This first argument put forth in this thread is inherently flawed because it assumes all people of a certain age are in possession of the same critical faculties\amount of musical knowledge and ignores the differing approaches people have to 'criticism' and the various understandings of what it should constitute. Some people don't enjoy analysing things, some do; some people think writing about music should be esoteric and intriguing, others think... you know the score.

On a personal level, I think my music writing has deteriorated over the last two years because I began to approach it on a much more - I hate to use the word but here it is besides - 'academic' level, and this has led to my pieces being supercilious and - well - sort of boring. It's something I'm going to try and work in the future; dissemination is fine but it has to co-exist with passion and vigour. An ordinary album shouldn't breed an ordinary review - a good writer can make an ordinary album the subject of something corruscating and vital: "it makes me want to vomit and throw the vomit at them".

As people have pointed out lots already, this is all removed from the age of a critic and the post was a knee-jerk, as it were - so I apologise for the digression (missive, whatever). On a more positive slant, who're peoples' favourite music writers? Lately I've been enjoying the work of Amanda Petrusich, Chris Ballard - in fact, a group of people from the soon to be Plan B magazine - and I rather enjoyed Nadine McBay's Morrissey review currently featured here.

Um, did i just see that? how stupid is this gotthrice? he just used "gay" as an insult and then had a mini rant about homophobia. Anyway, I would prefer to liten to the music I do, which is aparently immature than be "mature" and listen to Sting or Dido as most middle aged people seem to do in this country.