>bases all his reviews on how unique and influential the album is
>The Doors
>9/10
>Led Zeppelin
>7.5/10
makes sense
literally nothing wrong with this
The Doors is far better then Led Zeppelin, so yes.
>>69749764
Doors was unique at the time and remains a very influential album.
>>69749787
this, densmore kicks bonham's ass any day
whats the problem OP?
>>69749764
This guy is a pretentious cunt but i must admit he has show me a lot of good music.
>>69749778
>>69749785
>>69749787
>>69749808
Either bait or anon is retarded enough to understand that based on Scaruffis review system, the first Led Zeppelin album should be at least an 8.5/10 due to its unique blend of musical genres
>>69749796
That's not the point of the post
>>69749923
Explain the point of the post.
>>69749866
not a chance, kiddo. 7.5 is accurate.
>>69749989
To show that he's biased against certain artists even though they show the same amount of creativity and influence. Specifically the points he tries to say his reviews are all based upon
>>69749992
We'll then The Doors don't deserve any higher than Led Zeppelins debut. Scaruffi man, he tries to say that he's strictly objective in his reviews yet contradicting shit like this exists
>>69750031
>bowie died of cancer on january 2016
>>69749866
>unique blend of musical genres
>Led Zeppelin
kek
Those scores are both correct
>>69750070
how is that contradictory? the Doors' debut shows more creativity than Led Zeppelin's. did you try reading what he actually wrote about the albums rather than just looking at the ratings?
>>69750227
I'm pretty sure Led Zeppelins debut shows as much creativity as The Doors, I'm not more
>>69750353
*If not more
>>69750106
>Folk
>Blues Rock
>>69750394
are you implying that Led Zeppelin were the first to do that?
>>69750451
To mix those genres, yea
>>69750635
R O L L I N G S T O N E S
Ok, now try to read his reviews or actually make some points instead of ">" before making futile threads, /mu/ is full of these already.