I still regularly look up, listen to and buy music by artists I wouldn't have known about had it not been for reviews in The Word.

I don't see it as being told what to listen to, more gently recommended.

and was completely lost. I was just looking at the titles with no idea what they were about, no idea who the actors were and obviously no clue what was worth watching.

I'm not sure how I got so out of touch with contemporary movies, I used to see just about everything at one time.

Like Metacritic and Any Decent Music,although ultimately I make up my own mind,for example,the new Bon Iver album has had almost universal praise but I don't think much of it. Spotify helps this process since you can now listen to music and judge it on it's own merits and your own personal taste.

less convinced by the need for any review to be any longer than a single pithy sentence, containing a link to suitable streaming or preview clips. Not unlike the Something for the Weekend mailout, in fact.

For there then to be lengthy discussion once everyone's Spotifying on the same page is something else entirely. But a single person spouting forth about a record, book or film that none of their readers have heard, read or seen yet, expecting them to base their decision on whether to spend their money solely on the strength of that view - we're way beyond that now, aren't we?

I still like reviews a lot. They act both as a way of me finding new things, but also as another view on things that I have. They tend to be one place where people actually write about the music, rather than who made it. So I'll still go and dip in the Gary Mulholland's great books for insights in to albums from years ago.

All that said, they don't make me buy a magazine or newspaper, because ADM does it brilliantly, but the reviews are often the first section I'll turn to in anything I do buy.

I really like the long album reviews that Word does. If an album has a long review, I'll read it. An in depth approach to a new record can be interesting, regardless of who's record it is.

However, if it's just a paragraph on someone I'm not fussed on, I might skip it.

I always read the 1* and 5* reviews and if I've got time, Spotify the 5* ones even if it's "not my thing".

I think reviews are less relevant now, especially in the age of Spotify when you can judge for yourself whether it's worth your hard-earned.

has made my day. Thank you :)

Much as I'd like to claim I don't bother with them I do tend to look album/artist reviews up just to see if I agree with them!

still buy "The Other" music magazines even though their articles bore me stiff most of the time is because of the reviews.
I don't worry much about the ratings, but if the reviewer describes the music in a way that makes me curious ( especially if it's a reviewer that I trust ) then I will take a chance and buy it.
It's how I find new music and how I am reminded of new albums from old favourites.
I'm actually not a big fan of scanning the internet...so without the reviews and occasional tips from you lot I wouldn't have a clue what's out there to hear.
In a magazine you get all the info you need without having to spend hours online looking for it.
Unlike everybody else I actually prefer a short review, I don't want to know too much before I buy ( I would never listen before I buy, that's no fun ).

I will invariably go to the 'Reviews' section before any other, and browse through the listings- reading the 5 star recommendations first to see if they interest me.

I don't need them to tell me what to listen to but I quite often need to stop and ask for directions because there is so much flippin stuff out there!

I'll have a listen to some clips at least before I buy any music but there is so much stuff out there I'll be driven toward that point by all manner of channels. Principally for me it's the websites of online/physical stores I buy from, who of course give you short, pithy reviews of new releases. There is nothing like a record shop for helping you filter out the good stuff...they think it's good enough to stock their shelves/warehouses with! I'll also have a look at The Quietus or Pitchfork and so forth.

Magazines of course can't be as instant, but frequently I'll read a review of something I've missed and check it out, or maybe reconsider something I've glossed over if a review catches my eye.

With The Word it is different. This is mainly due to the fact that my music tastes are on the edge of the Venn diagram here.
Nevertheless, I enjoy the reviews in Word, especially the long ones. I enjoy reading about music! There are bands I don't particularly like but I enjoy reading about. I've no intention of buying another U2 record for example but I'm still interested in reading the reviews when their next record comes out (especially if they get a good shoeing!) same as I was keen to find out how their Glastonbury thing went down.

If they do review something I like, I've often already got it, but I'm genuinely interested to hear a 'Word' take on it and like all good reviews it might shed some light on a record that might have me digging it out for another listen. For example I've already decided I want the new Horrors album having heard most of it played live recently, but I hope Word review it, I'll make my own mind up about it but that doesn't mean I won't enjoy reading what whoever reviews it has to say.

If nothing else, Reviews can often replace sleeve notes by providing the context and information about a record which is sadly missing in the age of the download.

Take that new Battles record for example. You might download it, and you might like it. But if you read the reviews you'll discover that they had recorded it in a Spinal Tap scenario in some very bleak US town (a disused car park they describe it as) , it took 18 months during which they had an enormous dust up with their lead singer who subsequently went AWOL, the rest of the band re-recorded the whole thing virtually from scratch and got Gary Newman in to replace some of his vocals. You need a bit of that sort of colour to help you navigate through a record don't you?

reviews of new releases because I don't give a hoot about emerging bands or singer songwriters but I always love reading about re-issues ( although it's getting to the stage where I've got most of what I want and, as in the case of the recent 'McCartney' CDs, I now end up buying re-issues of re-issues! ). This emphasis on re-releases from pop's heritage is probably one crucial area where mags such as Record Collector and M**o have the edge on our otherwise appreciated Word.

But then I consider myself more of a 'historian/curator' than straightforward music fan since- in g towers at any rate- the broad consensus is that the Emperor's real interest in pop ended around 1978.

Years ago I used to read reviews as a pointer to what was essential to buy. I could afford no more than one album a month and getting to know the reviewer's tastes was an important part of the process. A glowing review from someone like Charles Shaar Murray in the NME was an indication it was probably worth my money.

I still use personality as a guide. As I've got to know Steve Turner of this parish I also know he's someone who's taste I can trust so on the basis of his Dave Alvin review on the Downloads page I've bought it.

It's not quite the same as buying on a mate's recommendation as I don't know Steve that well and I never bought an album on the basis of anything a mate wrote.

In the earliest editions they picked only a very few things to review. I much preferred that.