By now you have probably received your economic stimulus check (aka -- bribe from the government to forget its dismal performance), and maybe you are thinking of going to Plan 9 to buy some music as balm for a troubled soul.

How do you decide what to buy? Impulse? Intuition? Forked stick? A CD review?

A review should give you some idea about what a band sounds like, where the band is from, maybe how the record got made and by whom. There should also be some indication if it is well or poorly executed, and what ambitions the band may have for their music.

For many people music is an experience, as necessary as oxygen and alcoholic beverages. A review is by its very nature inadequate to the task of translating this experience.

A reader comment from part one of this story sums up the inherent contradiction, "Critics are useless, it's all about what you like … I wish I got paid to offer my opinion."

There it is -- few people respect critics, but many people want to be one.

Do you trust music reviewers enough to risk 15 to 20 bucks on one of their suggestions? Where do you go for information on new music? On the local scene your options are limited.

Brick

(Our apologies, but we're not sure if it's called Brick, Brick Weekly, Team Brick or Brick Reloaded as it's referenced as all three in its publication. Frankly, though, we don't really give a brick.)

Consider this recent review by Brick critic Jacob Lee -- "Do you like The Postal Service? Well f*&% [not edited in the original] you, because …" and so on; after that it doesn't really matter.

This is pretty typical of Mr. Lee's approach. Here is another nugget for you -- "… imagine if Prince, Juan Atkins and El-P all got together for some … man lovin' on top of some 808s and Juno synths."

Got that? See, you aren't nearly as hip as you think if you aren't up on your 808s. My best guess is that an 808 is either a stained mattress, a numerological reference to 142 more of something than Satan requires or a lightweight, high-performance sailplane constructed with composite materials.

A review by Mr. Lee is primarily about Mr. Lee. He slaps you across the face with his opinion, which he no doubt thinks substitutes for badass integrity. Mr. Lee is writing for himself and his two friends, the in-joke crowd, who consider you stupider than they are, forever.

His reviews operate on a disconnect. That is, that music is not really meant to enhance human experience, but is merely a yardstick by which to measure how smart and tasteful is Mr. Lee and how stupid and how much a philistine are you.

Beyond Mr. Lee's self aggrandizement, I can see no purpose in this … whatever one might call it. 

RVA Magazine

RVA Magazine celebrates Richmond in all its tortured glory. It is the self-proclaimed King of Richmond's Underground Media, the hippest magazine in town.

The music scene in Fist City is small and tightly knit. This is a good thing, but it presents a challenge for those who review local music.

Reviewers might not be critical of a band they will be having beers with this weekend.

This is an issue RVA can't quite skirt given it focuses on the local scene. It genuinely likes this city and the bands who call it home. But not all music is created equally, no matter how much you like who is making it.

RVA Magazine fills a crucial niche in this relatively conservative city by focusing on bands outside the mainstream. But then, RVA's stated mission is less to serve a critical function than a promotional one.

Style Weekly

Things are very different over at Style Weekly. They are faced with a conundrum -- what is their demographic? It's not certain, from the music they choose to review, if they have that quite nailed down.

They employ a stable of reviewers who seem to stick close to their own personal tastes. Peter McElhinney handles jazz recordings. Craig Belcher reviews rap, R&B and hip-hop. Hilary Langford tackles the broader world of pop, and reviews a lot of women artists.

This is a logical approach, but potentially problematic.

For example, Style's Josh Bearman plays with a local bluegrass band and so his reviews are mostly from the genre he is most familiar with. In a recent review he maintained, "originality has never been a necessary aspect of bluegrass songwriting anyway."

Does everyone agree with this statement, issued with such authority?

Too many bluegrass or whatever-grass bands have taken Bearman's formulation to heart, compensating for bland material with musical chops and jamming. Is it any surprise that bluegrass shares many fans with jam bands?

Perhaps what is needed most is new perspective, someone with a more impartial ear, someone who isn't predisposed to the form from the get-go.

Style is the established "alternative" weekly. They are analogous to the established artists that go onstage at Innsbrook, where everyone from Dwight Yoakum to Poison has played over the years -- established in their careers, and highly competent, if not breaking any new ground.

They have few reasons to take chances at this point. They are dependable and unsurprising. Few people go to a show at Innsbrook looking for something new. People know what they are getting and gladly brave crowded parking lots, beer in a cup, plastic bracelets and unglamorous crowds. 

Richmond Times-Dispatch

It might be unfair to expect the local newspaper to deliver information on new, interesting music given that the paper is the Times-Dispatch.

Melissa Ruggieri, the T-D music writer, genuinely seems to know her music and likes writing about it. To be fair, her portfolio is much bigger than mere music reviews. If you are looking to be turned on to new music, the Times-Dispatch isn't going to be of much help.

Try this -- pick up Rolling Stone, Mojo or go to pitchfork.com, or whatever music outlet you most prefer. Pick a review of a band you have never heard of. After reading the review, can you really say what the band sounds like? Would you buy a CD based on the review? I have, and most of them end up at Plan 9 in the used bin.

So if you feel well served by your local music critics, dole out your praises accordingly, because it's slim pickings out there.

Trusting a music critic is like needing a lawyer -- if you need one, you're already pretty far up the big brown muddy. You may find you need them, but do you really trust them?

Didn't think so.

[Full disclosure: at one time I worked at Brick, but I do not know their music reviewer or anyone who now works for them. I don't know and have never met anyone who works at Style Weekly, RVA Magazine or the Times-Dispatch either.]

Last time out: Did Internet Kill the Music Reviewer?