Spleen, it all comes back to 'dare to be bad' which should be branded on every musician's backside. If a band or individual aren't experimenting they're dealing in mass production. If a reviewer can accommodate the superficially bad and know when it's potentially brilliant, good luck to him. If not he's another cog in the wheels of commerce.

Regarding the thread about someone being an 'embarrassment' of a blues player - what does that mean? It's pejorative nonsense thrown by a reviewer to make himself feel better about his choices. Stephen Fry has an anecdote about reviewers at the pearly gates which begins, 'And why should you be allowed to stay?' 'I told everyone where they were going wrong.', Say that again..'