* WARNING: THIS PAGE IS SOMEWHAT OBSOLETE *
CLICK HERE FOR THE ALBUM REVIEW LIST BY AUTHOR
(website creator and editor)
Inspired to create this web site by a variety of sites like All Music Guide and Mark Prindle's page, as well as of course the comprehensive book called The Collector's Guide To Heavy Metal by Martin Popoff, Nick Karn originally created a site composed of albums he reviewed on his own called The Freak Music Guide, which originally made its debut in January of 1999, but wishing to expand his reviews on the site in greater detail, adding more features and easier navigation (including interactivity, band biographies, and a more convenient main band page as well as more colorful backgrounds as opposed to the dull green and blue of the old site) and other sorts of kind of important information to create the new site, Music Junkies Anonymous.
(contributing staff writer)
Casey Brennan first jumped aboard as the first outside reviewer for this site, having over 500 CDs in his collection, featuring a great deal of them 60s and 70s gems. He is determined to review them all from A to Z, and it's getting there. There was originally having a separate section for his reviews, but that section has now been merged with the main page. So check out his invaluable words on many of the greatest classic rock albums of all time within this site, which are getting longer and longer from previously short reviews (just like mine). Really neat song-oriented analyses and great background information on the particular bands he's covering are some of the strengths of his reviews. A nice sense of humor comes through them too.
(contributing staff writer)
Another self-described 'obsessive-compulsive music buyer' who owns over 250 CDs that volunteered to be an occasional contributor to this site, and contribute he did. For his initiation review, he did Jethro Tull's Minstrel In The Gallery, and the next day he sent me 24 more reviews of almost all their other albums.. pretty darn impressive. Since then, his output has been fairly prolific and wonderfully diverse, covering just about as much ground as anyone, covering classic rock, punk, progressive, metal and industrial among others. He's one of those reviewers who can go for months without reviewing and without warning get in that mood and start writing like mad. Check out his insights on Tull, Zappa and The Who in particular.
REVIEWER BIO:
Well, first things first - I was born on February 17, 1983 (so now you have no excuse for not sending me birthday presents). Loved music from the time I was born - my sister saturated me with the Moody Blues and Steven Stills, my dad saturated me with John Prine, and my brother saturated me with the Dead Kennedys and the Sex Pistols. So, as you can imagine, my musical tastes are pretty diverse. Plus, I'm willing to give any kind of music a try. I hit up pawn shops all the time trying to find a new band to try to get into. Sometimes these searches end in glorious success (Type O Negative), but sometimes they end in dismal failure (Phil Collins solo records). I guess you could say that my favorite style of music is prog rock, but that wouldn't really be true, since, like I said, I really do like just about ALL types of music at least some.
Well, now that I have the music stuff out of the way, here's a little more about me (so if you wanna hear more about my musical tastes, quit reading for now). I'm a geek, first of all. A hopeless one at that. Needless to say, I'm not exactly adept at dealing with the opposite sex, but no worries. I got Genesis albums! Woohoo! I like reading, though I don't read as much as I should. Fantasy/Sci-Fi books are probably my favorite types of reading (seeing as how I'm a geek and all), but I like other stuff, too. Wuthering Heights is probably my favorite book, if that tells you anything. Go Emily Bronte! And, of course, I like television (or at least some television). My favorite show is the immortal, brilliant Mystery Science Theater 3000, which, if you don't know, is all about mocking bad movies. It sounds simple and dumb, I know, but the writers for that show have style, and lots of it. So when they make fun of, say, bad Japanese dubbing, they can make you laugh hard with their combination of zany pop (or not-so-pop) culture reference, zany non-sequitors, and occasional downright cruelty. I've seen every episode of the Simpsons about a hundred times, of course (even though the last couple of seasons have, for lack of a better word, sucked), and I tape Futurama weekly. And, of course, Seinfeld. George Costanza is my hero (which might explain my failings in life... oh well).
I'm a very very VERY nervous, shy person. I'm terrified of people, to tell you the truth. Hence I'm very, very quiet around people I don't know (though good luck getting me to shut up around my friends). Though I'm shy, I still love talking to people and communication in general, so send me an e-mail sometime, and if you wanna talk about something (music related or not), ask me for my AOL Instant Messanger screen name, and you shall receive. C'mon, people, chat me up sometime! I won't bite. Unless you ask me to.
So, that's me in a nutshell. I hope you payed attention, because there will be a quiz later. OK, not really. But if there was, do you think you'd pass it? Be honest with yourself. Then forget about it, because it's a hypothetical question. Then go eat a cookie. Cookies are good, and you've earned one. Go on, don't be afraid! Eat the cookie!
(contributing staff writer)
A great fan of metal and progressive rock, here's a popular name among the reader comments world (especially at John McFerrin's site). A lot of the notables eventually turn into reviewers - he's also got a few pages at the Prindle site as well, but what's really impressive is how prolific a reviewer he's gotten in the last few months, tackling everyone from Yes to Iron Maiden to Sesame Street records. Check out the April 2001 updates page in particular to see how eclectic his selection is. Very amusing style too, particularly on his Yes page, which is a (maybe unintentionally?) humorous goldmine.
(contributing staff writer)
As you may have noticed in the links section before, Pat D. originally had a music review site that hardly got any visitors, so he decided to move all the reviews he's done over to this site, which is both convenient and kind of flattering. He definitely brings a distinctive style to the table, which is always great, and he's also a good emphasizer of an album's good or bad production values and knows a good, catchy riff when he hears one. Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to want to review much anymore, but a lot of his writings have interesting perspectives on the albums he reviews.
REVIEWER BIO:
Well, several months after Nick asked me to, I decided to write a little diddy about who I am and where I'm coming from in my reviews. Oh shit, that means I have to write a song. Okay, scratch that diddy idea.
The thing(s) I think you need to know about my reviewing stance is that I dont give a shit about how influential or historically important a band/artist is. All too often i find when going into either back catalogs of an artist, or earlier music, is that the music they put out either doesnt hold up well today, or is extremely inconsistant or inconsiquential nowadays. The few REALLY great artists in the past (i.e. early Beatles, early/mid stones, Doors, etc) made music that stands on its own, and would be considered great even if they hadn't influenced just about every rock band to follow. I dont know about anybody else, but my opinion is you shouldn't HAVE to like a band just because somebody says they are historically important. Unfortunately, there are a lot of critics out there who rate things that way, and I cant tell you how much it pisses me off.
That's really all you need to know about me and my writing style. Obviously, no matter how I try to be unbiased, my preference for music (metal, hard rock, technical rock) will affect my judgements of an album. I dont think any reviewer can claim otherwise, and if he does, well then, he's a liar. Not to be a kissass or anything, but Nick is one of the closest to complete objectivity on the net. Not Mark Prindle, not John McFerrin, not (insert amateur critic with undervisited website here).
Finally, if any of you care, i'm 23 and go to Meathead State....erm....I mean Albany State (more commonly known as SUNY-Albany). Born in Chicago, IL on July 15, 1978. Moved to Yorktown, NY at the age of 1 and have lived there most of my life. I build computers in my spare time and also am a big computer hardware enthusiast. Oh yeah, and I also like that music stuff. You know what i'm talking about. Now, if I only had some dough for music now that Napster bit the big one (Thank you, Mr.Ulrich), you might see some more reviews from me.
Also, I'd like to add a little "audio setup" thingie to give you an idea what I'm hearing since I'm always commenting on mixes and sound quality and shit.
Home: Receiver/Amp- Harman/Kardon HK3270 Stereo Speakers- (2)Infinity Entra Two Tower Speakers (A Channel); (2)Yamaha NS-A638 (B Channel)Subwoofer (just added)- Sony SA-WM40CD Player (just changed)- Technics SL-PD9DVD- Sony Playstation 2 (used for DVD viewing)
Turntable- Technics SL-1200MK2 with Audio/Technica cartTape Deck- Sony TC-KE400SSchool:Logitech Z-560 speaker system and Sound Blaster Live Value.
(contributing staff writer)
Rich Bunnell is a name you might know from the infamous Mark Prindle Record Reviews site, and he's volunteered to contribute full length reviews that other people on that site beat him to, such as Oingo Boingo and Blur, or bands/artists that are just among his favorite like The Police and Talking Heads. This 80s pop aspect is a style not too often covered on this site, so it's good to have someone who brings knowledge of that genre to the table - plus, his reviews have a great sense of humor to them. Cool to see he's helping out in the wake of his Prindle site maintenance.
(contributing staff writer)
Joining to try and fill some of the many, many gaps this album-oriented site has in order to become more of a band-oriented one, Samuel seems to be interested in a lot of 60's and 70's classic rock albums and artists, including some of the more less-covered artists on review sits like Bruce Cockburn and Jackson Browne. It's neat how he lets a little bit of his experiences into his writing style.
REVIEWER BIO:
Background: I'm 39, I'm male, and I live in California, that's what you need to know about me. I'm really like the mid-career Michael Jordan here, trying his hand at baseball by enlisting with any team that will give me a try. I'm out of my field but I need the practice. My best suit as a writer is ideology critique or, more specifically, social theory. I'm familiar with sociology, semiotics, political theory, educational theory, philosophy, ethnography, futurology. If you want to chat with me in that way, come visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecosocialism . I'm not really like Theodor Adorno, who did ideological critique of music while being an experienced pianist. I don't really have a piano, though I may get a guitar over the summer if I have any money to budget.
Approach: I'm not strong on the technical details of music. But I do think I have a feeling for what's special about the music of the 1960s and early 1970s. I make up for my inadequacies by looking at the psychology of the listener. My own perspective upon music seems to agree with George Starostin's essay at (http://starling.rinet.ru/music/essay1.htm ) -- only I tend to go further and argue that the musical high moments of that era were also the culmination of Keynesian economics, and that the current era of monetarist elitism hasn't produced anything comparable in terms of great musical innovation. In short, I'm arguing that the society that based itself upon consumer optimism, the supporting doctrine of Keynesian economics, also produced the most innovative musicians. Or at least I'm exploring the possibility that there might be a connection between economics and music, since I've made the connection between economics and psychology.
I'm also a partisan of the politicized music of the 1980s, of the short list in my review of Jackson Browne's World In Motion. The 1980s were indeed a period of Keynesian economics, but they were a period of upper-middle-class economics, of $72,000/ year jobs building bombs in San Diego, and so the sum effect of such an economics was to maintain the global supremacy of the dollar while pooling the money in Wall Street. See http://www.prospect.org/print/V6/22/wolff-e.html and http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/Wealth_distrib.html . Those who knew what was going on at the time produced music of often violent critical energy, though at the same time I'm resisting the 1980s fad of bad synthesizers that permeates some of those albums.
My own perspective upon the mainstream political scene and its effect upon music tends to be more supportive of such perspectives as they are advocated in "classic rock," more specifically "classic folk-rock" (although I do like Led Zeppelin and Jimi Hendrix) rather than punk (although I do stand in solidarity with groups such as Crass), and is given in greatest intensity in my review of Joni Mitchell's Ladies Of The Canyon. In Starostin's argument, the fusion of 'serious' music and mass culture is what distinguishes the music of the 1960s: I also see that the 1960s inaugured the popularization of (pretechnological) "folk music" under the conditions of technological ("mass") society. In such a history, people such as Pete Seeger stand out -- Seeger was a scholar of music and a reinventor and synthesizer of global "folk traditions," esp. through his quartet The Weavers. This trend continues under post-1960s conditions through the synthesis of "world beat," the incorporation of new types of "folk" and their music, through musicians like Peter Gabriel and David Byrne and Paul Simon, Bob Marley and Tish Hinojosa and Youssou N'Dour and Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan. I love that name, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan.
I guess that someday I would like to review my more complex musical superheroes, but I don't really feel competent to say what it is they really do, esp. as concerns the later John Coltrane, whose stuff is beyond reproach. I would give all the albums 9's or 10's, and my explanations would be such nonsense that people would buy the albums and then blame me because they didn't understand what it was that makes pieces like "First Meditations" and "Stellar Regions" so incredible. This doubtless applies to all of the classics of jazz, from Charlie ("Bird") Parker to Miles Davis to Eric Dolphy to stuff like Roland Kirk's Volunteered Slavery. These efforts are, for the most part, from guess when? That's right, they're from the 1960s, though Bird's peak period was the '50s and Miles' Kind Of Blue was from 1959. I'm just not good enough yet.
(contributing staff writer)
Hmm... someone who's got the guts to take on that much reviled Styx band in his introductory batch of reviews, eh? But this is as good a site as any to take on that kind of stuff, with a good interest in other 70's prog/art rock bands to boot, not to mention writing the best analysis of Pink Floyd's Meddle I've ever read. Very entertaining and exciting style, although maybe a bit too 'fucking' excited at some points.
REVIEWER BIO:
Well, there's not much to me, I guess. I'm 20 (almost 21!), a student in New Orleans for 9 months, and a lazy sonofabitch for the 3 summer months. Grtting my degree in Music education, I play the piano, bowl, and listen to music. My "genre of the year" is progressive rock with a splash of AOR, as you can see by the stuff I review. My favorite bands of the genre are Yes and ELP. Still haven't gotten into prog in-depth, but I'm getting there. I'm starting to get an interest in psychedelic rock as well, so expect some more Pink Floyd reviews and some other fellows, perhaps Jefferson Airplane, from me.
My rating of albums is pretty basic. 0 through 10, but i do let band bias show. My first review was Styx's self-titled album, and no matter how much it sucked, I still gave it a 4 because I like Styx. Yeah, I like Styx - got a problem with that? Also, I tend to be overly critical of sacred cows (see my Dark Side of the Moon review). At any rate, a bad album, depending on how bad, will get 0 through 4, a mediocre one will get 5 or 6, a good one will get 7 or 8, an awesome one will get 9, and 10's will be for what I consider to be perfect albums - no weak points in the songwriting, or a pinnacle for the band. I don't subscribe to the idea of one 10 per band; I have no problem with giving more than one 10 (I gave Close to the Edge a 10 and will probably give Fragile a 10 when I review it) if they are deserved.
(contributing staff writer)
Isn't it weird how pretty much everyone who reviews here is either huge on classic rock or metal? Well this is another reviewer from the first group whose reviews are well-done in a short, to the point fashion, with good insights along the way. He seems to have a good interest in 60's and 70's artists people don't really talk about as much, such as The Faces and The Pretty Things.
(contributing staff writer)
So, just who am I? I'm Kevin Baker, a Texas libertarian Christian guitarist rockfan. And yes ladies, I'm single. I'm probably the youngest reviewer on the site, being but a mere teenager who'll be 17 on 2-19-02. I'm currently a junior in high school (1st in my class..or maybe 2nd. Who cares?), and I'd kill to attend Tulane or Columbia. I write a lot, and I write all sorts of things. I'm a poet, a short story writer, a speechwriter, and suchforth....but I have the most fun reviewing music. I write not because I feel I have any "earth-shattering" opinions on music, but because I like to write about stuff I like. And I like music. A lot. My style? Heh, beats me...I just put stuff down and let you figure it out.
You're most likely to see a real mixed bag of political opinions, love-life anguish, etc. in my older reviews, BUT I'm trying to get past that. Of course, I think integrating oddball little snippets of my life beyond the WRC is a great thing, but no point in being a ninny. So in short, less C-Span and more Reese Witherspoon.
Musically, I like all sorts of stuff, though I will admit a certain love for any music that shows mastership of hooks. So, prog-rock, kraut-rock, and most other more avant-garde genres really don't do it for me. ;Age is no determinant for my love of the music; I don't care if it's from 1956 or 1996---if it's good, then it's good dangit!
OK, I've bored you enough. Go read my reviews so I can bore you some more! Oh, and any lavishings of praise, hatemail, death threats, love letters, bios w/pics, etc. can be sent to me at [email protected] or [email protected].
Also, feel free to contact me via the following insant messenging services!
ICQ---my number is 128246642
AIM---my sn is MobyReginald
MSN---my email addy to look me up by is [email protected]
Fredrik Tydal
(contributing staff writer)
Formerly a prominent reader commentator (particularly on George Starostin's site), Fredriik Tydal apparently wanted to try his hand at reviewing here (he's particularly familiar with major classic rock bands), and so far, he's provided quite a bit of great insight on his pages for The Grateful Dead. Hopefully there will be more to come from here.
(contributing staff writer)
One of those names you might now if you're a frequent visitor to George Starostin's site, as Jeff is a very frequent album commentator there, offering long-winded, but very very striking insights on albums, first demonstrating that here on this site's Radiohead page with his album comments and reviews of two EPs. Hopefully we'll see more of his output in the future.
(contributing staff writer)
Another one of those reviewers who has submitted reader reviews on the Prindle site you may have seen that has expressed interest in becoming a staff member here. Throughout his unhealthy obsession with 9's, we get another partner in this site's quest to take over the web reviewing world, offering some interesting background on the albums on the site he reviews.
REVIEWER BIO:
Alright, well I'm 17 years old and live in Lake Charles, Louisiana. I've been a music fan forever and I can remember listening to The Beatles' "Rocky Raccoon" and "Back In The USSR" when I was just a few years old. I was only around 9 when I developed my taste for the harder side of music and my favorite bands back then were Metallica, Nirvana, and Bon Jovi. That love of hard music has never really left me, but since then I've broadened my tastes considerably. There is not one style or genre that I can't find something to like in, and this includes stuff that a lot of people put down (country, rap, pop). That's not the type of music I generally spend my money on, but I refuse to dismiss any genre as a whole. So what DO I spend my money on? Well, I love things that are different, which means I like "experimental" music, and I like music that tries to expand the boundaries of whatever style it may be in. I especially like it when bands put together different styles of music that normally wouldn't go together. I'm a burgeoning classic rock fan as well, and I have a particular liking for The Who. Other "classic" bands and artists I enjoy are The Beatles (who doesn't?), Dylan, Zeppelin, and all the prog bands of the early 70's. There are a number of artists from the 60's/70's era I haven't gotten to yet, like the Stones, but I will in due time. Also, as I said before, I like hard music, so you'll find plenty of that in my collection too. Other favorite artists Tool and Mr. Bungle but I listen to so many different bands and styles that I don't have a stable set of favorites.
Okay, on to how I review. Well, I use the 1-10 scale of course, but I'll be honest, I don't really like ratings. Ratings make me sum up all my feelings of an album in a number, and I don't think I can do that with complete accuracy. I also feel that ratings may give readers false impressions of my opinion, because most people already have what each number means ingrained in their mind, but what I think that number means and what they think that number means might be completely different. On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit that giving out ratings can be fun and in many ways it does help to sum up my reviews. My criteria for rating really boils down to how much I like the album. All the other things come into play on why I like the album (originality, whatever else), but in the end it's "Do I like this album?" and "How much do I like this album?", then I'll try to explain why.
(contributing staff writer)
Yet another one of this site's many metal fan contributors, Kevin seems to have a tremendous liking for Slayer, judging by his introductory reviews for said thrash metal pioneers and another unknown but apparently great band in Incantation. Let's hope more of his work comes along.
(contributing staff writer)
Alex has been one of the most prominent names lately as far as 'reader comments' go, and now he's expressed an interest in becoming a contributing staff writer for the site, attempting to fill in even more of the many gaps this site has band/artist and album wise.
(contributing staff writer)
A classic rock fan, Seth's interest in reviewing for this site grew out of a desire to expand the currently very small Rolling Stones page here. Let's hope there's more where that came from, as so far his writing style looks fairly detailed and immaculate.
(contributing staff writer)
Another name I recognize from the Mark Prindle and George Starostin sites from glancing at reader comments on their pages, and he's got his own review site as well. Contributed the first of many reviews on The Who's brilliant Quadrophenia.
(contributing staff writer)
Ryan sent me a review for Bob Dylan's classic Blonde On Blonde, which can also be seen on the recently linked Classic Albums site. Apparently he's starting his own review site this summer, and I wish him well on that.
(contributing staff writer)
Offered a review of The Manic Street Preachers' Generation Terrorists.
(contributing staff writer)
Offered a review of Radiohead's Kid A.