poll Does critical acclaim matter or not?

[Bey Admired]

2 minutes ago, KillingYourCareer said:

So you're defending critics' personal perceptions on music by discrediting users' personal perceptions on reading their reviews?

 

I just want to see the damn reviews 

 

[sasashite]

Yes. Probably more than ever.

 

Part of the reason why critics like everything now is because labels pay publications, they know a bad reception can affect an album’s commercial performance.

[gustavothehuman]

3 minutes ago, Bey Admired said:

Reviews typically tend to be clickbaitey, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the actual review is not based on the actual album/music/concert. That review references the actual content of the music extensively. There’s nothing to suggest that the critic hasn’t given the album a fair hearing. And I love Coldplay 

Here's another review: https://www.godisinthetvzine.co.uk/2021/10/19/coldplay-music-of-the-spheres-parlophone/

 

In this one the author calls their guitarist "Johnny Boring Bollocks" and compares Humankind to "elevator music". How is that constructive or objective? God knows! Basic respect is getting harder to come by I guess.

[Bey Admired]

1 minute ago, gustavothehuman said:

Here's another review: https://www.godisinthetvzine.co.uk/2021/10/19/coldplay-music-of-the-spheres-parlophone/

 

In this one the author calls their guitarist "Johnny Boring Bollocks" and compares Humankind to "elevator music". How is that constructive or objective? God knows! Basic respect is getting harder to come by I guess.

He wasn’t the first and he certainly won’t be the last to say this. 
 

Again, calling their guitarist boring does not indicate they they based their entire review on the fact they find their guitarist boring.

 

[KillingYourCareer]

Just now, Bey Admired said:

I just want to see the damn reviews 

 

Okay, if you want a specific name, then let me recommend you to read some reviews by Rhian Daly who does most album reviews for NME. I refuse to believe she's ever taken an even basic music theory course, she's only there because she's great with words. This panegyric (that's the solo project of a BTS member - I can't even call it a review) gave me a good laugh the other day. Hyperbolic words of praise ("the charismatic rapper and phenomenal dancer who has conquered the world"), near-surreal poetic similes to fill up some space ("like walking behind a sun-dappled waterfall to find shadowy caves and the debris of erosion"), three superficial  descriptions of the music in the entire article ("murky hip-hop", "slowed-down, soulful R&B", "infectious '90s hip-hop")... with the rest of the space being taken up by paraphrase-like interpretations of the lyrics. As I said, it's very well-written, but at the same time completely devoid of any useful content. It's great creative writing, but abysmal critical reviewing.

 

[Acclaimed]

No it doesn’t. It’s become such a trend to be critically acclaimed that everyone is hiring the best writers.

 

So many of the critically acclaimed albums of the last 5-10 years have some of the most prolific writers attached to the project. 

Edited July 18, 2022 by Acclaimed

[gustavothehuman]

4 minutes ago, Bey Admired said:

He wasn’t the first and he certainly won’t be the last to say this. 
 

Again, calling their guitarist boring does not indicate they they based their entire review on the fact they find their guitarist boring.

He basically called the guy an idiot and that's more than enough to see there's a negative bias going on. Professionalism and objectivity requires being unbiased.

Edited July 18, 2022 by gustavothehuman

[Erreur2 La Nature]

Honestly ? Not at all. It’s only used by fanbases. I’m sure not even artists care or know about critical acclaim 

[brazil]

Critics aren't objective either, many times they will go along with whatever perception there is of the artist/album out there at the time, so in my opinion it shouldn't matter too much.

 

I do tend to observe critics more when it comes to films though, when picking a movie to watch I many times check rotten tomatoes scores.

[brazil]

Since you're asking for evidence. Just give you Blackout metacritic score of 61 while Circus that is a lot less cohesive and clearly put together in a rush (despite having many great tracks that dont go well together) has a metacritic score of 65. One was released at the height of her unpopularity and media hate and the other during during her image rehabilitation while many started viewing the media coverage of her as wrong.

 

Many of the reviews Blackout received were filled with personal criticism towards Britney's life at the time. The album has some of Britneys best vocals, but was criticized for robotic voices, meanwhile autotune filled Oops, released during her beloved popstar era, has a metacritic score of 72.

[GraceRandolph]

It doesn’t impact how much I like an artist or album, but critical acclaim across mediums has been meaning less and less since poptimism and online criticism changed the field. 

[Devin]

It matters, a lot of users just pretending they don’t care.

[Selegend]

It doesn't matter when ur album is filled with hits, but it does matter when the acclaim can actually generate interest for your project -- and this does happen. So it is important. 

[Gottasadae]

It's only matter for stan wars I guess 

[October Symphony]

No, depending on moods and state of mind. a month ago, I’m blasting iggy azalea’s reclassified and billie’s happier than ever and now santana’s welcome and Madonna’s bedtime stories.

 

regarding critics, if you agree to it, good for you, if you don’t agree to it, move on. Don’t let critics choose who you want to listen.

[ninasayers]

it does matter somewhat but i personally don't care if the music i'm listening to was well received or not (although i do like seeing the reviews and stuff)

Edited July 18, 2022 by ninasayers

[Rotunda]

I don’t think critical acclaim matters necessarily, but acclaim generally does. 
 

A good album should be championed by some group, whether it’s critics, the gays, the GP, other artists, etc. 

 

 

[KatyPrismSpirit]

metacritic or music publications dont matter

 

Grammys matter

[BLΔCKP!NK]

no. an album can be acclaimed and it can still just not be for me. I dont care about meta, critics, reviews, sales or whatever

[KatyPrismSpirit]

1 hour ago, Devin said:

It matters, a lot of users just pretending they don’t care.

the opinion of biased and snobby music journalist interns matter? why is that? you do know total nobodies write reviews for music publications? these people arent credible. what should matter is whether you like music personally or not. nobody in the real world is looking at metacritic scores and neither are artists. EGOT awards are the only thing the GP and artists slightly care about

[hallucinate]

3 minutes ago, Bussea said:

no. an album can be acclaimed and it can still just not be for me. I dont care about meta, critics, reviews, sales or whatever

this 

nothing else matters if i personally enjoy the album

[The Last of Us]

No it doesn’t. Which is why there’s a lot of critically panned movies in the world that were still box office smashes. It’s more of a bragging rights thing. An opinion is just an opinion at the end of the day. I’ve listened to albums and watched movies that the critics loved and they weren’t my cup of tea. I can’t even remember the last time I read a review. 

[Devin]

1 hour ago, KatyPrismSpirit said:

the opinion of biased and snobby music journalist interns matter? why is that? you do know total nobodies write reviews for music publications? these people arent credible. what should matter is whether you like music personally or not. nobody in the real world is looking at metacritic scores and neither are artists. EGOT awards are the only thing the GP and artists slightly care about

In reality idc but I do think praise and acclaim benefits the artist/album. 
 

1 hour ago, KatyPrismSpirit said:

metacritic or music publications dont matter

 

Grammys matter

This is kinda paradox cause if reviewers don’t matter why should a Grammy?

 

Esp given the history of Grammys being a panel of middle aged white men who only check for projects that has been critically acclaimed or commercially known. There’s been plenty of stellar projects that were snubbed or ignored by Grammys.

[RihFenty20]

Literally no, I’m not listening to music because it won Grammies or rated high on whichever publication. I listen to it because I like it. Only l*sers cling to the opinions of critics and/or awards to justify their taste (or lack thereof). 

[liquiddiamonds]

It matters if you are a small independent artist whose music falls out of mainstream sounds and the big indie labels that can place you in a nice Spotify playlist are not backing you up. That being said, most publications that count on metacritic are owned by major corporations, so we basically read paid advertising instead of reviews. That does not makes the music being reviewed bad or diminishes its quality if it connects to audiences and stands the test of time, but the artist has to generate some type of revenue, eg clicks, paid articles, to gain that space. Websites that weren’t much like this, eg Tiny Mix Tapes, are no longer around. I dont subscribe to the idea that the artist has to be an unknown from the underground to release a classic, but we’re on the other extreme where we have journalists being paid to circle jerk about what we are already aware of by way of social media, spotify, radio, and most of the time they’re late to the party. Information is shared way faster now to wait for thinkpieces. Critics only serve big pop artists if they are interested in building a legacy narrative for their careers or if they want to connect to a snob audience that usually pays them no attention just because they are popular. Critics on the other hand have a lot to gain by writing about popular artists these days, since they target stans that click and share such pieces. I also think this click-mentality is the main reason we see those “all time lists” and decade-related way more often than back in the day when print media was still dominant.