Re: Looping back to Krispen's old critics thread (was sorta: using laptops for music"

["Kris Hartung" <khartung@cableone.net>]

Such as historical or verifiable comparisons regarding melodies, 
techniques,
tid bids about the band history or members, other things that readers find
interesting and indicate that the reviewer gives a shit about understanding
the band, the context in which the CD was recorded or produced, etc...you
don't think music reviews areall about value statements do you?  Good
reviews most always contain a healthy balance of factual and evaluative
commentary.

Kris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Travis Hartnett" <travishartnett@gmail.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 12:19 AM
Subject: Re: Looping back to Krispen's old critics thread (was sorta: using
laptops for music"


Verifiable facts?  Were you writing for the sports section?  Otherwise...

TravisH

On 10/26/05, Kris Hartung <khartung@cableone.net> wrote:
> ...I was
> very precise with my language on my reviews, clarifying when I was 
>stating
a
> verifiable fact vs. my own emotional response to the music (i.e.,
> distinguishing factual from emotive statements), ...