Ghosts I-IV
by Nine Inch Nails
User Score
8.2

Universal acclaim- based on 88 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 78 out of 88
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 88
  3. Negative: 4 out of 88

Review this album

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. SquiddyM.
    Apr 12, 2008
    2
    An awful affront to the senses. If you could take a 10 car pile up and turn it into abstract noise with a rudimentary beat, it would be this album. The tracks are all very similar, and a good most of them are absolute rubbish, which is probably why we've been provided with so many of them. Quality over quantity is what you want from an album, especially when NIN have proven time and An awful affront to the senses. If you could take a 10 car pile up and turn it into abstract noise with a rudimentary beat, it would be this album. The tracks are all very similar, and a good most of them are absolute rubbish, which is probably why we've been provided with so many of them. Quality over quantity is what you want from an album, especially when NIN have proven time and again that they are capable of quality works that don't make your ears bleed. Ghosts leaves you with a feeling that just about anyone could have made these tracks, and you can certainly find a lot of better broody instrumentals for free, which begs the question, if Ghosts wasn't NIN, would anyone pay for it? At the end of the day Ghosts fails to satisfy, though if you're into the sound of heavily distorted noise mixed with a dial tone, you may just find it listenable. Everyone else would find their money better spent on a hooker with a venereal disease.… Expand
  2. Sam
    Apr 12, 2008
    3
    Its shit. clearly recorded in no time, little effort for origianlity or progression, in danger of sounding like his own cliche. The vocals on year zero were whispered...then none at all on ghosts. RUBBISH. I regret paying $5 for this, AND given how important it is that people do actually pay for music from NIN in future I'm less inclined to WANT TO next time round. I'm sure I Its shit. clearly recorded in no time, little effort for origianlity or progression, in danger of sounding like his own cliche. The vocals on year zero were whispered...then none at all on ghosts. RUBBISH. I regret paying $5 for this, AND given how important it is that people do actually pay for music from NIN in future I'm less inclined to WANT TO next time round. I'm sure I heard a sample from Downward Spiral. You can't regurgitate that!! Jesus. Move on and up trent not down and across. NEXT!… Collapse
  3. musicprophet
    Apr 17, 2008
    2
    NIN are "small time ponks." Every song sounds the frikken same. Only one band can get away with that...AC/DC.

Awards & Rankings

83
#83 Most Discussed Album of 2008

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
69

Generally favorable reviews - based on 12 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 12
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 12
  3. Negative: 0 out of 12
  1. NOW Magazine
    60
    At 36 tracks, Ghosts is as impressively ambitious as it is uneven and stunted.
    Read full review
  2. PopMatters
    80
    He shows here that he is much more than the swagger and smut of some of his previous releases. He has made it clear to the world that he has real vision and dexterity.
    Read full review
  3. Rolling Stone
    70
    Reznor's own hyperdetailed language defines the set: heaving synthesizers, doleful piano, alien-insect noises.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »