|
Visit my review web site wont ya
|
View this Thread in Original format
| filipgaliza |
The low down... I am 31, been listening to trance/electronica for 16 yrs now, have over 1,000cds, load of mds, tapes and I realized I need to start writing all this stuff up.
So I came up with my little site: http://www.trance-reviews.com
Its brutal, its honest, it slams a lot of talent that others might like, but having the ear I have, I am a picky bastard. I only started this almost a year ago so I am writing my thoughts on all the stuff that I relistened to.
Anyway I invite you to check it out. I have a feeling u might learn about some gems that are available in used CD stores for dirt cheap that deserve a lot more listen to then 80% of the stuff coming out.
Let me know what u think.
Grumpy Middle Age Geezer |
|
|
| Sykonee |
Layout looks quite familiar.:p
Seems to be a decent selection of trance to check out across the spectrum, with some other token styles thrown in. The reviews are kind of short, though, even for capsules. I personally like a little more depth in the reviews I read. |
|
|
| PersianMafia |
I'm giving honest critism here, for your own sake:
I'd rethink the organization. You have DJ Mixes in your album section, which is a big no no. Also some of your genre decisions are downright controversial. Putting Balance 8 in a trance section is insulting to any house fan. The closest that cd gets to trance is maybe the orbital track. You also seemed to the use the genre "deep house" out of context in numerous areas.
You also need to give better reasons for liking/disliking a CD. You're a review site afterall. Review the cd properly. Not just parts of it. From the reviews, you don't seem much of a house fan. Why review housey cds; it defies logic. If you're gonna review a house CD, do it unbiasedly. Also you need to grammar check everything, make your sentences sound nice and use attractive vocab. Don't let it sound like you're some 13 year-old writing a couple of sentences about all the mp3ed cds you've downloaded over the last week.
Last thing: The reader prefers quality over quantity. I'd rather see your site with 20 insightful, complete CD reviews (pro/con) rather than 200 1-paragraph-half-ass-jobs.
Other than that keep it! |
|
|
| DragonZ911 |
For layout etc..
Its easy on the eyes.
Easy to navigate.
however, your top banner is pretty lacking.
That bevel & drop shadow combination looks like somoene was screwing around with the text effects option in photoshop ;)
You ought to fix that. |
|
|
| spc |
heheheh.. look at his review for Balance 008
| quote: | It hurts to write a review for a house cd on a trance site but because a very good share of Balance material has been trance (now called progressive or deep house) I felt I should write a few things for those who are trance junkies like me.
Other then about 25 minutes of some trancey tunes on disc two, this whole thing was BAD. I mean cheezy vocals, cheezy lyrics, just plain lame.
Don't expect this to be like the other Balance series, trancey and progressive. This is pure vocal crap that hurts to listen to. F |
:haha: :haha: |
|
|
| UWM |
| It's obvious by that review and the review of the Seaman/Chable Renassiance disc that you should stop reviewing anything house. |
|
|
| s0UThErN^sUn |
| like hell you've been listening to trance for 16 years |
|
|
| dj christian |
erhmmh....
Progressive: Dumonde:whip: Live at NYE 05 (2006/2/23) PROGRESSIVE???
Progressive: Armin Van Buuren:whip: - In Motion (2006/3/6) PROGRESSIVE???
Trance: Orb- Orblivion (2006/1/5) TRANCE???? LOL:haha:
You may or should correct that misleading information, and i agree with s0UThErN^sUn there's no way you have listened for Trance in the last 16 years other than that the site has a nice and clean layout but it's maybe a bit dull perhaps and lacking alot of info. |
|
|
|
|
