Beta reviewers or the local literary critique group may not be fond of what an author has written. However, they often don’t know how to explain what they dislike. The problem could be based on style. Perhaps, the language sounds strange due to unfamiliar regionalisms, or the author has a vocabulary above that of the reviewer, or uses trite phrases ad nauseam.
The level of originality could result in critical comments because original works are not supposed to conform. Some people reading new literature become uneasy if the story bends their expectations of tropes for that genre. So, reviewers may enforce unnecessary standards for “creative” work because this quality is not based on a single component. The more that a writer pushes the envelope, the more that pinpointing what should earn the title creative versus being called ludicrous becomes a challenge.
Other people’s minds work just like that spelling and grammar checker, reading not for content but for conformity to usage that they believe to be correct. They may not accept alternate spellings such as colour or centre, even when the author is British. These reviewers may complain when words are not found in their spelling and grammar checker. However, the artificial intelligence supporting these is no where near perfect.
The most insidious problem with accepting a review of one’s work is based on personal beliefs. The piece may espouse a philosophy that the reviewer disdains. However, chances are this person will never tell the author their true feelings out of a misguided sense of politeness.
When a person is unable to describe what aspects need revision, they often resort to common over-worn expressions.
When a person assigned to assessing your work is unable or unwilling to describe what aspects need revision, they often resort to common over worn expressions, such as “move it up to another level,” “grab my attention,” or “put more into it.” These vagaries don’t address the problems at all. Rather than making the effort to show the author what is wrong with the manuscript, the critique group members advise the author to “show don’t tell,” breaking the very advice they have given.
Write about what? 
I like having an “ideal reader.” I think Stephen King used the term in one of his books or essays on writing. His ideal reader is his wife, and that’s who he writes for. I have one, and she’s brutally honest. As my alpha reader, she lets me know if a story is working. As a beta reader, she finds errors in the mechanics of my writing. It helps, of course, that she enjoys reading the genres I write. And it’s her honesty that keeps me showing her my babies before the rest of the world reads them.
Does Steven King gives his wife enough credit for her contributions to his success? What it would be like to take my rough drafts a send these immediately to an experienced editor?
King does mention her in the acknowledgments of some of his books.
There are several styles of editing beyond Strunk and White, which I learned when I worked as a graphic designer for a newspaper. I look for editors who can make my writing as simple as possible since young readers are drawn to the genres of my books. I never want my fiction to sound like it came from an instruction manual or the Wall Street Journal.
A fellow writer has become the best editor I’ve ever worked with. We write similar genres, so we trade off editing each other’s works, which keeps down the expenses of hiring editors in the business of only editing. 😉