"New" Reviews
-
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
-
What songs I heard I liked it love doris
-
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". 
-
I can't help reading reviews without thinking about the target audience for the publication. If it's People magazine, they'll assess it based on the bouncy, fun, or sentimental qualities. If it's Pitchfork, they might assess based on whether it's groundbreaking. If it's Rolling Stone, it's probably more about authenticity. If it's an audiophile, it'll be about whether there's brickwalling or not. And so on. I get excited if the reviewer gives clues that they actually know a lot of his solo music, but that's just me (well, maybe not just me!).
-
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
-
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
-
If I ever bother to read a review, it's usually in the alternative newsweekly of whatever city I live. Most critics are quite pompous and seem to thrive on being nearly impossible to please. I say: Screw 'em. Fans' comments are the best guage/barometer for me.
-
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Gives new meaning to Blowing In The Wind.
-
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Very true, RS loves anything that Dylan does for some reason. They are that way with Springsteen also but he still deserves the praise.
-
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Very true, RS loves anything that Dylan does for some reason. They are that way with Springsteen also but he still deserves the praise.
Let's see...here's RS on Dylan Farting...."Raw and evocative of life in a modern world devoid of manners and basic social graces as we all pursue our animal instincts, seeking to gratify these above all else. A work of genius and quite original."
-
John Mackintosh:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Very true, RS loves anything that Dylan does for some reason. They are that way with Springsteen also but he still deserves the praise.
Let's see...here's RS on Dylan Farting...."Raw and evocative of life in a modern world devoid of manners and basic social graces as we all pursue our animal instincts, seeking to gratify these above all else. A work of genius and quite original."
That pretty much sums it up. -
audi:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Gives new meaning to Blowing In The Wind.
-
According to RS, Dylan still has the voice of an angel....
-
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
Rolling Stone in the U.S. and Mojo in England. But I think the biggest factor in the success of "NEW" will be social media. Facebook and Twitter will make or break this album.
-
audi:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
BOYCIE:
yankeefan7:
Just curious as to what media publication everyone respects the most when it come to reviewing a new record/album. Do you think any particular magazine/newspaper review is critical to the success of "New"or it is the general consensus of major publications.
The hardcore Paul fans like myself will always buy his new album despite reviews, but i'm only guessing casual fans will look at the reviews for confirmation an album is any good. Reviews can confuse too, Elton's new album the Diving Board has had a few rave reviews, but also a couple of average ones, so we really have to make our own minds up by hearing it, obvious i know.
I know Tom Doyle in Q magazine thinks "New" is Paul's best in decades, but he's a fan so he may or not be a good judge.? I did ask him on his facebook page if it was better than Chaos, MAF and Flaming Pie and he confirmed "yup". Like you I will buy his new album (actually pre-ordered it already) and that does not depend on reviews. I know people hate RS and believe they are bias but I actually tend to agree with them on most of McCartney's records. (they have been very favorable to McCartney's latest albums). I also try and read the NY and LA Times because they will be blunt and that is what I want in a review. I don't want some "fanboy" praising anything he does but on the other hand don't wasnt a reviewer with a vendetta against McCartney. In the end, I hope the general consensus is that it is a good to very good album because it will help sales and prove to the general public that 71 yr old Paul McCartney is still a relevant artist and not entirely living on the past.
The thing with Rolling Stone is they tend to think other artists poor albums are still wonders to be hold and Paul's poorer ones as dregs. I think if Bob Dylan released an album of him farting instead of "singing" they'd still say it was bumderful.
Gives new meaning to Blowing In The Wind.
Thanks guys. I'm still laughing and after a hard day, I needed a laugh. PS I hear what you say about the critics and Dylan. I still remember what Bob said about Paul in RS ("the only living artist that I'm in awe of) so Bob is alright with me. I don't mind him getting good reviews.
-
My ears are the main determining factor to me, although I've got some interest in what reviewers say. They can get things so wrong, like the "Entertainment Weekly" writer who implied "Electric Arguments" is only a "borderline" success as a "progressive" music "experiment," he wrote. Some fantastic music's on there
-
I don't live or die by what critics say, but reviews have some value in reaching people who might not have thought about buying a new McCartney album. Clearly there's lots of value in good reviews in publications with lots of readers, like Rolling Stone. Time magazine gave a glowing review to "Flaming Pie," and that must have helped sales. But I don't think reviews are as important as people being exposed to the music -- through TV, concerts, radio, online, etc., etc.
-
I Like The New Elton CD
-
Bruce M.:
I don't live or die by what critics say, but reviews have some value in reaching people who might not have thought about buying a new McCartney album. Clearly there's lots of value in good reviews in publications with lots of readers, like Rolling Stone. Time magazine gave a glowing review to "Flaming Pie," and that must have helped sales. But I don't think reviews are as important as people being exposed to the music -- through TV, concerts, radio, online, etc., etc.
I agree that reviews may not be as imporant as being exposed to the music but I do think they help create a "buzz" about a record and I believe that helps sales also. McCartney has a certain "base" of people that will buy his new records, he justs needs to broaden that base.
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
My ears are the main determining factor to me, although I've got some interest in what reviewers say. They can get things so wrong, like the "Entertainment Weekly" writer who implied "Electric Arguments" is only a "borderline" success as a "progressive" music "experiment," he wrote. Some fantastic music's on there
they have NEVER been Kind to Paul..
