I'm sorry Mr Mate
you've got it wrong

I agree that you should know what the fuck you're talking about if you're going to critique music, but I don't think you have to be a musician. Someone like myself, I've been to a gig on average, about once a week for the last 20 odd years, have had a record and then CD collecting habit for even longer yet for the life of me, I can't play an instrument and my singing scares people. The thing is, anyone who's been in the music scene for a while picks up the ability to be discerning - and at the end of the day, that's what music criticism is about, providing some kind of informed comment on what they're listening to.

Hey I didn't say you have to be a musician... just good balanced opinions on what music you think is good and, and this is quite important I think, be able to see why someone likes a certain type of music, even if you don't.

If you attack bands/songs without weighing it up with at least one minor good point, thats not reviewing, its an attack.

Still I don't think its just enough to be a music fan to be a good reviewer/critique. Knowledge (if not musical from a technical/instrumental perspective) music as art and expression and not just as a form of entertainment (although this is a major factor of music, don't get me wrong) can help everyone understand better where a particular piece of music or band is coming from.

This can come from being a musician or indeed a lover of good music (and the term good music is a very loose one - only you can decide for yourself what you think is good/bad).

In saying that, I think the point of reviews is to rate musicians fairly on a scale of how, in general, the targetted readers of a particular magazine/newspaper (in this example, an Augustino/Stoods review in Real Groove magazine) would find the music, and either inspire the reader to listen to find out for themselves or subtley disuade them that it might not be for them.

The Augustino review in Real Groove did neither thing. I mean Duncan Greive doesn't have to like either band, but there was nothing in there that would have made anyone figure out WHY he didn't think Augustino were good and if they, as a generalised target of Real Groove magazine, would have a different opinion.

Not every review has to be good, but at least it should offer enough persuasive argument supplemented by evidence (either observed or factual) to convince a reader to follow the author's opinions.

To say "Augustino's bass player needs to improve his technique" or "could be more dynamic" is far removed from (and i paraphrase this completely but it was along the lines of (in the review that is)) "Augustino's bass player is just pathetic" (sorry Duncan for the misquote but hey I refused to buy your magazine months ago due to my perceived lack of substance in the articles and the tremendous amount of advertising).

Correct me if I'm wrong... I'm sure you all will.

//in actual fact it does help if you are NOT a musician, that way you review as a punter, without critiquing from a musician-point-of-view (which most of the public don't know or care about).

citizen72 that is a very very good point. But here we have a national music publication that is quite well respected I believe in the industry and also by its readers - and reviewers from such a magazine I believe shouldn't have to be musos, but maybe have a vast musical knowledge. I'm not suggesting either hollis or Duncan Greive have no musical knowledge - they just need to back up what they say a little more.

No worries. I blab on and on too much anyway.

Now that I have worked out what's going on fully, when was this review of DG's - the current issue of Real Groove? I think I must have missed it. And martha - its good to see people with plenty to say, forums rely on it. The thing about reviewers is that if they've been doing it for a while, readers get to know their foibles, so even someone who gives an entirely negative review is still providing some value, if you know what spins that particular reviewer's wheels. He obviously doesn't like Augostino, but if readers know his taste, than can actually work as a recommendation, because they have a frame of reference.

And some of the best reviews have a kind of caustic wit to them - sure its a bit of a wank on the part of the reviewer but when it is well done, it can be very entertaining. I'm not dissing Augustino at all - I like both songs of theirs I am familiar with - nor Stoods, since I've never heard their work, but I don't think a reviewer necessarily has to struggle to find positives in things they don't like, although it might raise questions about why their editor asked them to review that particular band. Sometimes its just a ploy to raise a bit of noise.

Do you think a gushing reviewer raving about his or her fave has to find bad points in the interests of "balance"?

Oh, and another thing martha - I also agree that the more informed a person might be in terms of musical history/aesthetics/technique is going to provide a better review, but at the same time will be a damn sight more devastating in their reviews of bans which don't cut the mustard, as their "attack" will be from the perspective of one who knows.

to be sure to be sure

fuck
I feel sorry for duncan
having all these extra people at his throat

I would agree with you except I've been watching from a distance and Hollis has made some pretty brutal personal attacks, which have since been removed from the site by the techis.... even teina had to say something about his behaviour! (see augustino forum)

wasnt that comment directed at both parties?

Yes you did miss it, it was pretty brutal and has since been removed. ;-)

You'll see. Nickolas - Nick'hollis' - sounds like a nicname to me. I'm pretty sure I know who's as well.

Come on then, spill!

FWIW... I thought your comments were on the mark ('cept for the Sean abuse).

nuff said.

Judging by your observations, I suspect you've got some on-to-it comments in that head of yours...

of course I can't blame him.
I'm attacking the only thing that gets him out of bed in the morning.

Thats the truth. Nice one.....

Hollis, let's get out of this shitty little forum. Wanna come back to my place?

BTW I'm a rock pig that wants to head bang to Churn.

...well......hardly never

slut

Oh 'Nick'hollis you fuck - you were in Melbourne last week were you - I know someone else who was in Melbourne last week!!!??? ahaha busted!!!

ahahahahaahaa!!!