Critics give Back to the Water Below a B-Side Breakdown of 75 (C), from 8 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 60 to 80.
The verdict on Back to the Water Below
5 of 8 critics liked it. A mixed reception.
- Highest 80 The Telegraph, Mojo, NME and 2 more
- Lowest 60 Rolling Stone
- Career Tied for #2 of Royal Blood's 5 albums with a Breakdown
| The gist | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Telegraph via Wikipediaby Neil McCormick | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | |
| Mojo via Wikipedia | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | |
| NME via Wikipediaby Erica Campbell | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | “Royal Blood's new album sees them self-produce and tap back into the undeniable chemistry that first brought them success.” |
| DIY via Wikipediaby Sarah Jamieson | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | “Certainly a more successful attempt at broadening their horizons.” |
| Kerrang! via Wikipediaby Mark Sutherland | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | “Royal Blood start to atone for Big Weekend meltdown with cracking fourth album…” |
| Metal Planet Music | 3.5/5 | 70 | 2023 | “Royal Blood are English rock duo Mike Kerr (vocals and bass) and Ben Thatcher (drums). They were signed by Warner Chappell Music in 2013 and have since released four albums:…” |
| The Line of Best Fit via Wikipediaby Finlay Holden | 7/10 | 70 | 2023 | “As a diverse and cohesive project, this album is uniquely placed in the Royal Blood discography. Back To The Water Below grounds fluctuating moods throughout a well-crafted journey for listeners…” |
| Rolling Stone via Wikipediaby Joe Goggins | 3/5 | 60 | 2023 | “As their recent histrionics proved, Royal Blood want to be seen as rock's next great torchbearer. This fourth album says otherwise.” |
Every Sunday: the week's new albums, scored by the critics. Plus our own reviews when we post them. Free, and one click to leave.
Back to the Water Below in Royal Blood's catalog
How these critics usually treat Royal Blood
- NME About usual for them6 points above the other critics here. Usually 5 points above on Royal Blood's other albums (4).
More from Royal Blood
More Rock from around 2023
Would you spin it again?
Be the first to answer. Results show once 3 listeners weigh in.
How the Breakdown works
Every outlet’s score is converted to 0–100 (2/5 is 40, 5.9/10 is 59, a B+ is 88) and averaged. Grades follow the B-Side scale: A is 90–100, B 80–89, C 70–79, D 60–69, F below 60. Approval is the share of critics who scored it 75 or higher; the Breakdown shows green at 75 and up, red below. Divisiveness asks a different question: not how many critics liked it, but how close their scores are to each other. Five critics who all give it 50 are Unanimous, even though none of them liked it. The labels run Unanimous, Broad agreement, Some debate, Divided, and Contentious. Replay rate comes from listeners, not critics: yes counts fully, a few tracks counts half, no counts zero. The gist quotes each outlet’s own summary of its review. Published is the date on the review itself, read from the outlet’s page, so you can see whether an album’s reputation came at release or years later. Scores marked est. come from reviews that publish no number. Scores marked via Wikipedia are archive ratings, mostly for older albums, taken from the “Professional ratings” box on the album’s Wikipedia page (published openly through Wikidata); each links to the original review when we can find it online, and to that Wikipedia entry when we can’t. When an outlet reviewed an album twice, years apart (often for a reissue), both scores count, each labeled with its year.
A-Side marks the critics’ top tier. An album earns it automatically, from its numbers alone: a Breakdown of 90 or higher, from at least 5 reviews, with at least 75% approval. Nobody hands it out and nobody can buy it; if new reviews pull an album below the line, it loses the badge.






Leave a Reply