Bases all his reviews on how unique and influential the album is

>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.

Doors was unique at the time and remains a very influential album.

this, densmore kicks bonham's ass any day

whats the problem OP?

This guy is a pretentious cunt but i must admit he has show me a lot of good music.

Either bait or user 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

That's not the point of the post

Explain the point of the post.

not a chance, kiddo. 7.5 is accurate.

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

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

>bowie died of cancer on january 2016

>unique blend of musical genres
>Led Zeppelin

kek

Those scores are both correct

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?

I'm pretty sure Led Zeppelins debut shows as much creativity as The Doors, I'm not more

*If not more
>Folk
>Blues Rock

are you implying that Led Zeppelin were the first to do that?

To mix those genres, yea

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, Sup Forums is full of these already.