Why Do We Do This Again?

Recently, I was called out (albeit in a friendly way) by someone who made meaningful contributions because I didn't comment on them in a review. I had to point out that the CD I was working from was an advance that came without artwork or a booklet, so I didn't know about said meaningful contributions. The last time this happened, I vowed we wouldn't review unfinished CDs (which includes the art and packaging), but that's often not realistic. As I write, I'm listening to the new Ha Ha Tonka to decide if I want to review it, and I'm doing so from an advance that came with a one sheet instead of liner notes. And a half-hour ago, I received the URL to download Jarvis Cocker's new album with the liner notes pasted into the email message. All of these situations conspire against liner notes that travel easily with the music it references. Information? What is it good for? (absolutely nothing!)

More Petulance on My Part

I'd like to review A-Trak's new mix, Infinity + 1, but I'm distracted by a voice that announces over the music, "You are listening to an advance of A-Trak's Infinity + 1." I'm not sure how regularly obscuring the sounds I'm supposed to be reviewing is supposed to help me review them, and there comes a point where I wait for the intruding voice and stop noticing the music. Of course, the announcement isn't there to help make sure I know what I'm listening to, but to keep me from bootlegging the album or sharing it without permission. But as a matter of principle, I won't review albums and artists that treat me as suspicious when I haven't given them any reason to do so. If I'm treated pre-emptively as the enemy, then I'll pass on that artist and review artists that wait until I do something wrong to treat me like a scumbag.