Are the audio reviews now being written by a robot?

[Kbarnes70]

Anyone else noticed that recent reviews, especially the Audio section, seem to be written in robotese?

Example:

The Take features a DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 loses soundtrack, and the added channels and availability of more immersive elements comes most welcome and proves a good format for the movie's sonic needs. The track is frequently intense, explosive, wide, deep, and highly enjoyable. Music is immersive, spreading to the stage's furthest reaches, and then some, seemingly rushing well beyond the theater's physical limitations. There's a nice, noticeable, usually even aggressive wrap through the backs, too, but it's still commanded by the front-end dominance. Whether score, pulsating beats from a distant club, or heavy-hitting bass in a car, the track is anything but timid and capable of pushing the low end's boundaries while still maintaining a pleasing tightness. Gunfire, explosions, crashes, and all sorts of mayhem are as genuine as they come. Gunshots hit hard and with plenty of authority; no half-power or timid shots here. Gunfire bursts with substantial bass and is apt to emanate from anywhere in the stage. Crowd chants, bangs, and other dense elements are wonderfully realized, too. The 44:40 mark brings one of the most intense moments in the track when, during a hit-and-run attack, a car is set ablaze and metal siding is beaten. Stage width and transparency there, and in the entire track, for that matter, is excellent. Dialogue is clear and natural, center positioned and well prioritized through even the most chaotic moments.

Compare with this much older review:

Universal's video transfer may have inspired a shrug or two, but the studio's rousing DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 surround track had me grinning from beginning to end. Dialogue is clean and intelligible, prioritization is spot on, and gunshots pack some heat of their own. Weighty LFE output lends oomph to every kick-kack, thoom, and roaring engine, and aggressive rear speaker activity encircles the listener with hurried crowds and brisk snow storms. John Powell's score has a palpable pulse as well, driving the film's befuddled amnesiac forward with ever-quickening bass beats and kinetic strings. Directional effects are equally effective, assaulting the listener from all angles and enveloping them in every step of Bourne's confusion plight. Moreover, pans are spy-vs-spy smooth, the soundfield becomes increasingly immersive, and dynamics rarely relent. A handful of conversations, chiefly those that take place between Damon and Potente while driving cross-country, could use some more support, but such mishaps should be attributed to the original mix, not Universal's efforts. Likewise, Liman's sound design isn't as intense as that which Greengrass employs in The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum, but that certainly isn't the result of any technical deficiency. Suffice to say, The Bourne Identity sounds fantastic.

The second review really gives a flavour of and a feel for the soundtrack and is clearly a personal view from someone who has seen the movie. The first is impersonal and 'jargony'.

Is it just me?

[spiderfan1985]

I don't know about it being written by a robot, but it could just be different reviewers. It would help if you gave the titles for the reviews. I can surmise that the second is The Bourne Identity, but what is the first? Different reviewers write differently. And frankly they are just giving the necessary information and score for the consumer to decide whether or not the dough should be spent.

[RockyIII]

How can a robot know about 'intense', 'explosive', or 'deep'??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320A using Tapatalk

[P-Rock]

This blu-ray has the bigliest sound you've ever heard. Period.

[CompleteCount]

The first review (above) is superior.

The audio portion of a review is often the one where superlatives and adjectives are thrown together, being where the experience of watching something affects the reviewer the most.

I've written reviews in the past, and repetition is an easy hole to dig yourself into, so it's best to employ synonyms and keep a check on them so as to avoid it. If you don't pans are always smooth, bass inevitably deep or subsonic, and the soundstage forever spacious. If you really want to convey just how good the audio is, then pick (maybe) three scenes and give a detailed account of then sonic engineering rather than smother it in a blanket of generic praise.

[Kbarnes70]

Originally Posted by spiderfan1985

I don't know about it being written by a robot, but it could just be different reviewers. It would help off you gave the titles for the reviews. I can surmise that the second is The Bourne Identity, but what is the first?

The two first words are the clue It's The Take.

[Kbarnes70]

Here's another robotic review (from The Inflitrator).

"Soundtrack cuts are the most exciting addition to the 5.1 DTS-HD MA sound mix, finding music most appealing, adding dimension and depth, while instrumentation remains tight. Scoring cues are equally welcome, delivering intended mood. Dialogue exchanges are engaging, isolating urgency and grand performances, never losing position as tensions rise. Accents are easily followed. Surrounds aren't especially active but capture atmospherics, delivering deeper outdoor environments and echo interiors, and group activity has its highlights. Sound effects retain fullness and snap. "

What does some of that even mean?

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

How can a robot know about 'intense', 'explosive', or 'deep'??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320A using Tapatalk

As a robot, I can't feel emotions, and that makes me very sad...