Reviews of "Alive" from media, Post reviews here Options

[Sakhmet2]

I honestly think there are less bad Ed reviews than their should be as unless you're already warm to him then to the average joe blow he's not worth writing a review over if you think nothing of it. He's not a big enough name to garner attention from people who would take the time over him to write a negative review. This could also ring true for TGF too. If Live got back together for example and made another shit album like SFBM then there would be more negative reviews for that then both Alive and TGF's negative reviews combined. So i think unless you're really someone major, the positive reviews will always outweigh the negative.

Are you shitting me? Do you actually believe this?

[Pokey]

Are you shitting me? Do you actually believe this?

Well yeah, think about it. If U2 release an album (just as an example) then it's a pretty major deal (god knows why, they're shit) but it's going to get a lot more coverage from people who are just there to review whatever is on the table, be it positive or negative. If bands with lesser notoriety make a release then they are generally going to be getting less reviews than a band with a larger release due to slipping under the radar. Sure your average reviewer for major publishing sourses will review it but you gotta figure for the most part it's gonna be people who are looking out for the release and that are in the know about said artist that will review it. Just a numbers game. And I'm sure the people doing that are more likely to put their time into something that they like than don't like. Hence more positive than negative reviews. This isn't a pick on Ed, like I said it would go for TGF too.
It's just a theory, but it holds as much water as anything Nick's come up with

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Well yeah, think about it. If U2 release an album (just as an example) then it's a pretty major deal (god knows why, they're shit) but it's going to get a lot more coverage from people who are just there to review whatever is on the table, be it positive or negative. If bands with lesser notoriety make a release then they are generally going to be getting less reviews than a band with a larger release due to slipping under the radar. Sure your average reviewer for major publishing sourses will review it but you gotta figure for the most part it's gonna be people who are looking out for the release and that are in the know about said artist that will review it. Just a numbers game. And I'm sure the people doing that are more likely to put their time into something that they like than don't like. Hence more positive than negative reviews. This isn't a pick on Ed, like I said it would go for TGF too.
It's just a theory, but it holds as much water as anything Nick's come up with

Usually web writers and bloggists get to pick what they review (even if they partner with a label) so this is actually fairly accurate.

Ed hasn't really been reviewed by a major site yet, so that would be interesting.

[Sakhmet2]

Usually web writers and bloggists get to pick what they review (even if they partner with a label) so this is actually fairly accurate.

In my youth I knew someone who had worked for a few places writing reviews in hc. They didn't get to choose. If what you say is true, it must be quite different in the blogosphere.

I'm still dubious. I came across a review of Alive the other day that excoriated classic Live even more than it did Ed: http://www.blackbookmag.com/article/live-t...s-sort-of/21434
So you're telling me this asshole fuckwit pompous pindick reviewer *chose* to review Ed so he could shit on the band?

This post has been edited by Sakhmet2: Aug 16 2010, 2:36 pm

[Nobody Knows]

In my youth I knew someone who had worked for a few places writing reviews in hc. They didn't get to choose. If what you say is true, it must be quite different in the blogosphere.

I'm still dubious. I came across a review of Alive the other day that excoriated classic Live even more than it did Ed: http://www.blackbookmag.com/article/live-t...s-sort-of/21434
So you're telling me this asshole fuckwit pompous pindick reviewer *chose* to review Ed so he could shit on the band?

That reviewer is a shithead.

[SecretInsomnia]

http://music.is-amazing.com/2010/07/8/ed-k...czyk-alive-2010

It’s certainly possible that the title of Ed Kowalczyk’s first solo album is a pun on his status as an former member of Live — he’s “A Live” on his own now — but given his fondness for sincerity, it’s unlikely. Kowalczyk doesn’t like to obscure his point, he likes to emphasize it, a sensibility that extends to his arrangements, which never rely on one guitar when five could do…which is all the better when he’s writing about big themes, which he does throughout 'Alive'. This isn’t a new wrinkle since Live always was one of U2’s most earnest disciples, making big music out of big issues, to the extent of treating the personal as a cataclysmic event. They lost a bit of that rock & roll messiah complex toward the end of their run, but Kowalczyk brings it back big time here and he’s the better for it, sounding reinvigorated, or at least louder, throughout the bulk of 'Alive'. This is the biggest, boldest music he’s made since 'Throwing Copper', lacking the overheated hard rock poses of Live’s albums immediately following that blockbuster, and feeling simpler than their otherwise admirable Live finale 'Songs from Black Mountain'. The big difference is, there aren’t skyscraping hooks here, only unfettered passion and sincerity, the eternal Kowalczyk trademarks that now get to burn brighter now that he’s on his own.

That reviewer must not know there was music after TC. Ha.


Everyone who says that Alive by Eddie K is better then anything after TC, has very, very clearly never listened a second of SS, TDTH, or even V and BoP. Period.

[LivesMeltdown]

That reviewer must not know there was music after TC. Ha.
Everyone who says that Alive by Eddie K is better then anything after TC, has very, very clearly never listened a second of SS, TDTH, or even V and BoP. Period.

So, are you saying is everyone must have the same opinion? While I do not agree that 'Alive' is Ed's best work since Throwing Copper, believe it or not some people may actually like it more than some of Live's earlier work. As shocking as it sounds, some people do not like 'Secret Samadhi' or 'The Distance to Here'. Because people like something different (which is against the norm) that doesn't mean that he has "very, very, clearly never listened" to the other music...it means that person just has different tastes and enjoys different albums.

[thefunkyredcaboose]

In my youth I knew someone who had worked for a few places writing reviews in hc. They didn't get to choose. If what you say is true, it must be quite different in the blogosphere.

I'm still dubious. I came across a review of Alive the other day that excoriated classic Live even more than it did Ed: http://www.blackbookmag.com/article/live-t...s-sort-of/21434
So you're telling me this asshole fuckwit pompous pindick reviewer *chose* to review Ed so he could shit on the band?

Policy may vary from website to website, but most of them that I've worked let their writers choose, ESPECIALLY with independent albums like Ed's.

I wrote for a site that wrote reviews for artists on Warner Bros. WB would send us a list of products that we got to choose from based on our site's readers and even our own personal taste. Yes, some of my fellow writers would choose things just to crap on them, and Warner Bros. approved them. There is no such thing as bad publicity.

Now, if an album comes out such as U2, Lady Gaga, whatnot, then websites will have to review it if they want to stay relevant. I doubt that is a concern with the Eddie K album, unfortunately.

[thefunkyredcaboose]

http://music.is-amazing.com/2010/07/8/ed-k...czyk-alive-2010

It’s certainly possible that the title of Ed Kowalczyk’s first solo album is a pun on his status as an former member of Live — he’s “A Live” on his own now — but given his fondness for sincerity, it’s unlikely. Kowalczyk doesn’t like to obscure his point, he likes to emphasize it, a sensibility that extends to his arrangements, which never rely on one guitar when five could do…which is all the better when he’s writing about big themes, which he does throughout 'Alive'. This isn’t a new wrinkle since Live always was one of U2’s most earnest disciples, making big music out of big issues, to the extent of treating the personal as a cataclysmic event. They lost a bit of that rock & roll messiah complex toward the end of their run, but Kowalczyk brings it back big time here and he’s the better for it, sounding reinvigorated, or at least louder, throughout the bulk of 'Alive'. This is the biggest, boldest music he’s made since 'Throwing Copper', lacking the overheated hard rock poses of Live’s albums immediately following that blockbuster, and feeling simpler than their otherwise admirable Live finale 'Songs from Black Mountain'. The big difference is, there aren’t skyscraping hooks here, only unfettered passion and sincerity, the eternal Kowalczyk trademarks that now get to burn brighter now that he’s on his own.

This reviewer needs an editor, a brain might help too.

[SecretInsomnia]

So, are you saying is everyone must have the same opinion? While I do not agree that 'Alive' is Ed's best work since Throwing Copper, believe it or not some people may actually like it more than some of Live's earlier work. As shocking as it sounds, some people do not like 'Secret Samadhi' or 'The Distance to Here'. Because people like something different (which is against the norm) that doesn't mean that he has "very, very, clearly never listened" to the other music...it means that person just has different tastes and enjoys different albums.

Oh no, I certainly don't want everyone to have the same opinion. I just can't believe that someone who listened to SS or TDTH for example - which this reviewer clearly didn't or maybe only listen to the singles off it - say it's not as good as Alive, which is on several points just weaker. This has nothing to do with taste (yes in my opinion).

I can enjoy Alive at some moments as well, and I don't say it's a bad album. And sure, people can LIKE Alive more than Live's earlier work. But I doubt if many of them are Live-fans (more likly fans of the so called Daughtry-genre, for lack of a better discription). Alive is just not BETTER then what 4 talent musicians created together in the 90ies. You must agree on that with me?

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Oh no, I certainly don't want everyone to have the same opinion. I just can't believe that someone who listened to SS or TDTH for example - which this reviewer clearly didn't or maybe only listen to the singles off it - say it's not as good as Alive, which is on several points just weaker. This has nothing to do with taste (yes in my opinion).

I can enjoy Alive at some moments as well, and I don't say it's a bad album. And sure, people can LIKE Alive more than Live's earlier work. But I doubt if many of them are Live-fans (more likly fans of the so called Daughtry-genre, for lack of a better discription). Alive is just not BETTER then what 4 talent musicians created together in the 90ies. You must agree on that with me?

I could make an objective case for why SS and TDTH are much better crafted music than Alive. That doesn't mean people will enjoy them more, though.

[Hoodstock]

I echo this sentiment. I really believe Ed still has it in him to write good music somewhere. He needs to feel failure's harsh touch in the fullest way possible before he breaks down and opens his eastern philosophy books again.

I also don't think he can continue down the blatantly christian road with the current trends away from religion in america.

I hope the feedback he see's is a good kick in the ass to get back to pre V writing. Problem is I think that giant ego he's got will completely cushion the blow!

[thefunkyredcaboose]

I hope the feedback he see's is a good kick in the ass to get back to pre V writing. Problem is I think that giant ego he's got will completely cushion the blow!

It'll also be difficult for him to get back to pre-V writing without the 3 guys helping him write the music.

[Hoodstock]

It'll also be difficult for him to get back to pre-V writing without the 3 guys helping him write the music.

Ya, especially since he hasn't let them really write music with him for years.

[jclive]

I hope the feedback he see's is a good kick in the ass to get back to pre V writing. Problem is I think that giant ego he's got will completely cushion the blow!

Its his music, his decisions, not ours. I dont care if the man decides to write a book of hymns and goes to work for the local mega-church. If I like his work, I'll listen to it. If not, then at least I still have the old stuff.