Quote:
Originally posted by Johnny
Metacritic scores are probably the most pretentious arguments for how much better a record is for something, at least when neither of the two scores are actually very good to begin with. And I'll tell you why. It's like trying to say the critics can tell you which album is better when, really, they're people with an opinion of an album just like everybody else.
Somebody like David Guetta is almost instantly going to be panned by a few critics, who tend to look for risky and more noncommercial albums. Lady Gaga was actually quite adventurous with her new record, which explains why her Metacritic score is significantly better. I personally think if somebody prefers Guetta's record, they're no less correct or incorrect than you are.
|
David Guetta's music is panned by critics because it's soulless Euro-dance that sounds derivative even when compared to rival pop material coming from the likes of StarGate and Dr. Luke and because the little bit that Guetta succeeds at--putting together catchy productions--is always outweighed by the complete and apparent lack of desire to produce anything but the cheapest dance hits and the fact that the catchiest parts of his productions seem to be pilfered without credit from old hits.
His albums lack artistic ambition, but even beyond that, they aren't even as well-produced as what his fellow producers are putting out for other artists. He's a Zedd with a small bag of tricks releasing double-albums of hits hoping that some of them stick.
, his music is better than anything on BTW
