usually total up the score and divide by the total sum of what would be a "perfect" score (an album with 10 tracks would have a perfect score of 100, for example). I usually convert that number down to the nearest decimal point. So, an album with twelve tracks that scored 102/120 would equal 85, which I would convert to 8.5 because I find that to be a less dramatic scale to work with-- for no apparent reason.

Anyway. I always try to keep it as objective as possible-- although I recognize a lot of my views on a given album are going to be subjective. Taking into account how well the songs sound together, how experimental a record is, how much effort was behind it, how well the record is sequenced-- those sorts of things will typically result in a not-completely-awful score, even if I hate the album.