So I was watching TheNeedleDrop and I was watching Anthony Fantano (internet's busy music mind you) and he was reviewing and an album I really liked and he gave it a low rating. Of course he explained why he didn't like it and all that, but my stance on the album was still the same. I watch a lot of his reviews some I agree, some I don't.

Anyways, the point of this thread is to ask does a critic's opinion on music (or anything really) affect how you listen to music? How much value does a critic have to you? Do you listening to a critic for what to listen to? Why? Why not? What?!? AAAAA.

butts.

I really don't pay much attention to critics. I like what I like, whether they say its good or not.

I prefer normal peoples opinions over paid critics

I don't really care for music critics because I happen to like things that many people don't. If they're talking about the technical stuff, then sure, but if they say "this is good, I like it" then idfaf. If they're a true fan of the musician and give a proper review that reflects what bla bla bla i don't care anymore. If I like it, I like it. Fuck off.

At 12/21/12 06:22 PM, jjjkuk wrote: I don't really care for music critics because I happen to like things that many people don't. If they're talking about the technical stuff, then sure, but if they say "this is good, I like it" then idfaf. If they're a true fan of the musician and give a proper review that reflects what bla bla bla i don't care anymore. If I like it, I like it. Fuck off.

Also, I don't read just one review. I read many. Get many different kinds of opinions. Then again, I don't actually read music reviews much. I just sample the damn thing and make my own judgement.

I never let a professional critic(though Anthony is cool) influence on whether or not I listen to something. I may look to stuff like user reviews, or look for review threads on other message boards, but even then, if I had any remote interest in the band/musician, I'd usually pursue it anyway.

I like critics that provide a realistic and well-explained, unbiased explanation of their subject. For example, if one were too say "The guitars were too noisy and dominant" I'd probably ignore the review, whereas if they said "The guitars have an extreme level of distortion, and are mixed too highly for my liking" it'd mean a little more to me.

Of course, this isn't to say that the critic's opinion will affect my own. If possible, I will use the critic's general standpoint compared to mine to get a rough estimate of what I'll think of the subject. I guess that's a fancy way of explaining "If a Pop/Hip Hop fan gives an album a shit rating, I might not mind it".

I don't really look at individual reviews, but get an idea of the consensus among reviewers and consider that when deciding whether or not I really want to check out something, whether it be a movie or album or whatever. Sometimes, the consensus is not so good, but I'll look anyway, because I'm really curious.

They're great for pointing out where to start with an artist, I usually aim for the album better rated.

I dont really but sometimes it may come into play, like say if its about a movie or a product i may be interested in buying, but anyways it all depends i guess.

At 12/21/12 06:12 PM, Scary wrote: dude he gave XXX an 8/10

so i'm assuming you're not referencing that review

Yeah, I'm not. I just wanted to put an album there.

(Danny Brown later name dropped Anthony Fantano in an interview with A$AP Rocky with much positive to say about him)

Loved that. http://youtu.be/0qMAzn4s1_g (for others wondering)

what album did he review negatively?

Jessie Ware - Devotion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAK0fVxfOUU. I thought it was at least a 7 or an 8. At least I thought so. But w/3.

(also, to answer the question, not massively. sometimes bad reviews will make me hesitant to try something, but a lot of the times critics have given albums i've loved mediocre scores, and it doesn't change how I view them).

w0rd.

At 12/21/12 07:49 PM, Slint wrote: They're great for pointing out where to start with an artist, I usually aim for the album better rated.

So you'd rather do something based of an opinion of someone else than see for yourself?

At 12/21/12 10:29 PM, TehSlapHappy wrote: So you'd rather do something based of an opinion of someone else than see for yourself?

I see what he means. It's good for reference if an artist has an extensive discography and you have no idea where to start. You can look at a site that groups together reviews and see what is the highest rated, or what is the most reviewed while still having a good rating.

At 12/21/12 06:06 PM, TehSlapHappy wrote: Of course he explained why he didn't like it and all that, but my stance on the album was still the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAEdkuwMZ50

Sometimes a review will determine if I give something a try. A good review will still be a pleasant read, even if I disagree with them. I love critics.

I never read reviews for anything. Fuck others' opinions.

At 12/21/12 11:59 PM, Gobblemeister wrote: plebs.

I hate you so much, it's surreal.

The point of a critic is basically to get quoted on a DVD cover to sell more games / movies / albums. Each individual is way better at predicting what they'll like than a critic is.

In fact you're probably better at predicting what you'll like from watching the trailer than user-submitted reviews. At the very least, user reviews are way better predictors of something not sucking than critic reviews.

Case in point: IMDB's top 250 movie list ( user voted ) vs rotten tomatoes' top100 movies list ( critic chosen). One list is shit and the other list is SUPER DUPER TURBO SHIT.

I see movie critics all the time, but I don't know if I've ever seen a review from a music critic. With that being said, I mostly just see what kind of comments they have on YouTube videos and how many dislikes a music video has. People are usually more honest on that website.

ZeroPunctuation shits on every game I love, but I still play them. Same with music, or any media really.

For music and video games I really could not care less about the critics' opinions. I rarely even look for reviews.

For films it's mostly that good ratings by critics will move me to go and check the film out. Secondly, they set my expectations to some degree, which could influence my opinion in the end (although I try not to let it to).

At 12/22/12 09:38 AM, poxpower wrote: Case in point: IMDB's top 250 movie list ( user voted ) vs rotten tomatoes' top100 movies list ( critic chosen). One list is shit and the other list is SUPER DUPER TURBO SHIT.

If I'm not mistaken, Rotten Tomatoes' top 100 list is determined by the fresh-to-rotten ratio and not by ratings, so that's the reason why you get oddities like A Hard Day's Night being ranked #1 (not sure if it still is) and the reason why it's a SUPER DUPER TURBO SHIT list.

All right, all right, how about this?

In the entertainment department, critics' reviews are basically opinions.

At 12/22/12 06:24 PM, jjjkuk wrote: All right, all right, how about this?

In the entertainment department, critics' reviews are basically opinions.

A critic's review is always an opinion genius

If someone I know and respect says something about an album that I haven't heard yet, their opinion will be in my mind when I listen to the album the first few times, but eventually I always end up forming my own opinions. Critics don't affect my listening at all; even if they make valid points against an album that I like, I'll still like that album just as much.

In fact, every time I really think about reviews and critics and all that, I always end up wondering why people even bother with them when you can just listen to the music yourself. I can understand reading up on reviews before purchasing an album that you haven't heard, if you're the sort of person who doesn't like previewing, but otherwise, I don't see the point.

It depends highly on the critic at hand, in most cases they will have a far broader appreciation and knowledge of said artform than myself but your own opinions are your own opinions and reviews are probably better used as a form for taking recommendations than ensuring your own opinions match up - but admittedly particularly when I watch Anthony Fantano videos I always find myself doing so for albums that I've already listened to and made a judgment on, particularly as in 9/10 cases I find myself agreeing with that fanta(no)stic man. The majority of critics I tend to disagree with in terms of music, but in other artforms where I have far less personal knowledge and in-depth opinions I have less of a base of my own to form opinions and mine tend to conform far closer to the general consensus.

I think this best answers the question.

At 12/21/12 06:19 PM, BumFodder wrote: I prefer normal peoples opinions over paid critics

Yeah critics never seem to have fun with the movie themselves.

At 12/21/12 10:32 PM, Sense-Offender wrote:

I see what he means. It's good for reference if an artist has an extensive discography and you have no idea where to start. You can look at a site that groups together reviews and see what is the highest rated, or what is the most reviewed while still having a good rating.

Exactly this.

At 12/22/12 10:11 PM, Gobblemeister wrote:

At 12/22/12 06:24 PM, jjjkuk wrote: All right, all right, how about this?

In the entertainment department, critics' reviews are basically opinions.

A critic's review is always an opinion genius

Unless they're reviewing the effectiveness of a piece of hardware or something. Not so much an opinion.