gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 06:46:24 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: No Pier Pressure Review Online  (Read 11892 times)
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 25, 2015, 07:48:40 AM »

Note that copies are now out there. Not for distribution, but eBay sellers are offering signed vinyl and cD copies on the site, with their own photographs. One signed LP appears to be accompanied by artwork form the gatefold sleeve's center - looks like a still of BW in concert from C50.

So a full listen might have been possible…



… tHough I agree with those who suspect this particular review is based on the samples.
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
37!ws
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1509


All baggudo at my man


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 25, 2015, 07:56:01 AM »

I have a friend who had a review copy before the samples were out. I was off that day, too -- I should have gone to her house and had a sneak-preview!!
Logged

Check out my podcasts: Tune X Podcast (tunex.fab4it.com) and Autobiography of a Schnook (SchnookPodcast.com); there are worse things you can do!
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 25, 2015, 08:32:27 AM »

Note that copies are now out there. Not for distribution, but eBay sellers are offering signed vinyl and cD copies on the site, with their own photographs. One signed LP appears to be accompanied by artwork form the gatefold sleeve's center - looks like a still of BW in concert from C50.

So a full listen might have been possible…



… tHough I agree with those who suspect this particular review is based on the samples.

Just to clarify, the Ebay seller offering the signed vinyl copy states that it would not be available to ship until July, and the listing mentions it's part of a special limited edition run of 500 signed copies that look like a special promotion which he/she most likely pre-ordered and is now taking pre-orders. It seems that vendor doesn't actually have that signed copy yet to sell/ship. And it looks like the other sellers are advance orders too for when it is released, rather than having it ready to ship now.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 08:33:27 AM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 25, 2015, 08:50:52 AM »

I'm not really sure why we're jumping to conclusions that (A.) the reviewer based his opinions solely off the Google Play samples and didn't really listen to the album or (B.) that he is not "well-informed" enough of BW to provide a proper review of the album.  Based on what I read, it sounds like the guy has at least some insight to the Beach Boys.  He was aware of the cancelled Lana Del Ray appearance.  And is it that unfathomable that maybe he listened to the whole album and just thought it was okay?  I'm assuming that 99% of us on this board probably haven't heard the whole album yet; so how do we know whether or not this guy's review is unfair?  30-second samples can play tricks on you sometimes...

Sounds more to me like people are upset that he didn't give a glowing review of the album and therefore we must find a way to discredit him.  Pretty sure no one would be questioning if he based his review off the audio samples if he gave it 5 stars, now would we?

I specifically clarified that point in my reply, so the answer to your challenge/question is what I wrote originally: It's not a case of agreeing or disagreeing with the opinion of the record overall

Shade it or nuance it any way you want, but I spelled out exactly my reasons for addressing this review and they weren't too far off from what others seem to feel as well. If it got 1/2 star or 5 stars, I'd feel the same - The review wasn't much of a review, and it got some key points wrong while not addressing others. I *thought* it could have been better considering it's one of the only reviews to have appeared so far.

There is still some responsibility to readership and fan bases, right?

Maybe I'm old fashioned in terms of what is probably a long-lost concept called journalistic responsibility, but someone getting an advance copy to review and basically contribute to shaping opinions before-the-fact should convey the feeling that he or she is knowledgeable enough about the reviewed product on their desk or computer to be up for the task...or that they'd get the details right before publishing.

Too much of a request from anyone supposedly reviewing from an advance copy rather than Google clips?

Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 25, 2015, 11:45:13 AM »

Note that copies are now out there. Not for distribution, but eBay sellers are offering signed vinyl and cD copies on the site, with their own photographs. One signed LP appears to be accompanied by artwork form the gatefold sleeve's center - looks like a still of BW in concert from C50.

So a full listen might have been possible…



… tHough I agree with those who suspect this particular review is based on the samples.

Just to clarify, the Ebay seller offering the signed vinyl copy states that it would not be available to ship until July, and the listing mentions it's part of a special limited edition run of 500 signed copies that look like a special promotion which he/she most likely pre-ordered and is now taking pre-orders. It seems that vendor doesn't actually have that signed copy yet to sell/ship. And it looks like the other sellers are advance orders too for when it is released, rather than having it ready to ship now.

Think you read the date wrong ( 7/4/15) as it's referencing April, not July. 

The Japanese CD with a promo button/badge, appears to be available on March 18th: 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brian-Wilson-2015-JAPAN-No-Pier-Pressure-SHM-CD-SS-PROMO-Pin-Badge-SET-/371263007705   
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
The Shift
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 7427


Biding time


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2015, 03:29:54 PM »

Note that copies are now out there. Not for distribution, but eBay sellers are offering signed vinyl and cD copies on the site, with their own photographs. One signed LP appears to be accompanied by artwork form the gatefold sleeve's center - looks like a still of BW in concert from C50.

So a full listen might have been possible…



… tHough I agree with those who suspect this particular review is based on the samples.

Just to clarify, the Ebay seller offering the signed vinyl copy states that it would not be available to ship until July, and the listing mentions it's part of a special limited edition run of 500 signed copies that look like a special promotion which he/she most likely pre-ordered and is now taking pre-orders. It seems that vendor doesn't actually have that signed copy yet to sell/ship. And it looks like the other sellers are advance orders too for when it is released, rather than having it ready to ship now.

Very fair points bough the shipping date -  7/4/2015 - is April 7, in English :D

I took the amateur artwork shown to be the vendor's own handiwork. May well be my bad!
Logged

“We live in divisive times.”
Ron
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5086


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2015, 06:19:36 PM »

Honest question:

Do people really buy music based on reviews?  I thought people bought music because they either liked a song they heard on the album, or it was an album by someone they're a fan of.

Who buys music based on reviews? 
Logged
Shady
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6480


I had to fix a lot of things this morning


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: February 25, 2015, 06:32:32 PM »

Who's the poster that said the reviews are going to be terrible...you're off to a bad start  Grin
Logged

According to someone who would know.

Seriously, there was a Beach Boys Love You condom?!  Amazing.
alf wiedersehen
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2178


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 25, 2015, 06:43:31 PM »

Who buys music based on reviews? 

I do.
Logged
Lee Marshall
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1639



View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 25, 2015, 06:48:07 PM »

Who buys music based on reviews? 

I do.

I don't.  Never have.  I buy music with my ears.  I'm the only critic who matters...to me.
Logged

"Add Some...Music...To Your Day.  I do.  It's the only way to fly.  Well...what was I gonna put here?  An apple a day keeps the doctor away?  Hum me a few bars."   Lee Marshall [2014]

Donald  TRUMP!  ...  Is TOAST.  "What a disaster."  "Overrated?"... ... ..."BIG LEAGUE."  "Lots of people are saying it"  "I will tell you that."   Collusion, Money Laundering, Treason.   B'Bye Dirty Donnie!!!  Adios!!!  Bon Voyage!!!  Toodles!!!  Move yourself...SPANKY!!!  Jail awaits.  It's NO "Witch Hunt". There IS Collusion...and worse.  The Russian Mafia!!  Conspiracies!!  Fraud!!  This racist is goin' down...and soon.  Good Riddance.  And take the kids.
Awesoman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1830


Disagreements? Work 'em out.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 25, 2015, 07:18:51 PM »


I specifically clarified that point in my reply, so the answer to your challenge/question is what I wrote originally: It's not a case of agreeing or disagreeing with the opinion of the record overall


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.   Afro  I find it hard to believe anyone here would critique his review if he had spoke more highly of the product.  If he thought the album was fantastic, why would anyone here complain?  "Man, he gave the album a good review but it doesn't sound like he really listened to it!"

Shade it or nuance it any way you want, but I spelled out exactly my reasons for addressing this review and they weren't too far off from what others seem to feel as well. If it got 1/2 star or 5 stars, I'd feel the same - The review wasn't much of a review, and it got some key points wrong while not addressing others. I *thought* it could have been better considering it's one of the only reviews to have appeared so far.

There is still some responsibility to readership and fan bases, right?

Sure, and it sounds like this reviewer's responsibility was to write an overview of what he heard rather than an in-depth analysis.  While I certainly wouldn't complain if he went the latter route, unlike others on this board I couldn't say I was expecting him to.

Maybe I'm old fashioned in terms of what is probably a long-lost concept called journalistic responsibility, but someone getting an advance copy to review and basically contribute to shaping opinions before-the-fact should convey the feeling that he or she is knowledgeable enough about the reviewed product on their desk or computer to be up for the task...or that they'd get the details right before publishing.

Too much of a request from anyone supposedly reviewing from an advance copy rather than Google clips?


Do we have concrete, irrefutable proof that all he did was listen to the Google sample clips?  Maybe those samples really are what he primarily based his review on, or maybe he simply didn't give the full album a fair listen.  And maybe he doesn't obsess over BW/The Beach Boys like we do.  The bottom line is that we don't really know.  I even agree with the consensus that his review of the album was nothing special; pretty much a cliff-notes overview.  But I honestly don't see anything in his review that was so glaringly unfair that I need to question his integrity.  
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 07:20:28 PM by Awesoman » Logged

And if you don't know where you're going
Any road will take you there
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2015, 07:31:25 PM »


I specifically clarified that point in my reply, so the answer to your challenge/question is what I wrote originally: It's not a case of agreeing or disagreeing with the opinion of the record overall


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.   Afro  I find it hard to believe anyone here would critique his review if he had spoke more highly of the product.  If he thought the album was fantastic, why would anyone here complain?  "Man, he gave the album a good review but it doesn't sound like he really listened to it!"

Shade it or nuance it any way you want, but I spelled out exactly my reasons for addressing this review and they weren't too far off from what others seem to feel as well. If it got 1/2 star or 5 stars, I'd feel the same - The review wasn't much of a review, and it got some key points wrong while not addressing others. I *thought* it could have been better considering it's one of the only reviews to have appeared so far.

There is still some responsibility to readership and fan bases, right?

Sure, and it sounds like this reviewer's responsibility was to write an overview of what he heard rather than an in-depth analysis.  While I certainly wouldn't complain if he went the latter route, unlike others on this board I couldn't say I was expecting him to.

Maybe I'm old fashioned in terms of what is probably a long-lost concept called journalistic responsibility, but someone getting an advance copy to review and basically contribute to shaping opinions before-the-fact should convey the feeling that he or she is knowledgeable enough about the reviewed product on their desk or computer to be up for the task...or that they'd get the details right before publishing.

Too much of a request from anyone supposedly reviewing from an advance copy rather than Google clips?


Do we have concrete, irrefutable proof that all he did was listen to the Google sample clips?  Maybe those samples really are what he primarily based his review on, or maybe he simply didn't give the full album a fair listen.  And maybe he doesn't obsess over BW/The Beach Boys like we do.  The bottom line is that we don't really know.  I even agree with the consensus that his review of the album was nothing special; pretty much a cliff-notes overview.  But I honestly don't see anything in his review that was so glaringly unfair that I need to question his integrity.  

Time to fess up and admit you're the reviewer....
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
Awesoman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1830


Disagreements? Work 'em out.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: February 25, 2015, 07:41:14 PM »


I specifically clarified that point in my reply, so the answer to your challenge/question is what I wrote originally: It's not a case of agreeing or disagreeing with the opinion of the record overall


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.   Afro  I find it hard to believe anyone here would critique his review if he had spoke more highly of the product.  If he thought the album was fantastic, why would anyone here complain?  "Man, he gave the album a good review but it doesn't sound like he really listened to it!"

Shade it or nuance it any way you want, but I spelled out exactly my reasons for addressing this review and they weren't too far off from what others seem to feel as well. If it got 1/2 star or 5 stars, I'd feel the same - The review wasn't much of a review, and it got some key points wrong while not addressing others. I *thought* it could have been better considering it's one of the only reviews to have appeared so far.

There is still some responsibility to readership and fan bases, right?

Sure, and it sounds like this reviewer's responsibility was to write an overview of what he heard rather than an in-depth analysis.  While I certainly wouldn't complain if he went the latter route, unlike others on this board I couldn't say I was expecting him to.

Maybe I'm old fashioned in terms of what is probably a long-lost concept called journalistic responsibility, but someone getting an advance copy to review and basically contribute to shaping opinions before-the-fact should convey the feeling that he or she is knowledgeable enough about the reviewed product on their desk or computer to be up for the task...or that they'd get the details right before publishing.

Too much of a request from anyone supposedly reviewing from an advance copy rather than Google clips?


Do we have concrete, irrefutable proof that all he did was listen to the Google sample clips?  Maybe those samples really are what he primarily based his review on, or maybe he simply didn't give the full album a fair listen.  And maybe he doesn't obsess over BW/The Beach Boys like we do.  The bottom line is that we don't really know.  I even agree with the consensus that his review of the album was nothing special; pretty much a cliff-notes overview.  But I honestly don't see anything in his review that was so glaringly unfair that I need to question his integrity.  

Time to fess up and admit you're the reviewer....

You'll never know!  Mwa-haha! 

(I'm not.)
Logged

And if you don't know where you're going
Any road will take you there
Summertime Blooz
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 1138



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2015, 07:23:09 AM »

Here's a link to a new ca-razy chuckler of a review for "No Pier Energy" (being released by Capitol Knowledge). I think this must be what it's like inside the brain of someone who is bilingual.

http://worldnewss.net/brian-wilsons-the-fitting-time-from-no-pier-pressure/
« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 07:24:21 AM by krabklaw » Logged

Please visit 'The American(a) Trip Slideshow' where you can watch the videos and listen to fan mixes of all the Smile songs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doOws3284PQ&list=PLptIp1kEl6BWNpXyJ_mb20W4ZqJ14-Hgg
Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1080



View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2015, 07:36:23 AM »

Here's a link to a new ca-razy chuckler of a review for "No Pier Energy" (being released by Capitol Knowledge). I think this must be what it's like inside the brain of someone who is bilingual.

http://worldnewss.net/brian-wilsons-the-fitting-time-from-no-pier-pressure/

ha ha, scraper software replacing synonyms in a poor attempt to fool search engines into thinking that the article is unique.
Logged

Please delete my account
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 872

Please delete my account


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2015, 07:56:09 AM »

Now we'll have forum members searching for where they can buy the "deluxe mannequin" of Brian.

Logged

Please delete my account
RBennett123
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 61



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: March 13, 2015, 06:35:07 PM »

Allmusic has posted their review of NPP, written by Stephen Thomas Erlewine. Not sure if anyone else has seen it, but I haven't seen it posted here yet.

3/5 stars.

http://www.allmusic.com/album/no-pier-pressure-mw0002760473


That's Why God Made the Radio provided a bittersweet coda to the Beach Boys' career but the soothing sounds of the 2012 reunion didn't linger long before they were soured by the internal fighting endemic to the band. Mere weeks afterward, Mike Love announced Brian Wilson wouldn't join the Beach Boys for any dates after the summer 2012 tour, leaving Brian free to capitalize on the good press of That's Why God Made the Radio. He headed into the studio with guitarist Jeff Beck and producer Don Was in 2013 with the intention of cutting a full album but that collaboration quickly fell apart, leaving Wilson to re-team with his longtime collaborator Joe Thomas to turn these abandoned sessions into what turned out to be No Pier Pressure. Caught halfway between a back-to-basics move along the lines of TWGMTR and a star-studded extravaganza, No Pier Pressure certainly doesn't have much to do with the high art that's marked Wilson's new millennium; there's nary an echo of the SMiLE revival or the Van Dyke Parks collaboration That Lucky Old Sun. This is all sand, sun, and Saturday night nostalgia, a sensibility goosed by the addition of Al Jardine, David Marks, and Blondie Chaplin -- the part of the Beach Boys camp that threw in their lot with Brian -- who help give their numbers ("What Ever Happened," "The Right Time," "Sail Away") a bit of the classicist AM pop sheen that made That's Why God Made the Radio so soothing. It's a nice anchor for the record and, frankly, No Pier Pressure needs such a grounding force because it often threatens to drift far away on the surging tides of showbiz schmaltz. When She & Him breeze in to deliver some Caribbean camp on "On the Island," the results are agreeably camp but "Runaway Dancer," a collaboration with Sebu Simonian of Capital Cities that seems determined to revive the arch camp peak of Stock, Aitken & Waterman, feels like a half-imagined Ibizaian hangover. By any measure, "Runaway Dancer" is bizarre but by arriving second on No Pier Pressure, it throws the whole feel of the album out of whack, turning such otherwise nice moments as Kacey Musgraves' "Guess You Had to Be There" cloying. By the time Nate Ruess of Fun. shows up for "Saturday Night," a throwback that seems to belong the early-'80s soft rock glory days of Carole Bayer Sager and not American Graffiti (and is the better for it), No Pier Pressure seems genuinely weird, as it's perilously perched between the best and worst of Wilson's pop talent and Thomas' showbiz instincts.
Logged
the professor
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 982


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: March 13, 2015, 09:15:52 PM »

bad writing on the sentence level and too many cramped references to artists I do not know make the point of this review elusive. However I see that RD is a big loser in all this. I have to say that its likeness to McCartney's Christmas song frightens me. . . .
Logged
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: March 13, 2015, 10:06:20 PM »

Stephen Thomas Erlewine is a dumbass. He once started ranting on Brian in the middle of  a McCartney review.he is a biased bitch.
Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
Wirestone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6043



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 13, 2015, 10:21:13 PM »

Quote
No Pier Pressure certainly doesn't have much to do with the high art that's marked Wilson's new millennium; there's nary an echo of the SMiLE revival or the Van Dyke Parks collaboration That Lucky Old Sun.

Yet they rank NPP higher than TLOS, which gets two-and-a-half stars. GIOMH also has a higher ratiing.

Allmusic's reviews of the BW solo output are muddled, to say the least.
Logged
Please delete my account
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 872

Please delete my account


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: March 14, 2015, 02:45:48 AM »

Quote
No Pier Pressure certainly doesn't have much to do with the high art that's marked Wilson's new millennium; there's nary an echo of the SMiLE revival or the Van Dyke Parks collaboration That Lucky Old Sun.

Yet they rank NPP higher than TLOS, which gets two-and-a-half stars. GIOMH also has a higher ratiing.

Allmusic's reviews of the BW solo output are muddled, to say the least.

1) he didn't necessarily say that not being high art was a bad thing for a pop record
2) Unless all the reviews on a given site are by the same reviewer, I don't think its fair to expect the ratings to make sense relative to each other. Imagine being given a record to review that you think is great but not as great as a record the site had previously given 4/10. You're not going to give it 3/10 are you? (apologies if all the reviews in question are by the same reviewer; I didn't check).

By the way, I know you're a journalist and you know your stuff, so I mean this argument respectfully!
« Last Edit: March 14, 2015, 06:08:48 AM by unreleased backgrounds » Logged

Please delete my account
ArchStanton
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 197


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2015, 05:39:43 AM »

I had a hard time with portions of that review as well--there were well-written passages and passages where I had no clue as to what he was talking about. Using the word "camp" three times in one sentence was impressive as well.

But I think it read as a fair review overall. I don't think this album will necessarily be for everyone.
Logged
Shady
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6480


I had to fix a lot of things this morning


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: March 14, 2015, 08:34:46 AM »

I can't stand allmusic, nearly as much as I can't stand Rolling Stone. Won't even bother reading that review.

Hopefully Robert Christgau reviews NPP, When it comes to other peoples opinions on music his is all I really care about.
Logged

According to someone who would know.

Seriously, there was a Beach Boys Love You condom?!  Amazing.
gfx
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.902 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!