Home› The Porch

Ten Review - Calgary Herald - not so good

IndifferenceIndifference Posts: 2,739
edited March 2009 in The Porch
http://www.calgaryherald.com/Entertainm ... story.html

SHOW COUNT: (164) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=108, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=4, Australia=5
Mexico=1, Colombia=1 



Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Guitarhero27Guitarhero27 Posts: 2,146
    ouch is right, but what's funny is that more people are buying the re-release of Ten today than this paper.
    9/29/96, 8/29/98, 9/8,11/98, 7/28/99, 8/23,24,25/00, 10/13/00, 4/15/03, 4/30/03, 7/8,9,12,14/03, 10/1/04, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 5/4,5,13,27,28/06, 6/1,3/06, 6/19,20,22,24,25,27/08, 7/1/08, 8/4,5,7,16/08, 8/21/09, 10/27,28,30,31/09, 5/15,17,18,20,21/10, 9/2/12, 10/18,19,21,22,25/13
  • AmantriaAmantria Posts: 608
    "Besides, the remix can't disguise the fact that while the strong moments on Ten are fantastic, the weak moments, and those make up just about half the disc, are a big snooze."
    "If this reissue makes one thing clear, it's that Ten, while still one of the most important albums of the '90s, wasn't necessarily one of the decade's best. At least not on the level we once thought it was."


    I don't know WTF they are talking about! This guy probably raved about the last Jonas Bros. album.
    Its good to be back!!
  • AB221569AB221569 Posts: 13
    I don't have a problem with him not liking the album.

    What I do have a problem with is that he marked it 1/2 out of 5, but the review in no way read like that. I could rant all day long about the stupidity of putting arbitrary scores at the top of reviews for shock value - it's cheap, and it devalues the review itself (which is fine).
  • 2-feign-reluctance2-feign-reluctance TigerTown, USA Posts: 23,344
    its just one reviewer guys/gals. the entire staff at the paper surely don't hate pearl jam.
    www.cluthelee.com
  • orig_long redorig_long red Posts: 2,029
    I'm sharpening my pitchfork and lighting my torches as we speak!
    Jam out with your clam out.
  • MudfestMudfest Posts: 1,025
    read the sun ;)

    M
    ===
    "OH Canada...You are so Beautiful when you are Drunk." Eddie
    1993-08-14 Gimli Mb Motorsport Park
    03-05-30 Vanc;05-09-08 Wpg
    05-09-07 Sask Sk;05-09-04 Calg
    05-09-05 Edm Alb;05-09-02 Vanc
    06-07-02/ 03 Denver 1 + 2;06-10-21/22 Bridge 1 +2
    4/3 + 4/2/08 Vanc Vedder ; 6/24+25 MSG /Toronto 09/buffalo 10/EV Chic 1-2
  • KalEl31KalEl31 Posts: 26
    As much as I loathe Billboard.... this guy needs to look at where Brother is on the charts. It completely shoots down the idea that Ten isn't one of those timeless albums.

    If the fucking trend followers can point at these charts and say shit like, "rock is dead", surely we can do the same thing back at them when we're on top.
  • megatronmegatron Posts: 3,420
    whatever :roll:
  • pdalowskypdalowsky Doncaster,UK Posts: 15,092
    AB221569 wrote:
    I don't have a problem with him not liking the album.

    What I do have a problem with is that he marked it 1/2 out of 5, but the review in no way read like that. I could rant all day long about the stupidity of putting arbitrary scores at the top of reviews for shock value - it's cheap, and it devalues the review itself (which is fine).

    in fairness to the reviewer he duid give it 3 and a half.....

    maybe its not to his taste, i mean he rates nevermind higher.....speaks volumes, Nevermind is good dont get me wrong, but for me and for me subjectively its not in the same league as ten
  • SeaSea Posts: 3,059
    AB221569 wrote:
    I don't have a problem with him not liking the album.

    What I do have a problem with is that he marked it 1/2 out of 5, but the review in no way read like that. I could rant all day long about the stupidity of putting arbitrary scores at the top of reviews for shock value - it's cheap, and it devalues the review itself (which is fine).


    FYI ... Now it says Pearl Jam Ten 3 ½ out of 5
  • AmantriaAmantria Posts: 608
    Well, its a 5 1/2 out of 5 for me!!! :D:D:D
    Its good to be back!!
  • analogueaddict72analogueaddict72 Posts: 307
    Critics hardly ever give them them kudos they deserve, Vs was hardly hailed as that good when it came out and I remember Q magazine equating some of it to Warrant.(Yeah! Cherry Fuckin Pie)

    Uncut gave Yield 5 stars on a original release and then when it was reissued they did a complete u-turn and admitted they were wrong and gave it 2 stars.

    How the fuck does it drop 3 stars, I like Nirvana but critics crawl up right up their arse and The Pixes did all the innovating Nirvana just took it and made it pop music (just listen to Nevermind) One day the bubble will burst and Nirvana will be seen to have been extremely good but certainly not up there with cream of bands.

    Seriously some people would say they are more important than Pink Floyd, Pearl Jam are in good company PF never got the respect and it's only the retrospective 5 star arse kissings Darkside got over the last 15 years that has it held up as a critical success.

    Nirvana were good but The Pixes got their first they just rode in on their coat tails. Not unlike the so called jumping on Nirvana's band wagon that Kurt accuse PJ of .
  • dreamweaverdreamweaver New York Posts: 721
    this is why you shouldn't read reviews at all... to each is own.
    Meadowlands, MSG 1, MSG 2 - '98
    Jones Beach NY 1 + 3 - '00
    MSG 1 + 2 - '03
    Boston Garden - '04
    Montreal - '05
    Boston Garden 1, Meadowlands 1 + 2 - '06
    Mansfield 1 - '08
    (EV solo) Boston 1 - '08
    Chicago 1 - '09
    MSG -'10
    Brooklyn 1+2 - '13
    Central Park - '15
    MSG - '16
    Fenway - '16
    Wrigley - '16
    (RRHOF) Brooklyn - '17
    Fenway - '18
    MSG - '22
    MSG 1 - '24
  • bazzerbazzer Posts: 3,125
    analogueaddict72 wrote:
    Uncut gave Yield 5 stars on a original release and then when it was reissued they did a complete u-turn and admitted they were wrong and gave it 2 stars.
    When did Yield get rereleased?
  • analogueaddict72analogueaddict72 Posts: 307
    bazzer wrote:
    analogueaddict72 wrote:
    Uncut gave Yield 5 stars on a original release and then when it was reissued they did a complete u-turn and admitted they were wrong and gave it 2 stars.
    When did Yield get rereleased?

    It was reissued on a mid price campaign in the early noughties, it wasn't a big deal but Uncut re-reviewed the back cat up to Binaural and weren't that complementary.

    Your right I shouldn't be effected by the reviews but it does nark me sometimes and I can't help looking, I don't read the music press like I used to but can't help but look out for what my fav bands are getting. The treatment of the last Cold War Kids album (superior to Robbers & Cowards in my view) was shocking but fuck them what do they know I'm happy and I guess that's all that matters.
  • EquallyWorthlessEquallyWorthless Posts: 3,993
    analogueaddict72 wrote:
    Critics hardly ever give them them kudos they deserve, Vs was hardly hailed as that good when it came out and I remember Q magazine equating some of it to Warrant.(Yeah! Cherry Fuckin Pie)

    Uncut gave Yield 5 stars on a original release and then when it was reissued they did a complete u-turn and admitted they were wrong and gave it 2 stars.

    How the fuck does it drop 3 stars, I like Nirvana but critics crawl up right up their arse and The Pixes did all the innovating Nirvana just took it and made it pop music (just listen to Nevermind) One day the bubble will burst and Nirvana will be seen to have been extremely good but certainly not up there with cream of bands.

    Seriously some people would say they are more important than Pink Floyd, Pearl Jam are in good company PF never got the respect and it's only the retrospective 5 star arse kissings Darkside got over the last 15 years that has it held up as a critical success.

    Nirvana were good but The Pixes got their first they just rode in on their coat tails. Not unlike the so called jumping on Nirvana's band wagon that Kurt accuse PJ of .


    The Pixies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nirvana .... No Contest.
    {if (work != 0) {
    work = work + 1;
    sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
    else if (work >= 0) {
    reality.equals(false);
    work = work +1;
    }system("pause");
    return 0;}
  • DD164485DD164485 Posts: 149
    No offense to anyone in Calgary. But the influence and opinion of this paper hardly streches beyond the snow banks of their parking lot. The Calgary Herald is not exactly a leading tastemaker in the world of music reviews and I hardly think opinions expressed by this hack part timer will have much of an effect when it comes to peoples opinion or historical outlook of this album.

    This jobber is probably anxiously awaiting the super deluxe re-issue of Billy Ray Cyrus's Achy Breaky Heart album. No doubt he will cream his little shorts when that album lands on his desk.
  • LizardjamLizardjam Posts: 1,121
    The way he constantly praised Nirvana and comparing the two...clearly one of those people that is an either or. And he's a Nirvana groupie. Not really into caring about his opinion.
    bugs in the way...I feel about you

    "New music, new friends. Pearl Jam."

    I like our socks. I hear we make a fine sock. I always say, You might not love our records, but I think you'll like our socks. - Stone

    "This record is us speaking out in class." -EV on PJ
  • nukebootnukeboot Posts: 1,465
    That was a satirical review, right?
    EdSurfingSig_zpsgmyltito.jpg
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me...
  • thecorythecory Posts: 290
    Weren't the band openly fans of arena rock? I remember reading that jeff and stone kind of wanted mother lve bone to go that way. also mike still loves that stuff. what is so bad about that? its not necessarily an insult to have an arena rock sound as the reviewer seems to feel.
  • Gary CarterGary Carter Posts: 14,067
    opinions are like assholes everyone has one
    Ron: I just don't feel like going out tonight
    Sammi: Wanna just break up?

  • megatronmegatron Posts: 3,420
    thecory wrote:
    Weren't the band openly fans of arena rock? I remember reading that jeff and stone kind of wanted mother lve bone to go that way. also mike still loves that stuff. what is so bad about that? its not necessarily an insult to have an arena rock sound as the reviewer seems to feel.

    i always though of em as classic arena rock...not like the 80's more 60's,70's
    this guys a chud anyway
Sign In or Register to comment.