Worst Record Reviews Ever

Another goodie from AMG

This review proves that even if it's a positive notice, it does a band no favors when it's written by a drooling fanboy with less-than-elegant writing skills.

 

Considine used to be the king of the one-line zingers. His review of Sade's Stronger than Pride, in its entirety: "And faster than Sominex."

 

*

 

One more from AMG (a classic)

Those of you who visit AMG regularly are probably familiar with the writings of Stephen Thomas Erlewine, a very prolific reviewer who unfortunately seems totally unable to make up his mind and contradicts himself in almost every single sentence. The following excerpt from Erlewine's review of Goat's Head Soup has puzzled me for many years:

 

A friend got booted from his college newspaper for headlining a review of Kilroy Was Here a la Variety:

Styx Sux Dyx

 

As long as we're piling on R. Christgau, here's what he thought of David Crosby's "If Only I Could Remember My Name"

 

My thinking about record reviews is that they should essentially attempt to answer two questions: "Is this album successful at what its trying to be?" For instance, a Jessica Simpson album should be evaluated on very different terms than an Elvis Costello album. The next question is "How does this album relate to the rest of the artist's work?" I think this is relevant because it may provoke worthwhile inquiry into the artist's intentions and overall creative path. I find that information to be informative.

It seems that most reviews are an exercise in creative journalism, as opposed to being truly informative. It does me no good to have a Strokes fan review the latest Bacharach album. And it does no one any good to have, say... ME review the latest Mariah Carey album. I'm not the target audience, and I have no idea what differentiates a good Mariah Carey album from a bad one. They're ALL bad to me.

That is why these reviews are so great. You know the person probably hates the artist and genre, but they review it anyway. Their hatred and disgust fuel previously unknown creative abilities. Overtime, that commentary becomes legendary (such as "nadir of the decomposition of the sixties") and the sheer creativity of the writing gives the review a sense of weight and added significance.

 

I'm reminded of another review: "Phish: Schitt."

 

Don't have any reviews in front of me, but Van Halen "III" was ripped apart by almost everyone. I like the album, but that may be because I don't care about the lead singer issue that most seem to be hung up on and just enjoy the songs. . .

 

But only a partial truth there. "When the Heart Rules the Mind," "Imagining," and "Toe the Line" were really good pop/rock tunes. Now about Rolling Stone magazine . . .

 

They lost me on this album. There's a point in "One I Want" where they go back into the verse, but they are about a quarter tone off. It sounds like a horrible edit where they either got the tape speed wrong or just re-tuned poorly. In any event, it just KILLS the flow of what could have been a cool song. Then there's "How Many Say I" . . .

 

It would have been a cool little song if it was only 2 minutes stuck on the end of the CD, but it goes on far too long. Luckily, it is the last song on a long CD (VH 1 & 2 are about 30 minutes each?), so I don't listen to it. Kind of like their 'Revolution 9' or 'Rude Awakening #2'. . . (wasn't the last song on "5150" kind of goofy??)

 

Am I the only person on here who has no idea what GTR is?

I keep trying to think of it as an acronym and I can't imagine who you all mean!

 

It was a short lived band featuring guitarists Steve Howe and Steve Hackett. GTR is supposed to be short for "Guitar" (much as SHT is short for...)

 

Total agreement here.

The problem is, there are a lot more colorful ways to pile on a record than there are to praise it. And all too many people who write about music are trying to be personalities, rather than helping their readers. I'd blame Lester Bangs, but that'd be like blaming Ray Charles for Michael Bolton.

What irritates me is when reviewers quote copiously from the liner notes, passing the insight/research off as their own, and then don't mention the notes.

 

It also had Jonathon Mover, briefly in Marillion, and Max Bacon with a high pitched voice. I love prog rock, including Yes, Genesis,etc, but GTR was hard to stomach. I had the first release made in Japan CD and traded it.

 

Didn't Rolling Stone savage the first Led Zeppelin LP? And Kate Bush's first (I remember them comparing her voice to Minnie Mouse)?

 

This has always been my favorite. Rolling Stone uses a different one now. I think MENDELSOHN wrote a review of II and took it back or said he was wrong or something like that.

 

In one of the earlier Rolling Stone Record Guides (I think it was a blue cover) Dave Marsh trashed the Doors (a lot of one stars). Then there was this review on the Osmond family's body of work:


"The only people I know of who actually deserved Andy Williams. Sometimes I wish they'd go skiing -- and meet his wife."

Andy Williams was a popular TV entertainer of the 1960s and 1970s who got the Osmonds their start. He was married to the singer Claudine Longet; after their divorce, she had a long-running affair with the famous skiier Spider Sabich, whom she also shot and killed.

Pretty merciless review

 

Well, he did, but I suspect there may have been a bit of sarcasm intended in his "apology." I couldn't find the whole review online for free, but here's the first paragraph:

For the record, Zeppelin pretty much always got bad reviews in the 70's. None of the critics liked them.

 

Here is the WHole review of GTR in Rolling Stones Record Guide (The Red Cover):

 

Here is the Billy Joel review from RS Record Guide (Blue Cover 2nd edition) for "Saigon Nights"......they act so smart but they don't even know the correct title

Meanwhile, back on Earth, I've never heard a Vietnam vet ever complain about that song. Hey come on, they didn't have soft soap. Life's a bitch.

 

It's even more baffling in the full context. The thing most people harp on about GTR is too much Max Bacon and NOT ENOUGH guitar "wanking."

I still maintain that Rolling Stone has been enormously destructive to the American musical community both for its "cooler than thou" mentality and its glorification of of the 60's and 70's drug culture. Even when I was in their target demographic, I thought their "taste" was ttl sht. Don't even get me started on the Jan Wenner Approved Rock 'n Roll (except prog and metal) Hall of Semi-Fame.

 

That is the dumbest thing I've read today (the quote, not your description of it.) An artist refuses to see a complex situation such as war in black and white terms and then gets blasted for it. Duh.

 

Here is another one from that 2nd edition: