I am a contributor to the Piper’s Review and have been for a number of years. My “job”, for those readers here who do not own a subscription, covers the gamut; interviews, detailed transcriptions, articles regarding practicing, etc. Because, we do not have a letters to the editor, I have chosen this forum to address a topic of concern. This is soley my editorial. In no way should this be misunderstood in the regards to myself having and axe to grind with editor Wally Charm, whom I respect, and have worked with for quite a number of years.
I have read many CD reviews throughout the years, and have contributed some of my own. I was moved to write this after reading the reviews of Eamonn Dillon’s CD’s. Before I go on with my thoughts on the reviews, I will preface my words with a couple of observations.
A reviewer (usually) has no responsibility to the artist, and equally, an artist should have a thick skin when it comes to critiques. However, reviewer can take the harsh road. I see no point in our small
piping community for opting to go in this direction. This is not Billboard, DownBeat, or Rolling Stone. The artists being reviewed are not going to sell 100,000 units.
In the reviews I had published, I made points about elements I did not care for, but I was as objective as possible while expressing my opinion. The fact that the artists I covered are professional musicians in a very narrow market was always in the forefront of my mind.
I will presume the reviewer who took the assignment of reporting on Eamonn Dillon’s CDs, knows what the life as a pro musician entails. Making a living as a musician is VERY difficult, which is why I was astonished by the review… the project “Storm in the Kettle” in particular. I should mention that despite the fact I know Eamonn Dillon, we have been out of touch for a number of years. Having said that, I am certianly not running to his rescue…he doesn’t need that. My reason for writing is far more broad.
The author did a decent job of explaining some of what Eamonn’s CD is about. However, the harsh critiques, and crafty quips show no regard for the artist in review, no knowledge of the circumstances around which the recording was created, and gives the general idea to the readers that the reviewer knows what is best for the CD purchasing piping community as a whole.
I may be alone on this idea though I doubt it; I personally do not condone, nor will I ever support reviews that include opinions that hurt the recording artist. It is damaging on MANY levels… period.
If you, the reader, recorded a CD ..and in a review of your project, a potential customer read something to the affect of “My 4 year old loved it,” “..the piping is pretty good..“This is plastic music” or " …this lacks nyaaaa” how well do you think your product would sell?
Many points about the pro’s and cons of being a reviewer, and his or her responsibility to the recording artist etc. could (and may well) be drilled into the ground. I am simply not interested in taking part in that sort of banter, my point is simple and crystal clear.
In conclusion:
This commentary is for those future and current reviewers alike. I am all for reading a telling review about a recording, as I am sure every other reader is, but don’t do us any favours, and dazzle the readers with whit and comments that knock the artist. Perhaps, ask yourself “what does this artist have offer?” In addition, if there are elements that do not suit your veiw of what is “good” music, there are constructive ways in which you can express that.
Whether a musician has a home recording set up or not, they spent thousands of dollars to get the CD you will be critiquing. Many musicians who make CD’s are full time players. Those who are not…at very least count on the sale their CDs to offset the expenses of the production of product. It is important to support piping recording artists who give a CD for review with objective reporting, and prudent governing of the pen as it were.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Kynch Padraig O’Kaine[quote][/quote]