Tony R Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (snowdogged @ Jul 26 2012, 02:00 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 25 2012, 10:42 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 11:53 AM) QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 07:35 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 12:59 PM)QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 06:04 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 05:22 AM)Ok, I'll play: Caravan 2/10 BU2B 2/10 Clockwork Angels 4/10 The Anarchist 4/10 Carnies 5/10 Halo Effect 3/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 1/10 The Wreckers 4/10 Headlong Flight 4/10 BU2B2 1/10 Wish Them Well 1/10 The Garden 5/10 So better than anything they've released since Signals for me. Nice attention grab. I'm still waiting for Trenken and Gemini to weigh in with theirs: Caravan 0/10 BU2B 0/10 Clockwork Angels 0/10 The Anarchist 0/10 Carnies 0/10 Halo Effect 0/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 0/10 The Wreckers 0/10 Headlong Flight 0/10 BU2B2 0/10 Wish Them Well 0/10 The Garden 0/10 Why do you care how other people perceive or enjoy an album. The fact that you like it should be enough. Other posts that say "I'm glad you like "it"" are equally perplexing. eg: QUOTE Seriously, I'm glad you're liking it so much. trink39.gif CA really is amazingly consistent, as seen in your ratings. I hope Seven Cities grows on you. I know you like the debut, and for me Seven Cities really sounds like a modern take on What You're Doing or Working Man (Zeppelin-ish blues rock). It's become one of my top 2-3 tracks on the album. 1022.gif Why should you wish that a track grows on someone? You didnt write it and it shouldn't change your enjoyment whether they do or they don't. Obviously we're all interested in what other fans think about CA, or we wouldn't check out this forum. I'm still tying to figure out why YOU'RE here, though. If CA earns a 3/10 for you but is their best since Signals, obviously everything Rush has done for thirty years has been shit for you. So why are you still here with 4800+ posts after thirty years of dissapointment? After three freaking decades, I think I would move on. EDIT: Just saw your review on Prog Archives, and I'm completely confused. How do you give CA a five star rating given your ratings above? Because of people like you! Stop over-reacting to what other people think and feel about music. Stop being a sheep. I have to admit that I'm completely puzzled as well. How do you give the album a 3/10 average when rating it per song, but then give it a 5 out of 5 star review? The math doesn't add up. He's fishing for reactions. He knows that certain people are going to get all riled up over low ratings for the songs. No,I think that the ratings are nonsensical without any explanation. Also, the fanboys put too much store on other people's opinions. I want to puke ever time I read something like "I can't wait to hear Goob's take on this" or "Tick's going to get all Ticky about...". Or even, how can you rate these songs so low yet give them a five star review. One's shit on a message board the other is a considered review. An album is about more than individual songs. When I first heard Headlong Flight I didn't really like it but as part of the album it works extremely well. And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetaxe&saw Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tel Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 easy lifeson 90,lets not get carried away here! "quote" i think we'd be talking about the best rush album ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony R Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 11:34 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. I'll drink to that! Theakstons Old Pec or an ice cold Magners? Highland Park or JW Green Label? Or all of them, it's a beautiful day!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetaxe&saw Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:49 AM) QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 11:34 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. I'll drink to that! Theakstons Old Pec or an ice cold Magners? Highland Park or JW Green Label? Or all of them, it's a beautiful day!! Ooooh, a Theakstons followed by a HP, that would be lovely. Repeat to fade..... Lovely day here too! Huzzah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombstone Mountain Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (greyfriar @ Jul 26 2012, 05:20 AM) Caravan - 9 BU2B - 9 Clockwork Angels - 10 The Anarchist - 9 Carnies - 9 Halo Effect - 9 Seven Cities Of Gold - 8 The Wreckers - 9 Headlong Flight - 9 BU2B2 - 8 Wish Them Well - 9 The Garden - 10 The album still grows on me so the rating might change daily. Like it Bud!!! Surprised me on the Seven Cities of Gold. CA is probably the best song by the band in 30 years...It is an amazing piece of art. It is on the highest shelf with the other epics!!! But that's just me!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 (edited) Edited July 26, 2012 by rushgoober Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 26 2012, 01:20 AM)QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 23 2012, 11:59 PM) What I really need is an explanation of what 1-10 means. I did that for rating albums: QUOTE 10. Absolute perfection all the way through - a masterpiece. 9. Excellent, not one weak track and nearly perfect. 8. Great album, a must-own. 7. Very good album - well worth owning. 6. Not thier best, but still pretty darn good. 5. I don't listen that often, but it's a good album. 4. It's not bad, some weaker material. 3 - It's alright, I'll listen and enjoy it occasionally, but will often skip some tracks. 2 - There are a couple of good or great tracks, but generally fairly weak. 1 - Barely listenable, for completists only, only one or two even halfway-decent tracks. 0 - Just really bad, no redeeming qualities whatsoever. That makes sense to me, and if I use that as a universal guide when rating albums, it will all be consistent using the same criteria. I find coming up with a ranking system, or what 1-10 actually means far more difficult when dealing with individual songs. What makes a song a 10 instead of a 9, or a 9.5, or a 9.75? Do I reward a song with a 10 because it's the best of the best of the best and therefore give other songs that are also completely outstanding a lesser grade just because they're not quite at that level? At some point it becomes about levels of perfection to me as opposed to perfect vs. not completely perfect. It's easier to determine this with an entire album. Do I reward all perfect songs with a 10 even though some are MORE perfect than others? When I came up with my long list of perfect albums, some criticized I had too many, that I was too lenient, and their lists were FAR shorter only giving a very few the PERFECT rating, but really how could I not give something a rating of perfect, just because there were albums that were MORE perfect? An album that I truly love from start to finish without any complaints has to be perfect to me, even though some albums are even better than that. Really though, it's not a bad problem to have... I just have a general issue with those numbers. A 3 is "alright"? Imho, a 3 is shit with few positives going for it. A 4 is "not bad"? Isn't a 4 below average? Wouldn't that alone put it in the general ballpark or vicinity of bad? Anyway... That ranking system was for albums, not for songs, but still you may be right. Maybe I'm being too generous in that rating system. Others have said my rating system makes the higher numbers too hard to attain, so I've heard criticism both ways. The one thing I've liked about using that system is at least to have SOME system where I can use it across a broad spectrum of albums and get results that are internally consistent. I'd rather have an imperfect rating system that gets results that are consistent than not use one at all. Still, I'll consider changing that up some for the future based on your feedback! QUOTE (An Enemy Without @ Jul 26 2012, 03:18 AM)10/10: Perfect. No flaws in sight. 9/10: Kicks ass, very few noticeable flaws. 8/10: Very good, a few more flaws. 7/10: Pretty good, not to be skipped. 6/10: Better than average. Barely. 5/10: Average. 4/10: Worse than average. Probably just filler. 3/10: Pretty bad. Many flaws. 2/10: Very few redeeming qualities. 1/10: Terrible. Absolutely horrific. 0/10: Embarrasingly bad, should never have been recorded. That's actually not bad in terms of rating definitions for songs! Using that ranking system, oddly enough some of my numerical rankings I gave earlier in this thread would go down, and some would go up. I'll keep them as I originally put them for now, but I may very well use this rating system (or a similar one that I might slightly modify) later on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gedneil Alpeart Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 05:28 AM) QUOTE (snowdogged @ Jul 26 2012, 02:00 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 25 2012, 10:42 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 11:53 AM) QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 07:35 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 12:59 PM)QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 06:04 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 05:22 AM)Ok, I'll play: Caravan 2/10 BU2B 2/10 Clockwork Angels 4/10 The Anarchist 4/10 Carnies 5/10 Halo Effect 3/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 1/10 The Wreckers 4/10 Headlong Flight 4/10 BU2B2 1/10 Wish Them Well 1/10 The Garden 5/10 So better than anything they've released since Signals for me. Nice attention grab. I'm still waiting for Trenken and Gemini to weigh in with theirs: Caravan 0/10 BU2B 0/10 Clockwork Angels 0/10 The Anarchist 0/10 Carnies 0/10 Halo Effect 0/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 0/10 The Wreckers 0/10 Headlong Flight 0/10 BU2B2 0/10 Wish Them Well 0/10 The Garden 0/10 Why do you care how other people perceive or enjoy an album. The fact that you like it should be enough. Other posts that say "I'm glad you like "it"" are equally perplexing. eg: QUOTE Seriously, I'm glad you're liking it so much. trink39.gif CA really is amazingly consistent, as seen in your ratings. I hope Seven Cities grows on you. I know you like the debut, and for me Seven Cities really sounds like a modern take on What You're Doing or Working Man (Zeppelin-ish blues rock). It's become one of my top 2-3 tracks on the album. 1022.gif Why should you wish that a track grows on someone? You didnt write it and it shouldn't change your enjoyment whether they do or they don't. Obviously we're all interested in what other fans think about CA, or we wouldn't check out this forum. I'm still tying to figure out why YOU'RE here, though. If CA earns a 3/10 for you but is their best since Signals, obviously everything Rush has done for thirty years has been shit for you. So why are you still here with 4800+ posts after thirty years of dissapointment? After three freaking decades, I think I would move on. EDIT: Just saw your review on Prog Archives, and I'm completely confused. How do you give CA a five star rating given your ratings above? Because of people like you! Stop over-reacting to what other people think and feel about music. Stop being a sheep. I have to admit that I'm completely puzzled as well. How do you give the album a 3/10 average when rating it per song, but then give it a 5 out of 5 star review? The math doesn't add up. He's fishing for reactions. He knows that certain people are going to get all riled up over low ratings for the songs. No,I think that the ratings are nonsensical without any explanation. Also, the fanboys put too much store on other people's opinions. I want to puke ever time I read something like "I can't wait to hear Goob's take on this" or "Tick's going to get all Ticky about...". Or even, how can you rate these songs so low yet give them a five star review. One's shit on a message board the other is a considered review. An album is about more than individual songs. When I first heard Headlong Flight I didn't really like it but as part of the album it works extremely well. And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... Yeah.....Rush....some kind of self indulging dino band loved by snobs and old farts.....whatever.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony R Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jul 26 2012, 03:37 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 05:28 AM) QUOTE (snowdogged @ Jul 26 2012, 02:00 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 25 2012, 10:42 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 11:53 AM) QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 07:35 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 12:59 PM)QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 06:04 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 05:22 AM)Ok, I'll play: Caravan 2/10 BU2B 2/10 Clockwork Angels 4/10 The Anarchist 4/10 Carnies 5/10 Halo Effect 3/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 1/10 The Wreckers 4/10 Headlong Flight 4/10 BU2B2 1/10 Wish Them Well 1/10 The Garden 5/10 So better than anything they've released since Signals for me. Nice attention grab. I'm still waiting for Trenken and Gemini to weigh in with theirs: Caravan 0/10 BU2B 0/10 Clockwork Angels 0/10 The Anarchist 0/10 Carnies 0/10 Halo Effect 0/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 0/10 The Wreckers 0/10 Headlong Flight 0/10 BU2B2 0/10 Wish Them Well 0/10 The Garden 0/10 Why do you care how other people perceive or enjoy an album. The fact that you like it should be enough. Other posts that say "I'm glad you like "it"" are equally perplexing. eg: QUOTE Seriously, I'm glad you're liking it so much. trink39.gif CA really is amazingly consistent, as seen in your ratings. I hope Seven Cities grows on you. I know you like the debut, and for me Seven Cities really sounds like a modern take on What You're Doing or Working Man (Zeppelin-ish blues rock). It's become one of my top 2-3 tracks on the album. 1022.gif Why should you wish that a track grows on someone? You didnt write it and it shouldn't change your enjoyment whether they do or they don't. Obviously we're all interested in what other fans think about CA, or we wouldn't check out this forum. I'm still tying to figure out why YOU'RE here, though. If CA earns a 3/10 for you but is their best since Signals, obviously everything Rush has done for thirty years has been shit for you. So why are you still here with 4800+ posts after thirty years of dissapointment? After three freaking decades, I think I would move on. EDIT: Just saw your review on Prog Archives, and I'm completely confused. How do you give CA a five star rating given your ratings above? Because of people like you! Stop over-reacting to what other people think and feel about music. Stop being a sheep. I have to admit that I'm completely puzzled as well. How do you give the album a 3/10 average when rating it per song, but then give it a 5 out of 5 star review? The math doesn't add up. He's fishing for reactions. He knows that certain people are going to get all riled up over low ratings for the songs. No,I think that the ratings are nonsensical without any explanation. Also, the fanboys put too much store on other people's opinions. I want to puke ever time I read something like "I can't wait to hear Goob's take on this" or "Tick's going to get all Ticky about...". Or even, how can you rate these songs so low yet give them a five star review. One's shit on a message board the other is a considered review. An album is about more than individual songs. When I first heard Headlong Flight I didn't really like it but as part of the album it works extremely well. And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... Yeah.....Rush....some kind of self indulging dino band loved by snobs and old farts.....whatever.... It is what it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 09:43 AM) QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jul 26 2012, 03:37 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 05:28 AM) QUOTE (snowdogged @ Jul 26 2012, 02:00 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 25 2012, 10:42 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 11:53 AM) QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 07:35 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 12:59 PM)QUOTE (They Bow Defeated @ Jul 24 2012, 06:04 PM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 24 2012, 05:22 AM)Ok, I'll play: Caravan 2/10 BU2B 2/10 Clockwork Angels 4/10 The Anarchist 4/10 Carnies 5/10 Halo Effect 3/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 1/10 The Wreckers 4/10 Headlong Flight 4/10 BU2B2 1/10 Wish Them Well 1/10 The Garden 5/10 So better than anything they've released since Signals for me. Nice attention grab. I'm still waiting for Trenken and Gemini to weigh in with theirs: Caravan 0/10 BU2B 0/10 Clockwork Angels 0/10 The Anarchist 0/10 Carnies 0/10 Halo Effect 0/10 Seven Cities Of Gold 0/10 The Wreckers 0/10 Headlong Flight 0/10 BU2B2 0/10 Wish Them Well 0/10 The Garden 0/10 Why do you care how other people perceive or enjoy an album. The fact that you like it should be enough. Other posts that say "I'm glad you like "it"" are equally perplexing. eg: QUOTE Seriously, I'm glad you're liking it so much. trink39.gif CA really is amazingly consistent, as seen in your ratings. I hope Seven Cities grows on you. I know you like the debut, and for me Seven Cities really sounds like a modern take on What You're Doing or Working Man (Zeppelin-ish blues rock). It's become one of my top 2-3 tracks on the album. 1022.gif Why should you wish that a track grows on someone? You didnt write it and it shouldn't change your enjoyment whether they do or they don't. Obviously we're all interested in what other fans think about CA, or we wouldn't check out this forum. I'm still tying to figure out why YOU'RE here, though. If CA earns a 3/10 for you but is their best since Signals, obviously everything Rush has done for thirty years has been shit for you. So why are you still here with 4800+ posts after thirty years of dissapointment? After three freaking decades, I think I would move on. EDIT: Just saw your review on Prog Archives, and I'm completely confused. How do you give CA a five star rating given your ratings above? Because of people like you! Stop over-reacting to what other people think and feel about music. Stop being a sheep. I have to admit that I'm completely puzzled as well. How do you give the album a 3/10 average when rating it per song, but then give it a 5 out of 5 star review? The math doesn't add up. He's fishing for reactions. He knows that certain people are going to get all riled up over low ratings for the songs. No,I think that the ratings are nonsensical without any explanation. Also, the fanboys put too much store on other people's opinions. I want to puke ever time I read something like "I can't wait to hear Goob's take on this" or "Tick's going to get all Ticky about...". Or even, how can you rate these songs so low yet give them a five star review. One's shit on a message board the other is a considered review. An album is about more than individual songs. When I first heard Headlong Flight I didn't really like it but as part of the album it works extremely well. And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... Yeah.....Rush....some kind of self indulging dino band loved by snobs and old farts.....whatever.... It is what it is... and whatever.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 03:34 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. AND it's FUN to take Rush way too seriously! Obviously in the grand scheme of things an album by a rock band is of precious little importance, but we're here on a Rush fan forum talking about it, and it's fun! Obviously I've got other much more important concerns in life, but it's a nice diversion, and if it was something that I/we felt really casual and nonchalant about, we probably wouldn't be here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetaxe&saw Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 26 2012, 02:50 PM) QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 03:34 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. AND it's FUN to take Rush way too seriously! Obviously in the grand scheme of things an album by a rock band is of precious little importance, but we're here on a Rush fan forum talking about it, and it's fun! Obviously I've got other much more important concerns in life, but it's a nice diversion, and if it was something that I/we felt really casual and nonchalant about, we probably wouldn't be here. No, what I mean by "wayyyy to seriously", is getting into a hissy if you dare criticise the Holy Triumvirate, treating Neil like he's Shakespeare, you know, and generally being a humourless tw**. Now back to your Twilight books, girly-girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombstone Mountain Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 09:56 AM) QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jul 26 2012, 02:50 PM) QUOTE (Hatchetaxe&saw @ Jul 26 2012, 03:34 AM) QUOTE (Tony R @ Jul 26 2012, 10:28 AM) And people take Rush wayyyy too seriously... This is true. And some take themselves wayyyy too seriously as well. And some take themselves, and Rush, wayyyy too seriously. Still, it's fun to read. AND it's FUN to take Rush way too seriously! Obviously in the grand scheme of things an album by a rock band is of precious little importance, but we're here on a Rush fan forum talking about it, and it's fun! Obviously I've got other much more important concerns in life, but it's a nice diversion, and if it was something that I/we felt really casual and nonchalant about, we probably wouldn't be here. No, what I mean by "wayyyy to seriously", is getting into a hissy if you dare criticise the Holy Triumvirate, treating Neil like he's Shakespeare, you know, and generally being a humourless tw**. Now back to your Twilight books, girly-girl. Thus Spake Zarathustra!!! That is funny stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyfriar Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tombstone Mountain @ Jul 26 2012, 03:09 PM) QUOTE (greyfriar @ Jul 26 2012, 05:20 AM) Caravan - 9 BU2B - 9 Clockwork Angels - 10 The Anarchist - 9 Carnies - 9 Halo Effect - 9 Seven Cities Of Gold - 8 The Wreckers - 9 Headlong Flight - 9 BU2B2 - 8 Wish Them Well - 9 The Garden - 10 The album still grows on me so the rating might change daily. Like it Bud!!! Surprised me on the Seven Cities of Gold. CA is probably the best song by the band in 30 years...It is an amazing piece of art. It is on the highest shelf with the other epics!!! But that's just me!!! As I said, it still grows and grows on me and I think my rating will continue to go up. The album is so brilliant that I'm still in a state of shock, that they're able to surprise me in that stage of their career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 QUOTE (Tommy Sawyer @ Jul 25 2012, 11:22 PM) QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ Jul 25 2012, 08:39 PM) The Wreckers: 1/10 The only below average song on the album? Yes, but it's WAYYYYY below average. Also, rating BU2B2 is pointless. It's not a song. Seven Cities is a 5, as in pretty average. Wish them Well I gave a 6, could be a 5. It's right there with Seven Cities. So that leaves 8 songs that I definitely do think are well above average and I do consider BU2B perfection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate2112 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Caravan 10/10 BU2B 6/10 Clockwork Angels 10/10 The Anarchist 9/10 Carnies 10/10 Halo Effect 5/10 Seven Cities of Gold 10/10 The Wreckers 7/10 Headlong Flight 10/10 BU2B2 2/10 Wish Them Well 7/10 The Garden 8/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyBlaze Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruthless137 Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Caravan - 9/10 BU2B - 10/10 Clockwork Angels - 11/10 The Anarchist - 10/10 Carnies - 8/10 Halo Effect - 7/10 Seven Cities Of Gold - 9/10 The Wreckers - 6/10 Headlong Flight - 10/10 BU2B2 - 0/10 Wish Them Well - 8/10 The Garden - 7/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now