When the authors start practicing in the genre of music reviews, they do not use the set standards; they try to describe the music (and often in non-musical terms, which is why crazy phrases like “aggressively entered into” constantly appear in the text.
Another problem is that, in the opinion of most novice authors, the review should sound pretentious, sometimes scientific, and ponderous.
But the review is not a slanderous essay; it is a text that should help make a decision regarding the described album or single: listen to it or pay attention to something else. If you don’t know how to do it right, it is better to get help from a reliable essay-writing service like https://essayshark.com/. An essay sample will teach you how to write high-quality music reviews.
How to interest the reader
If the author is a graphomaniac, the review is their way of self-expression and communication with the world. They choose something rare for analysis and demonstrate their refined taste. If the author wants to help their addressee to listen to this or that disk, they must explain themselves clearly and must interest the reader so that they read the text to the end.
We will talk about graphomaniacs some other time; today, we will talk about how reviews that are useful to the reader are created. They do not always have to be neutral because the reader often likes to see an opponent in the author and internally argue with them, and if a particular famous person scolds a work of art, and their reader usually disagrees with this author, they can get acquainted with an album or book on the contrary.
Today I’m going to talk about some of the essentials to create a competitive product for quality publications that systematically write about pop culture.
Two conditions for creating a review
I have my two most important personal rules, which I always use so that the review remains in the reader’s memory and is not one-time. I use them so that readers return to a review not only as a source of delirium but as an informational note that clearly describes this or that case.
Condition number 1
From the review, it should be clear what kind of artist is in front of the reader. You need to assume that the reader does not know anything about the subject that you are describing. That is why the first five lines (or two sentences, if you feel comfortable thinking in such volumes) devote the presentation. Tell a reader about the artist, what period they are in, what they are famous for, and what their new work means in the context of their entire career.
Condition number 2
It is necessary that your review (like any text in principle) sound good to the ear. Reading aloud cleans your text from unnecessary, unhealthy phrases (including gerunds), the number of nonsense in the text after you read the note from the printed sheet with an expression (you can see errors on paper one and a half times more than on the screen) will decrease by about three times.
Subsequently, you will understand that dramatic pauses are possible within the text; you can control the mood of the reader, speed up and slow down. And ease of handling the internal dynamics of the text means more than stuffy beautiful adjectives, which editors usually remove first when shortening the text.
Tips for writing a music review
Let’s summarize all of the above in the form of specific tips.
- Be clearer
Most novice authors mistakenly believe that a review should sound pretentious, sometimes scientific and ponderous. For such authors, a review is a way of self-expression, of demonstrating their refined taste. Trying to describe music in non-musical terms is not worth it. Because of this, crazy phrases like “aggressively entered into” constantly appear in the text.
- Try to benefit the reader
The author of the review is obliged to interest their reader so that they read the text to the end and perceives it not as a source of the author’s nonsense but as an informational note. And most importantly, the review should help to make a decision: listen to this album or not.
- Speak your opinion, even if it is controversial
A good review doesn’t have to be neutral. The reader likes to see an opponent in the author and internally argue with them. If a particular famous person scolds a work of art, and their addressee usually does not agree with this author, they can get acquainted with the album or book “on the contrary.”
- Make it clear what kind of artist is in front of the reader
You need to assume that your reader does not know anything about the subject that you are describing. Therefore, devote the first five lines (or two sentences) to the presentation. Tell them about the artist: what period they are in, what they are famous for, and what their new work means in the context of their entire career.
- The review should sound good
Reading aloud cleans your text of unnecessary, unhealthy phrases (including participles). The number of nonsense in the text after you read the note from the printed sheet with expression will decrease by about a third. One and a half times more errors are visible on paper than on the screen.
- Try to control the mood of the reader
Dramatic pauses, accelerations, and decelerations are possible within the text. Ease of dealing with the internal dynamics of the text means more than stuffy beautiful adjectives, which editors usually remove first when shortening the text.
You need to give absolutely enough information for the reader to decide whether to listen to the disc or not. This is the main task of the reviewer – to present the work in such a way that the reader themselves can draw a conclusion about it without even listening. And if the author managed to push the reader to listen to the album and then argue in the comments under the text, this is the best option for the 21st century.