The musical critique aims to clarify all doubts, with the greatest amount of information, about a musical product. However musical critic is not that person who has an accurate taste (listen to classical music and everything), but rather the one who knows how to understand and appreciate what is beautiful, sensitive, etc. But lately this is not what happens in most cases.
It is common to hear badly about the musical criticism. It is generally the musicians themselves who are the first to direct a sort of "mortal hatred" against "such critics." The most common argument is that critics speak, speak, and say nothing; moreover, critics - because they are not in the majority of cases professional musicians - speak what they do not know or do not understand in practice. That is, in this case of "music critics" we are saying more about "frustrated musicians", who hide their ignorance through subjective opinions about the work of others.
But the fault of these types of "music critics" is the professional musicians themselves who do not hold such a position and leave it to frustrated opportunists or people who are not even in the art of music.
However, one may object that "music is a matter of taste," and that is precisely what makes one's criticism unfeasible, that is, one affirms where another denies.
So just as some have a special ability to compose, to play, to sing or to rule, others manifest as teachers, thinkers, researchers or musical critics. In some cases the artisanal and reflective talent go together, however all these talents are necessary. In any case, while the musicians themselves are boycotting the development of this critical reflection, it will obviously remain insecure, prejudiced, or superficial.