Tobaccoreviews.com - What A Joke

[cosmicfolklore]

I'm just amused that we are novice critics critiquing a site and the critiques left there by novice critics. :wink:
Yeh, I know. I'm easily amused.

 

[rmbittner]

cosmicfolklore:
I'll just take issue with "novice." Some of us have been smoking and reviewing blends for our own benefit for dozens of years. Seems a shame to label us all as "beginners."
doctorthoss wrote:
"While our tastes in tobacco are very subjective, there are some elements of what we smoke that are NOT objective. For instance, the contents of a blend. There are a LOT of mistakes in many descriptions."
Agreed. . . BUT, tin descriptions can be notorious when it comes to actually listing ingredients. A tin description can say "orientals," never mention "latakia," and still be wholly accurate even if the blend contains latakia (which is why the question of its presence in Presbyterian is so confounding). Some blenders don't mention all of the constituent leaf; for example, the current tin description for MacBaren's Roll Cake contains no mention of perique. But unless this blend has changed recently, I'm smoking a 3-year-old sample that most definitely contains perique.
Some reviewers may take a tin description as ultimate truth and align their perceptions accordingly. Others will see what they can taste and smell in a blend and ignore the tin description entirely. And then, of course, there ARE the reviewers who maybe haven't cleaned their pipes recently or who don't have enough experience to understand what they're smoking or who don't understand the terminology they're using -- and they write that Penzance's "topping" provides a light flavoring or that Old Gowrie is a nice Virginia/perique blend.
Bob

 

[bentmike]

Right on purple mountain!
This thread was a fun read. Especially Harris' comments to peck. I miss Harris and the friendly banter between those two.

 

[ravkesef]

When I read a review by Jiminks I understand, ab initio, that this is serious business. He describes the fragrances, flavor characteristics, burn, strength, etc. In short, all the information I could possibly want. Whether he likes the tobacco or not, or whether he is personally a fan of that style of tobacco is irrelevant to the review, which is about the tobacco itself, not an advertisement for his taste buds. When I read a review that contains something on the order of: "I am not a fan of Virginias/aromatics/lat blends, etc., so I'll give this one only one star," I realize that I'm in the presence of someone who ranks somewhere between an imbecile and a sphincter. I have smoked many four-star tobaccos that I absolutely detested; they were excellent tobaccos withal, my personal preferences being the least consideration for rating the tobacco. The first place I look in the review is the strength of the tobacco. If all the reviewers agree that a particular tobacco is strong, I will most likely avoid it, since I tend to go for mild and medium tobaccos. We all remember the big splash that HH Dark – fired made a couple of years ago. I never tried it, nor am I likely to, because everyone agreed that this was an extremely strong tobacco. Therefore although I am certain that as tobaccos go it would probably rate somewhere close to the "great" category, not being enamored of the things that accompany a nicotine overdose, I kept my money in my pocket. I look forward to reviews that read something like: "while I am not ordinarily a fan of VaPers, the superlative quality of this tobacco is unmistakable, and those who prefer a VaPer should certainly gravitate toward this blend." This is what we find in the world of wine reviews. Who would want to read a wine review that said: "I don't care for reds at all, so my advice to you is don't buy this Château Laffitte." GLP has an excellent article on how to review a tobacco. Would that all reviewers followed his advice.

 

[condorlover1]

Anything that contains Biblical quotes in conjunction with a review of pipe tobacco is to be avoided at all costs! I don't believe I have ever heard of anything like it in my life. It would be like translating How To Speak French into French! I want a review to tell me what the tobacco can be compared too. Does it burn slowly or does it require multiple matches to get it going. What is the nicotine yield like and how does it compare to other brands available. Things of that nature are helpful in a review as opposed to quotes from the Book of Job!

 

[ithelouniverse]

Love this thread. The bible quoting muttonhead is the least of the issues I have with that site. It seems like every tobacco review ends with

Age when reviewed: 975 years, it's been in my basement/bunker next to the ammo so long I forgot I had it...

It drives me nuts. If I'm planing on buying something, I'm buying a new tin. I know lots of people cellar. And I have one or to things set aside myself, but most people but fresh tins...

 

[JimInks]

Ravkesef: thank you for the kind words. I do take my reviews very seriously, and with a very few exceptions, make them brief and to the point. I agree that the ones with all the overblown, flowery descriptions that mean very little are boring, and makes for tedious reading. Those reviewers must have large finger blisters from turning pages in their phrase books. Just get to the point. We'll take it from there.

 

[yaddy306]

I have smoked many four-star tobaccos that I absolutely detested; they were excellent tobaccos withal, my personal preferences being the least consideration for rating the tobacco.

Good point, Ravkesef. There's a big difference between not liking a particular tobacco, and not appreciating it. For example, I appreciate jazz; I don't like it, but I sure do appreciate the musicianship involved. Same with speed metal.
In describing one of my favourite tobaccos, one reviewer on tobaccoreviews.com said "Upon opening the bag, the overwhelming aroma of menstruating skunk assaulted my senses." Come on now! That's off-side!

 

[andrew]

I agree there are alot of crap reviews on there plus some stuff that is just plain ridiculous, it does have the biggest amount of blends and reviews, and by reading through a page or so of reviews of a specific blend you'll get a good idea of what to expect from it. I also like the format of it, it's easy to find blends. I've used it quite a bit to discern whether or not to order something, and it hasn't let me down so far.

 

[anglesey]

why have I not discovered this thread before. i couldnt agree moret most of the reviews seem to have the seem listless, directionless descriptions as befits a hipster novelist filling his dull prose with meandering, dry and aimless similes and metaphors. Browsing the site is as easy as navigating a child's sandy playpen and offers such little worthwhile tobacco descriptions that I am compelled to wax lyrical as the fruitless reviews are as devoid of literary merit and punctuation and therefore as easy to read as the large sentence embossed in steel as have carved on the welsh parliament building and have little to do with the actual description of the tobacco itself and more filled with references to other things like skunk menstruating which inevitably covers up the lack of knowledge of the reviewers
Strength: Weak and vapid

Flavouring: Dry as a budgie's arse

Taste: Dewdrops on a December morning

Room note: Leaves a sour and pissed off smell
In Christ's name, keep smoking God's herb.
0 people found this review helpful. Ever.

 

[peckinpahhombre]

Ok, I would like to recant my dissing of Tobaccoreviews.com. I now admit that the site can be useful if you know how to sift through the junk. I didn't realize it then, but I believe it now.
Most humbly yours,
Peck

 

[dottiewarden]

I now admit that the site can be useful if you know how to sift through the junk.

I'm no Shakespeare, but some of those so-called reviews say absolutely nothing, some are very helpful and others just fun to read.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I've never smoked a pipe tobacco before. I'm more of a sticks and dirt sort of guy. But, when I tried this Mixture 79 stuff, I was amazed, and decided to go buy me a pipe.

 

[morton]

This probably common knowledge but, I found that by "favoriting" certain reviewers like jiminks, rmbittner, rothNH and pipestud, if I leave TR in default mode those reviewers come up first and I can see what people I trust say about a certain blend before wading through the rest of the reviews. I don't always agree with their reviews but I've got a good start anyway. The other thing I like about either review site is the description of tobaccos in the blend, whether there is a topping etc.

 

[huntertrw]

I have followed tobaccoreviews.com for a long time, and I agree with many here that some reviewers and their reviews can be inane. The key for me has been to find the former whose tastes in tobaccos seem to mirror my own, for I may then vicariously benefit from their samplings of blends I have not tried.
One such reviewer is doc'spipe (Rudy Agresta, D.O.). I find that the Doctor's reviews are to the point, well written, and very helpful to me.

 

[pruss]

Ok, I would like to recant my dissing of Tobaccoreviews.com. I now admit that the site can be useful if you know how to sift through the junk. I didn't realize it then, but I believe it now.

Praise be.
Now I can start posting reviews again.
Sincerely,
-- Gus

 

[condorlover1]

Have you seen what they say about Condor!

 

[elpfeife]

It's a travesty...the tobacco, not the reviews.

 

[misterlowercase]

The reviews for Bengal Slices Aromatic are pretty funny,

http://www.tobaccoreviews.com/blend/1073/bengal-slices-bengal-slices-aromatic
Pipestud always delivers,

I like this one:

I finally broke out a 7 year old brick a week or so ago. I was in a strange mood and figured I might as well smoke a strange tobacco. Bingo!
Cannon Plug had a very rotted fruit smell from the moment I opened the package. I took a swak and shaved it. The smell is still on my fingers a week later. I was smart enough to grab an old pipe reserved for aromatics. Although not really aromatic in flavor, Cannon Plug does leave its taste and scent in your pipe long after the tobacco has been consumed. I will own up to the fact that only a quarter bowl was consumed before I decided I was no longer in a strange mood.
Somewhat recommended for those who go totally against the grain in all that they do.

 

[meatballj]

Thanks to @Morton for the heads up on favouriting reviewers to get the best experience out of tobacco reviews. I'd done just that and its nice to see those reviewers topping my feed.