Have you ever purchased an album based SOLELY on a review you read, having never heard the music?

I used to read Creem Magazine back in the 70's and based on their reviews starting listening and buying a lot of British and US new wave and punk - Sex Pistols, The Clash, Lene Lovich, Patti Smith, etc. and was never once disappointed.

Yes, that's wher the subjective part of music listening comes in. it's even worse when you read the review, and you can tell that the reviewer understands very little about the music being reviewed (this happens often when non-metal reviewers review metal albums). One in particular that I disagreed with was where Blender reviewed Meshuggah's newest album, and criticized it for not being catchy enough (It's Meshuggah, goddamnit!), then went on to talk about their polyrhythmic approach where the reviewer made it quite apparent that they had no idea what a polyrhythm is (this particular album is actually much less polyrhythmic than previous Meshuggah albums). By the end of the review, it was pretty clear that the reviewer was simply writing it after a runthrough of the album, and probably skimming over the band's wikipedia article, rather than actually applying some musical knowledge. edit: also, so much of the process is based on hype and reputation. As good as many people seeem to think that it is, I find it hard to believe that just about every publication in the industry came to the independent conclusion that Animal Collective's new album was the best of the year. I'm not trying to say anything negative about this album, I'm just saying that I think the hype that came with it influenced many of the reviewers. Same with the new Baroness album. It was good (I might even say great), but I think many publications gave it a high score simply because it was Baroness, not because of the album.

Yes. back in 86/87 I read a review of 2 new LA bands coming on the scene and the review was comparing the two groups albums and gave both great reviews and suggested that one of them was destined for stardom. The "stardom" band was Faster Pussycat, with their debut. The other was Guns N Roses with Appetite. I picked up both and needless to say I was blown away with GnR. It was more than a year later when they finally caught on with everyone else, and the guy actually printed a retraction on his review.

Yeah.

I tend to believe Pitchfork when they give a good review on an album. Today though, I was at the record store and I left the new Black Kids full length because it got a 3.8

never read any music reviews, ive only ever bought 4 albums...when i was about 9 I started listening to what music was in my house, which went from straight outta compton to blood on the tracks and my taste has developed from there!

No. I don't read mamy reviews, and when I do it's usually from Rolling Stone. I don't trust Rolling Stones opinions on albums.

Maybe I should try doing that though.

Not that I know of.

I use the 30 second samples, and if possible, listen to the entire album BEFORE spending a cent.

i heard billy talents album was really good i heard from my friend not a review.. her and mine tastes are differnt though.. i took teh chance adn feel in love with it

Well I read that MCR's The Black Parade was supposed to be the next great rock opera....WRONG!

'Damage' by The Blues Explosion. Even at my age, I can appreciate good rock.