Here are a list of albums that were critically panned: Wu-Tang Clan - Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) Sex Pistols - Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin Black Sabbath - Paranoid Weezer - Pinkerton Radiohead - Pablo Honey Muse - Showbiz The Rolling Stones - Exile On Main St. Such shitty albums, am I right? EDIT: Oh and of course, Weezer's Pinkerton.
It seems like this will be their worst reviewed album, which is a shame. I notice a lot of the negative reviews start out with something like "it's not because it's pop", then goes on to say it's missing the "Linkin Park edge", but maybe that's because it's pop...no? Every single album people bring up their nu-metal past and compare it. I wonder how their music post "Meteora" would have been received had the band's name not been attached to it. Neither? A "professional opinion" is still just that, an opinion. Music is subjective, sure I guess it can be objectively bad if there was little effort put into it, but then there's still some that may find it enjoyable. You can't tell someone that they're wrong for liking or disliking an album. I like reading people's impressions, but it doesn't shape my own.
I hope these reviews don't make LP think no one likes the album, because this is better lyrically, melodically and mixing wise than most of their work.
That's why in the release thread I made sure to mention Adam from WBR and let him know how the majority of the forum feels.
Ask yourself: is great albums being critically panned at release the exception or the rule? And do you really really think OML will be considered a classic like these albums in 10 years time? If so, you're very naive. Edit: also, Pablo Honey is not very good, so not sure why you listed that.
I'm just pointing out that bad reviews does not a bad album make. A lot of bad albums get good reviews. See: Meteora. EDIT: Also, for someone who was so offended when someone called your opinion a lie, you seem so set to tell people their opinions are wrong.
Yeah, because that was definitely the point he was trying to make. What's kinda sad is that you're using half-assed reviews from internet articles (might I add, internet reviews and journalism in general on major news companies are a complete joke) to justify your opinion. Because for some reason you feel the need to make sure your opinion is "right."
No, I got your point. But all those same albums were also vindicated by re-reviews later on, often by the same magazines. Somehow I doubt that'll happen I with this one. All art is subjective, no objective truth in reviews, blah blah yes, but they give you a pulse on how the album is being received. And it seems like everyone outside these boards, whether professional or not, seems to agree on its badness. I think that's telling. Also LOL @ offended. That dude literally called someone he disagreed with a liar. I didn't go that far. I just called you wrong. Also @Minus I've been here since the mid aughts and remember you having better taste than the masses so it's disappointing you're accepting this mediocre fare.
Yup, everyone. Absolutely everyone. Wow, that's so right... (even though one review linked gave it a 3/5 and another 6/10 which are both considered good and their videos and tweets are getting a lot of likes) But yeah, everyone!
Ah yes, so credible these sites are Fucking iTunes where you can rate albums the moment they go up for preorder. Okay
You probably shouldn't read all the 1/2 star reviews going up now from people who've heard the album. Not sure you can handle it.
If you base your opinions on this band due to review scores then why are you even still listening to them? Metacritic Scores: Meteora: 62 Minutes To Midnight: 56 A Thousand Suns: 66 Living Things: 60 The Hunting Party: 65 One More Light: 45 Linkin Park has never exactly received glowing reviews... They average a mediocre 57/100 across all albums according to the Internet. But yes please keep telling us how One More Light is objectively bad and we should feel ashamed for thinking otherwise.
Oh I can deal with criticism of the album as long as it's justifiable, I've made it clear that I understand people are not a fan of this direction. I just think its pretty sad how you're trying your absolute hardest to prove to everyone that their opinion is wrong and that this album sucks is the general opinion, which probably isn't true. You're forgetting a good portion of the "fan base" and media have bias against LP, so of course you're going to see a large portion of people vocalizing their distaste for the album. I'm not even sure why you have to justify your opinion. We get it, you don't like the album, move on with your life and stop wasting your time.
What is it exactly that you're trying to argue? So you agree that art is subjective, but your initial post states "I think it's pretty clear who has the right of it". You're essentially flat out stating that because the general reception is negative that those who rate it positively are wrong or somehow in denial that one of their favorite bands released a dud. By that logic, nobody should be a fan of Linkin Park because the majority of their albums have been considered mediocre or outright shit by many. So, why does it matter when no one on this forum is insinuating that "One More Light" will go on to be heralded as a modern classic or that it should be exempt from criticism? If anything, this forum itself is split in half regarding the album. Certainly there's some bias given that it's a fan forum, but some of us genuinely enjoy what the band has created here and that won't be swayed.
Doesn't that kind of show the opposite of what you're saying? 60 something is a pretty solid score for Metacritic. Scores skew towards the average there for most things. The 45 sticks out even more than I thought it did.
Not sure in what world 15 points on a 100 point scale is the difference between what you're trying to argue One More Light is and something "pretty solid".
Newsday - B+ Allmusic - 2.5 stars out of 5 The Times - 1/5 stars Pretty polarizing reviews so far. Allmusic's review is the first sorta-negative review I've read that's well-written imo.
Pretty big fucking difference between a 45 and 65 on metacritic. Decent and bad-to-mediocre basically.
I haven't really seen the split you're talking about. I saw it for Heavy but now it seems more like a positivity circlejerk. Anyway I have the clarity to realize I'm the villain here so I'll get out of your way and let you enjoy the album.