Julia Fox Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Do they made justice? Do they just inflates the album quality just because poptimism? Do they just for clicks and money? Do they show the accuracy more than the first review? Does they have more power than the initial review? discuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATRL Moderator madonnas Posted June 23, 2022 ATRL Moderator Share Posted June 23, 2022 I get them, because it’s easier to analyze something with hindsight, but it’s also easier to give something a positive review after it’s been around for a decade or more and is still beloved (or pan it cause it’s forgotten). I find old reviews that pan classic albums or Stan forgotten albums more interesting to read. Most retrospective reviews are probably done for clicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Cash Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 As biased and useless as reviews on the initial release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fauxtography Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 8 minutes ago, Johnny Cash said: As biased and useless as reviews on the initial release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicked Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Retrospective reviews are better than overinflating new releases. Lot of albums considered classic now got panned on arrival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOW Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) Mostly useless because they already follow what the gp has deemed an album over time. Case in point: the unanimous praise they gave Born to Die on its 10-year anniversary, with some of those same publications dragging the album through the mud initially for the very things it helped define in the music scene last decade. Edited June 23, 2022 by NOW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoanneActII Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 useless and pandering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElleDriver Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 Usually accurate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polgg48 Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 (edited) i dont read them, mostly they go for praise to heaven high and settle the bias towards all those stansuccess/numbers/longevity while its more of clear vision when albums released. only benefits for newbie listeners and those casual who not into music. but i recommend to agree on having retro reviews, sometimes people missed that certain period and exceptional albums which stand ahead of its time belong to have moment to recognition, i still wont read them though. for ex, pj harvey ones, my bloody valentine ones, Sun Ra ones, or a tribe called quest ones. perfect example for initial panned album to have that retro praise moment is trouble in paradise - la roux Edited June 23, 2022 by Polgg48 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bencharmer Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 They can be just as biased as the initial ones. But some can be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HïFidelity Posted June 23, 2022 Share Posted June 23, 2022 I like watching reaction videos to super old pop songs if that counts, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.5c069777b1ab1d704a32825806767213.png)
Recommended Posts