# classical music and amazon reviews that make no sense , i dont get it?



## deprofundis (Apr 25, 2014)

Has you may all know by know i worship Antoine Brumel, i have a superior quality cd of Brumel on hyperion by the brabant ensemble whit mister stephen rice of course, may god bless this man.

But soon after i went trought my naxos catalogue 2015 and found out Brumel has the same mass + bonus works that dosen apear on hyperion released so i will by it but...

The review i seen on Amazon make no sense the guy , give it 4 stars out of 5 so i was like hmm
he gonna says the Brumel cd is excellent, nope he bash it, he said the recording was terrible the unit too small to capture Brumel intensity since there only four in the ensemeble.

So i dont get it do you, when someone put a marker of 4\5 stars this is like 90\100 so it's a keeper and the recording is good? but he did says a lot of crap on the cd.

So i guess the cd is more like 3 stars, it most be an average cd, not totally mind blowing but not bad either.I dont know if i can trust amazon when they critic cds, music is subjective , like someone said someone pot of gold is someone else crap barrel.Look at the box-set O magnum mysterium originally on bayer record now on brilliant was bash totally 2 star out of five and lot's of negative comment the recording are olds ect...

But i did enjoy this box-set so mutch i would lisen to it very often, so amazon critic sometime is worthless are you whit me on this?

The only cd they bash so far that i would agree was music of the troubadours on naxos, here were i agree on this cd lacks, true the voice of the singer not that good sadely and she sing on all the songs, troubadours were mostly man back than, but since im not a sexist i would like to had some female vocal on some work would have been appreciated and male singers too, mixity?

These were my two cents on amazon and there critics, can we trust these guys when it come to review of classical they bought.

:tiphat:


----------



## helenora (Sep 13, 2015)

deprofundis said:


> But i did enjoy this box-set so mutch i would lisen to it very often, so amazon critic sometime is worthless are you whit me on this?
> 
> :tiphat:


yes, I'm with you


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

The "experts" aren't much better, Penguin seem to give everyone three stars (= Amazon 4/5 stars...) This "all shall have prizes" attitude everywhere makes it hard to find the good stuff.


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

Frankly, I never take those comments seriously. I believe my own ears and mind, and the written notes. But the quality complaints are always noteworthy.


----------



## Friendlyneighbourhood (Oct 8, 2016)

Simply ignore reviews and maybe taste test first?


----------



## Mal (Jan 1, 2016)

Not sure about "taste test". I just listened to mono Walter/NYPO/Mahler/1954 which doesn't start as well as Kubelik, so on "taste test principles" I might have rejected it. But the "third ear" Mahler reviewer is quite good (I reckon... even after slamming Kemperer in Mahler 2... ); he said "listen!", so I persevered, and I'm glad I did, it got increasingly better, with an incandescent final movement. So how would a taste test have helped here? I guess you just have to listen to all of everything out there (and then again... and again... your taste might change/improve)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bruckner Anton said:


> Frankly, I never take those comments seriously. I believe my own ears and mind, and the written notes. But the quality complaints are always noteworthy.


I completely agree with you, keep trusting your own instinct and ears.


----------



## rspader (May 14, 2014)

Something that I used to do is check on Amazon to see if others feel the same way about a CD that I have purchased. I came to the realization that this is futile. Who cares what others say if I already own the CD? If I like the CD, it is a 5/5. If I don't like the CD, it is a 1/1. As Pugg says -- trust your own instinct and ears.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

This one kills me (from an Amazon review):



> These Sutherland fanatics (like the Callas and Sills ones) would write ecstatic raves if she belched! I love her too. But a) she was not her typical self in this opera, and b) there ARE other sopranos, you know.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

deprofundis said:


> But i did enjoy this box-set so mutch i would lisen to it very often, so amazon critic sometime is worthless are you whit me on this?


I remember the old conversation from Star Trek. Spock: Captain, why do you keep asking my opinion when you already have your mind made up? Kirk: Peace of mind.

Sometimes reviews are good for peace of mind, but when the decision is to be made, in the end, it's still your mind. Go with what makes it happy.


----------



## deprofundis (Apr 25, 2014)

Manxfeeder said:


> I remember the old conversation from Star Trek. Spock: Captain, why do you keep asking my opinion when you already have your mind made up? Kirk: Peace of mind.
> 
> Sometimes reviews are good for peace of mind, but when the decision is to be made, in the end, it's still your mind. Go with what makes it happy.


Very true sir i acknowledge your statement , thanks for posting ManXfeeder


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

deprofundis said:


> These were my two cents on amazon and there critics, can we trust these guys when it come to review of classical they bought.


I've always considered the Amazon comments useless. The only person you can trust is yourself.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

This is one of those cases where there is a happy medium. Should you listen to all reviews? Of course not. Should you consider and listen to some? Of course you should. How to know the difference? Find reviewers that share your taste in performers. Ones who are very prolific at reviews and have reviewed many recordings that you are familiar and unfamiliar with. Look for those reviewers when you are considering a piece. I have many reviewers who are simpatico with my tastes, and I look for their reviews when I'm looking to purchase a piece of music and have many options.

It takes a few misses to find a good assortment of reviewers who are reliable to your own tastes, but with patience, it pays in the end.

V


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Amazon reviews are pretty much worthless now. There was a time when they would highlight/bump good reviews from reviewers with a reputation and a lot helpful votes. Several reviewers I knew and even had good discussions with like Santa Fe Listener. Now, the order of how the Amazon reviews appears seems to be random, or perhaps the newest ones are listed first. You very rarely see negative or lukewarm reviews on the main page, and it's rare you find intelligent critiques that tries to list the flaws they hear as well as whatever strengths it has and with comparisons to other recordings. 

That said, I don't know if there are any reliable sources for classical music reviews. Most publications seem little more than shills for the labels--it reminds me of "reviews" of audio equipment, which is really just "advertisements for whatever companies support our magazine." ClassicsToday used to have good stuff, but they're subscription-only now and most of their reviews are behind a pay wall. AllMusicGuide reviews a lot of classical, but most everything is 4-5 stars, which makes the whole endeavor of criticism pointless if you're going to suggest that everything is either great or excellent. 

Essentially, I wouldn't pay much mind to reviews, especially on Amazon. If you happen to come across one that seems well-written and insightful, then maybe make it a point to read more reviews from that author, but otherwise don't rely on user ratings or anything else but your ears and perhaps a little luck.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^^^ I used to hate some of the leading Amazon reviewers! They seemed so dogmatic and pompous. Many of them were extremely rude to any fool who risked disagreeing with them. At best they were just telling us their taste. But often you got a very real sense that they were reviewing stuff on a conveyor belt that they had listened to once and, because their main purpose was to write a review (rather than enjoy the music), you got a very real sense that their listening was of the type that involves sitting with pen and paper making notes about their observations - not a perceptive way to listen to music. It is true that the reviews on Amazon are now a mess (after all Amazon is no longer very interested in the selling CDs side of their business) but is no great loss in my opinion.

The idea that the well-written reviews, and the most articulate of the punter-reviewers, were the most useful seems very dubious to me. I don't see why the accuracy and insight of their perceptions can be identified by how well they write. Indeed it is easier to write rubbish, letting the words decide what to say, than to accurately describe what you are feeling.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo (Jan 30, 2016)

Enthusiast said:


> The idea that the well-written reviews, and the most articulate of the punter-reviewers, were the most useful seems very dubious to me. I don't see why the accuracy and insight of their perceptions can be identified by how well they write. Indeed it is easier to write rubbish, letting the words decide what to say, than to accurately describe what you are feeling.


"Useful" is a pretty relative term here. There are only three ways I think criticism can be "useful:" one is what I might call the "probability" effect. If you find a recording that seems almost universally beloved or held up as the standard, then there's a good probability that you will like about it what most people have liked about it. This is by no means a guarantee, but I've found many favorite recordings just by investigating the classics. The other is what I'd call the "personalized" approach where you find reviewers, or even a circle of friends, with whom you share similar tastes with and get suggestions that way. Especially if you find friends with similar tastes you can get to know each other so well that you can say to each other "hey, I think you'd like this or that" and there's a good chance you/they will. The third and final way is finding criticism that's more descriptive/analytical than critical. If you can find reviewers that just describe the way recordings are, often by comparing them to others, then it's often possible to get a decent idea as to whether you'll like it or not. This kind of descriptive writing was a big part of what the better reviewers did well. I could often read them and get a fairly good idea of what a recording was and wasn't, often with copious comparisons. Of course, one can write extremely well about just personal impressions and feelings and reactions to recordings or music, and there can be a kind of value in that as well, but it's much more subjective and relevant to the individual writing it than to the person reading it and trying to decide whether to buy it.


----------



## MatthewWeflen (Jan 24, 2019)

So I am in an interesting position relative to this conversation: I am what I suppose you might call a "professional" Amazon reviewer. That is, I am a part of the "Amazon Vine" program, which means I receive free products from Amazon in exchange for honest reviews. I can review it up or down, good or bad, and that doesn't affect my standing in the program. All that matters is that people find them helpful.

Reviews are definitely sorted on the product page by helpfulness. I know this because I try my best to hit the top of the page on any given product review, and I only ever do when I am in the top 3 in terms of helpful votes. The way to receive helpful votes is to include pictures, be amusing, or to write a thorough, detailed review that is actually useful. For something like a computer or a television, that's pretty easy. Music of course is much more subjective, which is why you find so many "bad" or "pointless" reviews.

On the rare occasion that I review music products (my reviews of the Karajan Beethoven Atmos Blu-Ray and the Karajan 1977 Beethoven CD box set have been deemed particularly helpful), I always try to do a few things. First, I declare my own tastes. Then I judge the recording against my tastes. I offer general comments on the recording quality (hiss, balance, clarity) and then might offer some comparisons to other recordings (if I know of them). I also comment on technical aspects, such as ease of ripping tracks, and price.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Eva Yojimbo said:


> "Useful" is a pretty relative term here. There are only three ways I think criticism can be "useful:" one is what I might call the "probability" effect. If you find a recording that seems almost universally beloved or held up as the standard, then there's a good probability that you will like about it what most people have liked about it. This is by no means a guarantee, but I've found many favorite recordings just by investigating the classics. The other is what I'd call the "personalized" approach where you find reviewers, or even a circle of friends, with whom you share similar tastes with and get suggestions that way. Especially if you find friends with similar tastes you can get to know each other so well that you can say to each other "hey, I think you'd like this or that" and there's a good chance you/they will. The third and final way is finding criticism that's more descriptive/analytical than critical. If you can find reviewers that just describe the way recordings are, often by comparing them to others, then it's often possible to get a decent idea as to whether you'll like it or not. This kind of descriptive writing was a big part of what the better reviewers did well. I could often read them and get a fairly good idea of what a recording was and wasn't, often with copious comparisons. Of course, one can write extremely well about just personal impressions and feelings and reactions to recordings or music, and there can be a kind of value in that as well, but it's much more subjective and relevant to the individual writing it than to the person reading it and trying to decide whether to buy it.


Very learned, Eva, but I'm not sure it addresses what I said. My general point was that _we shouldn't expect a highly articulate and beautifully written review to be more perceptive or "accurate" than one that is less well written _(and perhaps briefer). Obviously there is a bar to cross - writing that is so poor as to be gibberish is obviously unhelpful and writing where the writer is unable to express what he wants to say clearly might also be of limited value. I also made a more specific point about it being much easier for many to write well than to write accurately (about their perceptions) and the danger that they will go with what sounds good rather than what describes their true feelings about the music. I have lost count of the reviews I have read that use puffed up and flowery language only to say (once you have decoded it) very little of substance. You might say that puffed up and flowery writing is not good writing but I have seen on Amazon that it is often reviews like that which attract "like" votes.


----------



## premont (May 7, 2015)

Bulldog said:


> I've always considered the Amazon comments useless. The only person you can trust is yourself.


You can always trust Don's reviews.


----------



## PeterFromLA (Jul 22, 2011)

There were some terrific reviewers at amazon back in the day, folks like autonomeous and Christopher Culver, both of whom were reliable sources for the latest new music cd releases. Since the death of the discussion forum and other take-aways from the site (e.g., the removal of "lists"), the reviewing activity has become sporadic and unreliable.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I take Amazon reviews with a grain of salt. The advantage is that depending on the item, you have a bunch of reviews. I've found them useful in terms of sound quality, if reviewers agree that its not good, then I am unlikely to consider purchasing the item. 

Judgement of other things, interpretation in particular, is more subjective. I can't take seriously extreme responses to a particular interpretation - e.g. its total rubbish or its exactly like the composer would have wanted his music to be heard. If a reviewer makes comparisons with other recordings and gives reasons for his or her opinions, then I'm more likely to take notice. 

Having said that, sometimes the reason why a reviewer dislikes a particular interpretation is the reason why I like it. To give an example, I remember reading a review of Brahms' sextets on Naxos and the main criticism was that the interpretation lacked bite and sounded more like Faure than Brahms. I still purchased the disc and have never regretted doing so. I like the more easy going approach of this interpretation - surprisingly by a German group from Stuttgart - even though I had a more straightforward interp of the same music on tape done by the Amadeus Quartet and guests. As the saying goes, one man's trash is another man's treasure.


----------

