Reviewing non-metal releases is not allowed !
Printed From: MetalMusicArchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Internal news
Forum Description: Stay informed about the latest updates regarding the site
URL: http://www.MetalMusicArchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=371
Printed Date: 21 Dec 2024 at 9:11pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 10.16 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Reviewing non-metal releases is not allowed !
Posted By: m@x
Subject: Reviewing non-metal releases is not allowed !
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2010 at 4:23pm
|
Today we launched a new features (or remove 1 , depends on how you see it) - reviewing non-metal releases is not allowed anymore. Based on suggestion from valuable members, we decided to make this change. Please post your comments and thoughts. Max for the admins  |
Replies:
Posted By: Negoba
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2010 at 5:02pm
| I think it is probably a good idea at least until the metal albums are well represented with reviews. I assume the non-metal albums still appear on the discographies? |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2010 at 5:36pm
| Yes, they do, but when you open one of their pages, you will see that the review window is missing. I know that because this morning I started moving some of Rush's albums to Non-Metal, and noticed this. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2010 at 5:46pm
|
nice move M@X. For what is worth.. really impressed with the subtle differences between MMA and PA. Creating not just a clone.. but a better site. Not sure the underlying reasons... different/new ideas.. or correcting 'mistakes'/weaknesses of the flagship site. |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2010 at 6:12pm
|
Excellent! I still don't love opening a metal website and seeing lots of Led Zeppelin reviews, but OK, they were fundamental in bringing this genre to life. Again, this all depends on the collabs. If they know their music, we can be sure no true metal band will end up as non-metal and no non-metal band will end up as metal and available for review. We have excellent people here so I'm sure we'll do fine. Any inconsistencies please report. Great idea. We can implement changes that PA needed for a long time but when the site got so big it was too late.... ------------- 
|
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 12:38am
|
Good idea mailto:M@X - M@X . I�m ususally against only having prog albums from an artists discography on PA, but with the tagging system here on MMA where the non-metal albums are still showing I think it�s a great idea. ------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 12:58am
Thanks for noticing. MMA benefits from past PA experiences, but soon enough PA will benefits from MMA's too. The engineering and analysis of MMA , makes me realize a lot of things that can be improve and better for both sites.  |
micky wrote:Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 12:59am
| Thanks all for the support ! |
Posted By: 1967/ 1976
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 4:33am
|
It is interesting reading, however, the weight of a single album of Proto Heavy Metal or 70's Hard Rock in the development of Metal in general.
I think Cream, Ten Years After, MC5, Jeff Beck Band or Hendrix has a very interesting weight in the birth of hard rock but not of Heavy Metal. However, they have opened the way for proto heavy metal bands to metal in general (traditional heavy metal in all forms).
But if we talk about Rush, B.O.C. or similar (or even Jethro Tull or Zep...) things change. Because here it is obvious that Heavy Metal is the evolution of these bands (at least in its most traditional form).
Originally posted by micky
For what is worth.. really impressed with the subtle differences between MMA and PA. Creating not just a clone.. but a better site. Not sure the underlying reasons... different/new ideas.. or correcting 'mistakes'/weaknesses of the flagship site. Yeah, micky! You have all reason!!! I prefer MMA that PA (and see other reasons in my PM for Raff!). ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 6:41am
ahhhh... I had heard rumours... good for you M@X.  |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 7:12am
I'm not sure I get this straight....
1- only metal bands are allowed here, right???
2- very few metal bands changed sound or style(unlike prog bands
 )..... they pretty well stayed metal bands, even if they changed metal style,3- some bands might have moved to metal music after starting out differently - I'm thinking of Status Quo (for ex) who started as psych and got into a proto-metal-boogie rock (>>> Not sure they're in the MMA yet) >>> would this mean that we're only allowed to review their metal-sounding albums., and not the others???
4- if what I assume in 3- is correct, how do we (and who) discern which albums are metal enough to be reviewed?
5- in other wordsif we don't agree about the album tagging and consider an album metallic enough despite the tag, we can't write a review to explain why we think otherwise?
6- This new rule seems aimed at the proto-metal genre mainly, right???
7- If what I assume in 6- is correct, is it to avoid their presence from spoiling the metal contents in the top list ???
8- If so, why not just letting this proto-metal genre out of the top list algorythms???
------------- my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones.... 
|
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 7:34am
I was coming to ask this as well. Because if not, then albums like Opeth's Damnation should be moved to non-reviewable-non-metal as well (like all unplugged stuff) and I would not like to see that happening.
------------- http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow">  <- Click on this!
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 7:52am
|
I think you all understand why the decision was taken. After years of reading people's complaints on PA about non-prog reviews 'defiling' the site's home page, it was time to make a brave, if radical, decision. Personally, I thought that many albums other people considered non-prog were instead very much prog, and I understand it might be the same here with metal vs. non-metal. However, especially at the beginning of the site's activity, we have to tread very carefully in order not to alienate potential new members. You all know how purist many metal fans can be - there are already people wrinkling their noses at LED ZEPPELIN reviews on the home page. Can you imagine what would happen if they saw a review of, say, Rush's Presto? My view is a very inclusive one, but I can't force my beliefs on others, nor do I want a repeat of the 'wars' that have spoiled the PA atmosphere for me. |
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 8:19am
Just to clarify, I definitely support the idea in general  but I'd like to know if it applies to those bands who are unquestionably metal in the big picture, but might have some rare unplugged stuff in their catalogue?------------- http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow"> <- Click on this!
|
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 12:08pm
-------------
|
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 12:11pm
DAMNATION by Opeth is a metal album by a 100% metal band. That it is played on acoustic instruments doesn't change the fact that it is seen as metal by pretty much everyone else. Deviations from this norm will affect albums that are not only acoustic but also clearly depart from the band's core sound. Unplugged=/=nonmetal.... -------------
|
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 2:08pm
This view could open a whole other discussion about the boundaries of metal (in my view Damnation is not a metal album but a metal band exploring the non-metal side they've always had next to their metal, and I've always thought this is how people generally see it), but we're not going into it here at least. Bottom line is that the system seems great  ------------- http://iamthreepeople.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow"> <- Click on this!
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 2:13pm
I think the system works best... would work best when you error on the side of caution, ie inclusiveness. Common sense. Comparing Opeth Damnation to (as an example) Rush Signals is apples and oranges.. on a metal site. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: 09 Apr 2010 at 2:31pm
hmmm... interesting. Having a great discussion here at the dining room table of the metal mansion.. SPOT ON!!! Teo.. This is NOT PA's. Look at Judas Priest... this site is NOT PA's where round bands are stuffed into square boxes. The current tag represents a portion of their career.. and tagging individual albums handles the rest. Judas Priest is listed in the NWOBHM because they.. with Maiden pretty much started it. The difference.. is Maiden's debut coincided with it. Priest did not.. they had a different sound in their first 4 or 5 albums.. that was not NWOBHM.. but something different... call it... NWOPM. Yes... they though history doesn't acknowledge it... or PA's.. were the first prog metal group. It was prog... showing all the facets of it.. yet were undeniably metal. When they streamlined their sound/music.. they changed.. and became one of the creaters of the new wave so to speak. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 12:24pm
Nice addition Max! I do enjoy bashing pop albums at PA, but it is for the benefit of the site after all!  Just one question - what if there is already a review present for an album that we want to move to "non-metal"? Would the review go away, or would we not be allowed to move the album's subgenre??? Thanks, Jeff ------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 1:24pm
|
In general, I approve of this system, but the collabs will have to be careful and there are bound to be disagreements. The example that pops into my mind is Burzum's album "Hli�skj�lf," written in prison without the use of guitars or vocals (see my excellently written review.)To anyone just listening to it, it does not sound metal in the least, but if you know its history and concept, it does seem to very much ft in with the spirit of black metal, if not the sound. ------------- Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves. |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 2:30pm
|
That case is interesting. That's the kind of situation where I would use a rather unscientific approach like "this band X is a known 100% metal band... They released this non-metal album... It still should be open for review as people will want to know about the ENTIRE discography of the artist". It's different in cases that are already borderline even at their most metal (Bon Jovi) -------------
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 10 Apr 2010 at 5:15pm
Thanks for the clear answers
Thanks for the clear answers ------------- my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones....
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 12:38am
I'm not a metal expert by any means, but I thought it was well accepted that an acoustic album could still be metal. Metal is the chords you play as much as the level of distortion on your guitar. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 6:36am
In other words we could not rate G'nR's only excellent album, Lies, which has one full face of acoustic songs.... ------------- my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones....
|
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 3:49pm
|
Except Damnation is not a metal album even ignoring the fact that acoustic albums can be metal compositionally. It is a progressive rock album.
That being said for Opeth it's an important album for their discography and should be allowed to reviewed anyways. ------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 6:31pm
Let's get this post on the new page in hope of a response ...
------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 6:37pm
| Jeff, having moved quite a few albums to NM, I can tell you that I suspect the review would get deleted, unless the person in charge of the operation decided to save it for future use. Unfortunately, only M@x will be able to answer your question with a high degree of accuracy, since none of the albums I moved had any ratings or reviews. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 6:58pm
Thanks Raff ------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 11 Apr 2010 at 7:02pm
| I have just posted a review of Rush's Moving Pictures, which makes it quite clear that the album is not metal...Luckily I will take care of its removal myself, if it is so decided, so that I will be able to save it. |
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 12 Apr 2010 at 6:15am
|
Raff is right, when an album will be re-classify to non-metal , we will delete (or hide from the site) and may list it only in the reviewer page (for information only). So, be careful with borderline releases , in the mean time the admins do their best to tag the non-metal correctly.
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 10:44am
|
I wrote a review for Rush's Grace Under Pressure before the policy came into an effect. The review was not deleted and still appears in my reviewer profile, but it is hidden from the album page and does not count towards its rating. So that's what happens, or at least it did in my case. ------------- Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 11:01am
Apologies for overlooking your review, since I was the one to move the album . I often have problems loading MMA pages, and was so taken by the task at hand that didn't think of checking if there were any reviews. I'll be more careful in the future, I promise.
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: 13 Apr 2010 at 12:55pm
|
Oh I wasn't complaining. I actually think that what happened is the best policy. That way I get the satisfaction of seeing my review, but it doesn't clutter up the album page, front page or top ranked lists. I'm very pleased it wasn't deleted.
------------- Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves. |
Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 2:47pm
|
I must admit that I hope the non-metal review feature will be opened up again once the MMA have been more firmly established. ------------- 
|
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 2:53pm
|
Yeah maybe it would be healthy to take a discussion about this again in a couple of years. ------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 2:58pm
| I'm sorry to sound pessimistic, but I don't believe that even waiting for two years (or possibly more) will make some people act like mature beings, instead of spoiled brats. On PA it seemed as if seeing a review for an Iron Maiden or Led Zeppelin album on the front page was some sort of sacrilege, and, when one had to read such rants over and over, it got old very quickly - especially when some people questioned the integrity of the whole Collab contingent. It seems that for some people it is impossible just to ignore what they don't like, and enjoy what they like. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 4:16pm
Raff, that wasn't the point of either of the two above posts. I agree with you - I hate hearing people bitch and moan all day about an Iron Maiden review, but you're forgetting that most people don't act like that. It's a few people that populate the forum that ruin it for everyone else. All Jonas and Time Signature were trying to say is that this topic may be more appropriate once the site is more developed. ------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: The T 666
Date Posted: 17 Apr 2010 at 5:36pm
That last sentence is the key. ONCE we have been established, ergo, ONCE we can afford to sustain and withstand blows by people who will question our credibility. PA was already a made site when the controversial additions and reviews started. MMA is still a child that will not survive a ton of non-metal reviews in the front page. In a while, when we feel like we've accomplished our first goal, when we have a lot of members and visitors, when people think of our site as a great metal resource, then I think we can open the gates and let the tsunami in... -------------
|
Posted By: Time Signature
Date Posted: 18 Apr 2010 at 3:20am
I know that. That's why I included that last sentence. -------------
|
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 2:23am
|
Ok I just came from the Cynic Re-Traced review where it seems that people want to keep it open to review and rate based on it's metal relatedness. As far as I'm concerned that's just fine and dandy. People also want to keep Opeth's Damnation around for the same reason (I know many consider it a metal album anyways, and I'm not here to argue about that). However, I've noticed that Pain of Salvation's latest album is in the non metal category. I haven't personally listened to that album, but I trust the site's judgment anyways, and I've sampled it anyways and the bits I've heard only support that decision. My biggest issue is I'm not sure we have established guidelines on what to keep and what to put in non-metal for the time being. Damnation is an important album in Opeth's discography, and the duality between it and Deliverance wouldn't exist, so it does make sense that we should keep it for it's relation in Opeth's releases. But Road Salt 1 could become an important part of POS' discography as well and could be crucial to understanding the direction they take in the future (metal or not, not even the band itself probably knows at this point). Furthermore, what if Road Salt 2 is a metal release, then you have the same thing going on with Deliverance and Damnation. And then you have Cynics Re-Traced which is an EP and probably will not be an important part of Cyinic's discography, yet we're keeping it? Even with one song on the EP that isn't even quite metal itself? These are just a few examples. I know this policy is mainly to eliminate albums by bands like Bon Jovi that are questionably metal in the first place. But there may be other examples on the site I haven't found. My main question is if we have good guidelines? Cause these three confuse me for this reason: Damnation - non metal (arguable, though questionably metal to say the least) but important. Reviewable Road Salt 1 - non metal, but important in a discography. Non reviewable Re Traced - questionably metal, not important in a discography. Reviewable ------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 2:41pm
Here's my two cents... I've been thinking about this a lot lately with
the dawn of the new Pain of Salvation album, and I think we should
bring back the option of reviewing non metal albums with a few new
restrictions. First of all here is my proposition:
Would it really do that much damage to the site if there are some non-metal reviews from metal bands? Just look at metal-archives.com! They allow reviews for ALL albums in a band's discography, and they are the main reference source for most metalheads. The main purpose of MMA is to focus on reviews, and not allowing reviews for signicant albums in band's discographies will just detract from the overall value of our website. Feel free to discuss this.
------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 3:18pm
|
Well defended J-MAN.
After reading your posts guys, I think we can find a solution here, interesting. Let's allow non-metal releases but..
Sounds good !! ?? |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 3:38pm
|
^ That sounds fantastic M@X! Thanks!
------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 4:04pm
So posting reviews of non-metal releases is now OK, but they will only appear on the album page and not on the frontpage? ------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: Vehemency
Date Posted: 08 Jun 2010 at 4:32pm
| Sounds good to me. There wouldn't be any toplists for non-metal albums anyways so it's not a big loss if non-metal albums don't have any rate value calculation. I'm really happy if we allow non-metal reviewing / ratings. As long as people just don't go on a frenzy and start reviewing and rating only non-metal albums. |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 1:49am
|
Glad something I brought up actually helped the site instead of causing trouble. Good job m@x! ------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 6:10am
Even on PA people NEVER rated or reviewed only non-prog albums, in spite of the loud cries of the more narrow-minded members of the community. It seems that a hundred badly written prog reviews are more valuable than a couple of well-written, well-thought-out reviews of so-called 'non-prog' albums. Personally, I have never been offended by any non-prog reviews, and I doubt I will ever be - so, I can't help wishing people tried to deal with such issues as adults. Anyway, situation solved for the best! Thanks to M@x and everyone else! |
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 6:14am
Indeed, thanks dude !
|
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 8:13am
|
GUYS, after reviewing what needs to be done technically to implement this, we need to let you know that we will handle this, but later. I am going to ask you to be patient. Thanks , I am sure you understand |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 10:58am
Rats!!
 This means we are now allowed to review non-metal albums but only from a metal POV; right???   ------------- my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicted musicians to crazy ones....
|
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 2:37pm
 What if you happen to be 14? ------------- Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: 09 Jun 2010 at 3:54pm
In my experience, there are 14-year-olds that are more 'adult' than adults. And I'll stop at that ...
|
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 1:49am
^I�m still 14 in my mind, but my body refuses to stop aging . Damn traitor. ------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 2:01am
|
I've always been a college student on the inside. Which explains why I waste my time on sites like these
------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: progshine
Date Posted: 12 Jun 2010 at 1:00am
|
Don't like it! I just tried to vote in two Aerosmith albuns and noticed that almost all of their albuns are available but the newest ones not! And in my humble opinion the band goes pop a little bit but, not so much different from http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/aerosmith--get-a-grip.aspx - or http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/aerosmith--pump.aspx - and hey, we can still vote/review this ones! ------------- Testing 1...2...3.. RAY, IT'S NOT WORKING! www.progshine.net Your resource of Prog Rock with weekly Podcasts, reviews, interviews and many more. 
|
Posted By: topofsm
Date Posted: 12 Jun 2010 at 4:00am
|
^That's better than what I would do, I wouldn't let them on at all. I wonder why we allowed them on when there was a statement that there weren't going to be any controversial hard rock additions... ------------- Lost respect for these archives when I saw Creed added, among other bands. Not going to be foruming here anymore. You can keep my reviews if you want. |
Posted By: m@x
Date Posted: 12 Jun 2010 at 5:54am
^^They need to be re-tag to non-metal , and then, we decided that, we will accept rating+review but only available on the album page (not the front page, not the artist page) and those rating won't be use to calculate any average rating anywhere. |
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: 14 Aug 2010 at 4:47pm
^I just tried to post a review of this one: http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/rush--retrospective-3%28compilation%29.aspx - http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/rush--retrospective-3(compilation).aspx and still get this message:
------------- http://www.lyngby-boldklub.dk/" rel="nofollow - Forever TRUE - Forever BLUE! https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |