re: my first bad review

[Greg House <ghunicycle@yahoo.com>]

--- matt davignon <mattdavignon@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, when you something to be reviewed, you're asking for an opinion 
>from 
> an unbiased pair of ears. 

I don't think you ever get an "unbiased" pair of ears, just ears with 
biases
which may be different from your own. But yeah, you are definitely exposing
yourself  for ridicule.

> My advice would be to consider his points, determine which of them have 
> merit, then figure out which of those could be improved, and which ones 
> can't be fixed without comprimising what's unique about your music.

I've heard Scott's music now (thanks!) and I can definitely say that I 
think the
reviewer was seriously offbase. While the recording isn't without faults, 
the
reviewer didn't even get onto the most serious of them, choosing to slam 
stuff
that's subjective (artistic choice) instead. Given what I've heard, I'd 
say the
review isn't really all that interesting, since this guy seems prone to 
slam on
something just because he doesn't like it. And he seesm overly harsh and
unconstructive too. I heard nothing on this recording that even remotely
qualifies as "mindless guitar wank". 

> Also consider that music that requires a technical understanding of the 
> process (for example, knowing what "looping" is) is often a hard sell to 
> non-musicians.
I don't think an understanding of looping is necessary for this recording.
Perhaps an appreciation for ambient type music would help, but how it was 
created
really isn't the point here.

Greg

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com