My Near Future Letter To Maximumrocknroll, Rough Draft

Har har just fooled ya. I got nothing to say. Oh there is the whole thing on my mind on how this magazine Maximumrocknroll could be improved. But not in the magazine's entirety. There is only one area which I would choose to change, if I were CEO or "Coordinator". The Reviews!! My objection is that not everyone listens to every new punk band around. It seems the reviewers fail to realize that a new reader or member of the punk community may be checking out the mag for the first time ever. A common misconception is that EVERY punk knows about EVERY punk band around. Unfortunately, most of us have other things on the mind, and have not had the ability to sample every band of the world, as the reviewers clearly have. One thing that could be taken to heart is a few details on what music the band plays. As easy as it is to find things on the internet, some of us don't know all the bands you compare new bands to. For example, 'well it sounds like Ty Segall and Fucked Up had a baby.' What does that mean to a new reader?? Why not define the music as either 60s, thrash, heavy metal, or 77 punk as you used to? And if it's psych pop, garage pop, electro, don't review it. Also power pop and poppunk are good buzzwords to throw out there for us. What is powerviolence? What is Grindcore? Why all the words anyways? Provide clear examples of the MUSIC ITSELF. Not, "well I hate the artwork, my stomach hurts so I hate every record I reviewed today." Then give a review of the content, lyrics, etc.., and let us decide. Don't hide the music in a riddle of obscure bands/buzzwords most of us haven't heard of yet. It would be nice to get a more classical description of the band, based at the least, on bands every punk is sure to know. The classic major bands would be a good launch point. This may sound kind of contrived to those whose job is to delve into every nook and cranny of punkish music, but the fact remains, we don't know every recent band, nor should we. The classics set the stage, and many genres of "mainstream" music factor into the punk movement. It seems the actual punk bands take a backseat review-wise in relation to other experimental sounding bands. All I ask is please get those reviews on the right track. The artists hurt as a result, and so does the scene in general. I would love to listen to more recent music, but am confused as a result of your reviews as to where to look for parallels to some classic punk faves I have. And being left to decipher whether or not it's actually punk can be all too annoying as well.