@U2 Forum

U2 => The Music and Lyrics => Topic started by: Manos73 on January 07, 2018, 01:27:39 PM

Title: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 07, 2018, 01:27:39 PM
Metacritic is a review aggregator that builds an average score for a record on a basis of 0 - 100. They've rated the last 7 U2 releases (including re-releases).  Here are their respective scores:

1987/2017 - The Joshua Tree [30th Anniversary Super Deluxe Edition] - 90
1991/2011 - Achtung Baby [Super Deluxe] - 93
2000- All That You Can't Leave Behind - 79
2005 - How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb - 79
2009 - No Line On The Horizon - 72
2014 - Songs of Innocence - 64
2017 - Songs of Experience - 63

There is an unmistakable downward linear trend.
http://www.metacritic.com/person/u2?filter-options=music
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Argo on January 07, 2018, 06:27:02 PM
As my mother would say - if megacritic jumped off a cliff, would you? It is irrelevant. You like what you like and I definitely don't like ATYCLB more than SOI and SOE.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: davis on January 08, 2018, 01:15:52 PM
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 08, 2018, 04:07:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
SOI has more lasting power. I still listen to SOI on occasion. Never SOE.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Allhorizonbomb on January 08, 2018, 04:47:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

The fact that SOE is basically identical to SOI in ranking is enough to discredit it for me, as SOE is a far stronger album (yes, in my opinion). 
SOI has more lasting power. I still listen to SOI on occasion. Never SOE.

Itís only been a month since itís release. I think you may just be tired of it, and hopefully it gets better with time
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Luzita on January 08, 2018, 07:12:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah, the review aggregate thing says a lot more about how "cool" something is at a given cultural moment.  U2 has not been officially cool for decades. 

Totally agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: mcpaulson22 on January 08, 2018, 11:38:40 PM
Funny. I think SOE is their best album of the 2000s.
Metacritic gathers reviews from a lot of hipster websites that don't give much clout to old rock bands like U2.
It's a cultural shift of opinion more than anything.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: BalconyTV on January 09, 2018, 04:37:41 AM
Meh. I think aggregators are pretty accurate.

No Zooropa and Pop here?
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 10, 2018, 02:46:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Meh. I think aggregators are pretty accurate.

No Zooropa and Pop here?
I doesn't seem to go back further then 2000. I feel like Metacritic's pretty accurate. SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: davis on January 10, 2018, 04:22:21 PM
Quote
SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.

You're mistaken.  Rolling Stone gave it a 4.5.  No other publication gave it over a 4.  On the flip side, there were a large number of reviews giving it two or two and a half stars.  If anything, the aggregate is skewed low by these ridiculous disses. 
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 11, 2018, 12:46:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
SOE wouldn't have been 63 without some over zealous 5/5 ratings from Rolling Stone and the like.

You're mistaken.  Rolling Stone gave it a 4.5.  No other publication gave it over a 4.  On the flip side, there were a large number of reviews giving it two or two and a half stars.  If anything, the aggregate is skewed low by these ridiculous disses. 
You're right about RS - 4.5. That's what I get for using my memory. They did get some 4/5's. This is from SOE's page on Wikipedia:

Source/Rating
AnyDecentMusic? 5.8/10
Metacritic - 63/100
AllMusic - 2.5/5 stars
Consequence of Sound - CĖ
The Daily Telegraph - 4/5 stars
The Guardian - 4/5 stars
The Independent - 2/5 stars
Mojo - 4/5 stars
NME - 2/5 stars
Pitchfork - 5.3/10
Q - 4/5 stars
Rolling Stone - 4.5/5 stars

A Venn diagram of Bono's connections would show the more he's involved with the people at a mag, the higher the album did in reviews. NME's review of SOE has to hurt even more - not that they've been U2 fans for a while.

So I stand by my comment. Without some old school rock mags and political Bono fellow travellers giving SOE above average reviews, Metacritic would be well below 63. U2 can't be happy about the reviews.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songs_of_Experience_(U2_album)#Critical_reception
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: paddyattitude on January 12, 2018, 11:21:34 AM
they probably listens to albums just once...
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: paddyattitude on January 12, 2018, 01:59:46 PM
critics are hypocrites
back in the days they never such a high mark to Achtung Baby when it came out
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 12, 2018, 05:21:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
critics are hypocrites
back in the days they never such a high mark to Achtung Baby when it came out
I just looked up the current top 10 albums on the Billboard Rock Charts. SOE is at #10 but is the third highest rated album of the 10 (using Metacritic ratings). 
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: davis on January 13, 2018, 03:01:04 PM
Ok, but just go on metacritic.  You can see all the ratings/publications they used for their rating.  There is an absurd number of 2s and 2.5s skewing the aggregate down. 
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 14, 2018, 12:03:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ok, but just go on metacritic.  You can see all the ratings/publications they used for their rating.  There is an absurd number of 2s and 2.5s skewing the aggregate down. 
Pretty sure the absurd amount of reviews are the other direction. The higher the rating, the more likely U2 is to be used on the cover of the mag. Meaning, the mags that use U2 to sell copies give the album higher reviews.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: davis on January 16, 2018, 05:09:18 PM
Quote
Pretty sure the absurd amount of reviews are the other direction. The higher the rating, the more likely U2 is to be used on the cover of the mag. Meaning, the mags that use U2 to sell copies give the album higher reviews.

Not that I care, but I still can't figure out why you don't just go on metacritic and see for yourself the exact reviews they used for their aggregate.  It's there in plain English. 
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Clarky on January 17, 2018, 03:57:58 AM
Alright.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 17, 2018, 10:40:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
Pretty sure the absurd amount of reviews are the other direction. The higher the rating, the more likely U2 is to be used on the cover of the mag. Meaning, the mags that use U2 to sell copies give the album higher reviews.

Not that I care, but I still can't figure out why you don't just go on metacritic and see for yourself the exact reviews they used for their aggregate.  It's there in plain English. 
I have seen them. The higher reviews appear to be by music mags that use U2 on their covers.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: GoalisSoul40 on January 17, 2018, 03:25:46 PM
So let me get this straight: SOE is rated low according to an arbitrary aggregate of critical reviews??  And this is somehow supposed to matter?  Fans will make up our own minds about the album.
Title: Re: U2 on Metacritic
Post by: Manos73 on January 19, 2018, 10:02:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So let me get this straight: SOE is rated low according to an arbitrary aggregate of critical reviews??  And this is somehow supposed to matter?  Fans will make up our own minds about the album.
It's not arbitrary, it's an average. An average that shows a downward linear trend.