Jump to content

The MR.com 100% club & perfect ratings in general


whiplash1972

Recommended Posts

 

from 2005-2006 archives,

several that almost made it to 100% (which is 'only' 99%) are :

 

HAREM SCAREM - Overload

MASTERPLAN - Aeronautics

 

 

Those two are stunning albums IMHO...

 

Yeah backed I love both albums, but for me the HS is beaten by a few of their other albums.....for example Higher, s/t, Mood Swings would all rate above this this so I could never give Overload 99%

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

i think sticking to 1-100 should be fine, that's your signature over these years, but yes, the sorted reviews based on alphabetic will be awesome, because right now we have to load the page all over to search for a specific review :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with the theory that everyone should have at least 1 single release rated at 100. This gives you a guideline to rate everything else. I mean... if you don't think any release is rated at 100% than how do you know what a rating of 99% or even 89% is? Without a measuring stick these ratings have no meaning.

 

My single release rated at 100% is TRIUMPH - "Allied Forces". My favorite 5 bands of all time (Joan Jett and the Blackhearts, KIX, Savatage, The Runaways, and SR-71) do not have a release that I would rate at 100%. My highest rated KIX release (Midnight Dynamite) I would only rate at about a 94%... Joan Jett - "Sinner" would be about 93%... Savatage - no idea my favorite release... The Runaways - "Waiting For The Night" would rate about 92%... SR-71 - "Here We Go Again" would come in at about 97%.

 

I've never been a big fan of Andrew's ratings. Most of the time I prefer a different release by a band to the ones he rates at 100%. For example, I prefer a couple of TNT releases to the one he ranks at 100%. Though not a huge Journey fan I prefer a couple of their releases to the one he ranks at 100%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

 

 

Send me some ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

 

Wow, that's a hard one. How often can you properly review a disc after a few listens or a week. These days I try not to review anything until I've listened to it for a year or two (and I keep wanting to listen to it). I would hate Andrew's job though. Imagine forcing yourself to listen to crap.... which is why I guess he created the site in the first place, to listen to and spread the word of good music.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

No, Geoff is right. It was reviewed in the 'in-brief' section and got 86%. It's nowhere to be found in the archives now though...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with the theory that everyone should have at least 1 single release rated at 100. This gives you a guideline to rate everything else. I mean... if you don't think any release is rated at 100% than how do you know what a rating of 99% or even 89% is? Without a measuring stick these ratings have no meaning.

 

 

Quite simply the way I rate an album is to rate each song indivdually (may seen arduous, but is OK when you are looking at 30-40 releases over a year...doesnt really take long).

 

If a song (for me) is perfect in every way.....from intro to verse to chorus to solo (if there is one) to outro....then I will score it a 10/10. Whilst I would say that there are no perfect albums (100%) I would definitely say that there are perfect songs and lots of them.

 

For example a couple I would rate as perfect 10/10 songs -

 

Crown Of Thorns - Dyin For Love

Jeff Scott Solo - Eyes Of Love

 

However for an ALBUM to be perfect, every song would need to score a 10/10 and that just aint gonna happen.

 

& if it did I would be a very happy bunny indeed.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

 

Wow, that's a hard one. How often can you properly review a disc after a few listens or a week. These days I try not to review anything until I've listened to it for a year or two (and I keep wanting to listen to it). I would hate Andrew's job though. Imagine forcing yourself to listen to crap.... which is why I guess he created the site in the first place, to listen to and spread the word of good music.

 

That is why I created the site - absolutely!

 

As for forcing myself to listen to crap....indeed that is the case. But that's another reason why I don't review everything I get!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

 

Geez....anywhere from 5 to 50 listens....over the period of a week or 3 months....depends on how early I get the advance and what kind of record it is. Some only need to be played once!! There are many I have changed my view on over the years after doing my usual repeat-to-be-sure multiple playbacks. A lot of growers out there. But some truly get worse with each listen (Sin-atra for one).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking (I know everyone has their own picks), but the review of H.E.A.T's "Freedom Rock" still really surprises/baffles me. 86% overall, with 84% for the production (?!), when stuff like the latest BLANC FACES got 91%, MASTEDON 3 got 95%, FAIR WARNING "Aura" got 90%, SHINING LINE got 91% (the production on that thing was bloody awful), TERRY BROCK got 99%, NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days. The comments it was too slick/polished/over-harmonised should never be used in relation to AOR!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking (I know everyone has their own picks), but the review of H.E.A.T's "Freedom Rock" still really surprises/baffles me. 86% overall, with 84% for the production (?!), when stuff like the latest BLANC FACES got 91%, MASTEDON 3 got 95%, FAIR WARNING "Aura" got 90%, SHINING LINE got 91% (the production on that thing was bloody awful), TERRY BROCK got 99%, NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days. The comments it was too slick/polished/over-harmonised should never be used in relation to AOR!!

 

backed, it was a straight fight between that and First Signal for my album of 2010. Nothing between them really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days.

See I would rate Nelson so high above HEAT and Treat because I loved that album and thought the other two were ok, but not as great as I was lead to believe.

All a matter of personal choice. I still dont get the big deal about HEAT or that Treat album as I have heard plenty of albums that were the same as those, and they didnt thrill me either.

Give me Organised crime any day of the week over those two.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

 

Geez....anywhere from 5 to 50 listens....over the period of a week or 3 months....depends on how early I get the advance and what kind of record it is. Some only need to be played once!! There are many I have changed my view on over the years after doing my usual repeat-to-be-sure multiple playbacks. A lot of growers out there. But some truly get worse with each listen (Sin-atra for one).

 

 

Glad to see that. I read a lot of reviews that seem as if the writer has only played the CD once or twice, which I think is ridiculous - you can't have an in-depth opinion of an album that quickly! What annoys me more is reading reviews by reviewers who confess to not liking the style of music of the CD, then give it a poor rating. Of course they aren't going to like it! Presumably you avoid that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking (I know everyone has their own picks), but the review of H.E.A.T's "Freedom Rock" still really surprises/baffles me. 86% overall, with 84% for the production (?!), when stuff like the latest BLANC FACES got 91%, MASTEDON 3 got 95%, FAIR WARNING "Aura" got 90%, SHINING LINE got 91% (the production on that thing was bloody awful), TERRY BROCK got 99%, NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days. The comments it was too slick/polished/over-harmonised should never be used in relation to AOR!!

 

I thought the production was a step down from the debut...still think so. And I wasn't as into the songs on #2. Sorry!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doods, I'm 99% sure the debut Farcry did get reviewed on Melodicrock.com. Let me do some digging if I get a spare moment. I think it got somewhere in the mid-80's? 86% or something?

 

looks like andrew missed that, i can't find any High Gear on his archives :popcorn:

 

I think I did miss it actually. Sometimes promos arrive late and get swept aside by the latest titles that just need doing asap. In the same situation right now. Don't know where to start....maybe 100 CDs really need reviewing!

 

BTW - When the new site launches - ALL archive reviews will be listed and searchable A-Z (when I get time to move them over (but all news ones will be immediate) and also searchable via scores etc...

 

Looking at making a change to how I rate CDs for the new site. Just haven't decided on 1-100 or 1-10.

 

Out of interest, how many times do you listen to a CD in order to review it?

 

Geez....anywhere from 5 to 50 listens....over the period of a week or 3 months....depends on how early I get the advance and what kind of record it is. Some only need to be played once!! There are many I have changed my view on over the years after doing my usual repeat-to-be-sure multiple playbacks. A lot of growers out there. But some truly get worse with each listen (Sin-atra for one).

 

 

Gld to see that. I read a lot of reviews that seem as if the writer has only played the CD once or twice, which I think is ridiculous - you can't have an in-depth opinion of an album that quickly! What annoys me more is reading reviews by reviewers who confess to not liking the style of music of the CD, then give it a poor rating. Of course they aren't going to like it! Presumably you avoid that?

 

 

I have my favourites and my own personal preferences for sound/style/mood etc...as does everyone, but I try not to bring that into the review. Just stick to the points needed to be made. When it is out of my personal taste I review from the view point of a fan of that artist - would they love this particular album when compared to the band's other releases - and does it stack up against others of the same genre.

As an example - I've never been a Warrant fan, but the new album is bloody terrific as far as melodies, power, production and song writing, so I can't see how any Warrant fan would be disappointed. So it will get a really solid review.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS. On the subject of # of listens, I HATE how reviews appear for a certain record the NEXT DAY after the promo copies were made available via digital download....right, so how many times did someone listen to that then?!!!!

 

At the other end of the scale, I take too long :)

 

Yes, I know I'm waaaaay behind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PS. On the subject of # of listens, I HATE how reviews appear for a certain record the NEXT DAY after the promo copies were made available via digital download....right, so how many times did someone listen to that then?!!!!

 

At the other end of the scale, I take too long :)

 

Yes, I know I'm waaaaay behind.

 

...especially when those reviews are really gushing, making you want to go out and get the CD, then after 2 or 3 spins you realise it's not all that great.

 

Taking a long time is much better imo. I like sites where reviews appear for new albums as well as some that are a few years old that we may have overlooked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking (I know everyone has their own picks), but the review of H.E.A.T's "Freedom Rock" still really surprises/baffles me. 86% overall, with 84% for the production (?!), when stuff like the latest BLANC FACES got 91%, MASTEDON 3 got 95%, FAIR WARNING "Aura" got 90%, SHINING LINE got 91% (the production on that thing was bloody awful), TERRY BROCK got 99%, NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days. The comments it was too slick/polished/over-harmonised should never be used in relation to AOR!!

 

I thought the production was a step down from the debut...still think so. And I wasn't as into the songs on #2. Sorry!

 

I agree with Andrew's assertion of the last H.E.A.T., albeit Freedom Rock had a better collection of songs than the debut, the production and the over the 'topness' on everything gave it no balls whatsoever. A beefy Rock ingredient was missing on much of the album, adding some more heaviness would have really complimented Kenny's killer vocals. With that said the album was easily in my top 10 of 2010...but could have been #1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been a Warrant fan, but the new album is bloody terrific as far as melodies, power, production and song writing, so I can't see how any Warrant fan would be disappointed. So it will get a really solid review.

But surely if you have never been a Warrant fan but loved this boring release, you can understand why Warrant fans for the most part are disappointed. It had very little going for it as a Warrant album, and is very weak as a melodic rock album. Song writing was sub par at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been a Warrant fan, but the new album is bloody terrific as far as melodies, power, production and song writing, so I can't see how any Warrant fan would be disappointed. So it will get a really solid review.

But surely if you have never been a Warrant fan but loved this boring release, you can understand why Warrant fans for the most part are disappointed. It had very little going for it as a Warrant album, and is very weak as a melodic rock album. Song writing was sub par at best.

 

See I love Warrant and for some reason I love the new album. Sure it doesn't exactly sound like Warrant but to my ears there's at least 8-10 songs I'd consider great and maybe only two fillers for me and Robert sounds great. At first I didn't love the production but now I don't mind it. I'm starting to read more and more great reviews for Rockaholic and although it took me a few spins I now love it as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking (I know everyone has their own picks), but the review of H.E.A.T's "Freedom Rock" still really surprises/baffles me. 86% overall, with 84% for the production (?!), when stuff like the latest BLANC FACES got 91%, MASTEDON 3 got 95%, FAIR WARNING "Aura" got 90%, SHINING LINE got 91% (the production on that thing was bloody awful), TERRY BROCK got 99%, NELSON got 91% etc etc etc. All albums considerably weaker than the H.E.A.T album, which is frankly right up there with the TREAT disc IMHO and is nearly as good as AOR gets these days. The comments it was too slick/polished/over-harmonised should never be used in relation to AOR!!

 

I thought the production was a step down from the debut...still think so. And I wasn't as into the songs on #2. Sorry!

 

I agree with Andrew's assertion of the last H.E.A.T., albeit Freedom Rock had a better collection of songs than the debut, the production and the over the 'topness' on everything gave it no balls whatsoever. A beefy Rock ingredient was missing on much of the album, adding some more heaviness would have really complimented Kenny's killer vocals. With that said the album was easily in my top 10 of 2010...but could have been #1.

 

That surprises me given how much you like the last Danger Danger disc. There was no guitar in that mix whatsoever!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been a Warrant fan, but the new album is bloody terrific as far as melodies, power, production and song writing, so I can't see how any Warrant fan would be disappointed. So it will get a really solid review.

But surely if you have never been a Warrant fan but loved this boring release, you can understand why Warrant fans for the most part are disappointed. It had very little going for it as a Warrant album, and is very weak as a melodic rock album. Song writing was sub par at best.

 

I've read nothing but high praise all over the place for the album. This is the first negative I've heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • 2020 HH Donation Drive

    Please support Heavy Harmonies! The donations goal is the out-of-pocket expenses to run the main site and this board for calendar year 2020.



    28% of donation goal reached.
    Donate Sidebar by DevFuse
  • Posts

    • Video is "not available in my country". What's the name of the song?
    • Bro, I fucking post this shit on here, acting all shocked about this brand new band I have discovered and my extreme confusion towards their music, then on a gut feeling I go look in a rack of shit that Ive purchased and never listened to, literally everything in this rack never got taken out of the wrap, and there sits this album, and Moonraker, never even gave them a second worth of listens, I feel like I'm about the biggest phony on here, I really am and do feel like I'm just a fucking idiot, anyways, spinning this one today, then I'll work into the next CD, this really is a good disc, kind looking like this may be the standout track on this one, I get back after Moonracker, prob tomorrow
    • I know I'm really stretching it out on this one, but the other day I caught the end of A video for a song that I absolutely thought was one of the most killer fucking songs of it's genre, I even put it in many of my AOR and rock playlists, though it was clearly Alt + Modern Rock, it never pretends to be anything else, but something about this song, even back in Junior High, set itself apart from all the other garbage of the same genre that was swallowing us in massive droves back around 93 to 95, I thought this song was not only so much different  then the rest of the genre, but it went a step beyond, and was actually a good song, if you could look past the obvious Alt and modern influences, it's a song that gets stuck in my head all the fucking time, a song shrouded in mystery, as I to this day have never figured out what the lyrics are completely about, I love this fucking song, and I got real curious how my metal and AOR brethren felt about and towards this completely fucking catchy and awesome song??? of course the song is Black Metallic. it is if not anything else, an awesome fucking borderline pop song.  
    • Yeah, know what you mean. Really hard to get these tunes out of your system... Guess that's what they call a guilty pleasure... 😉 Have you heard the follow up album "Moonraker"?
    • Nominations aren't announced so what happens is a politician who made the nomination 'leaks' that they did it. Means diddly squat. If any of us were in a position to we could nominate leykis101 and leak it.   
    • I haven't seen either, but I've heard good things 
    • Early part of Romper Stomper, the skins verses the Asians
    • We All DIE Young- Steelheart
    • Ahh, that would be a no!
    • Tesla, "Signs" Joan Jett - "I Love Rock and Roll" Disturbed - "Sounds of Silence" A personal favorite, Jeff Buckley's rendition of "Hallelujah"
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.