quote:

---

Originally posted by philosopherEric: That Rogue Wave record, however, is a left-field hit to my ears. It's what I wanted the Shins to sound like...

---

Well, thanks pE, for agreeing AND disagreeing with me in one sentence. Rogue Wave's "Out of the Shadow" is pretty awesome, but I still like the Shins better. This is the kinda stuff that solidifies friendships though.

I think the main thing to remember when criticizing Pitchfork, or anyother media outlet for that matter, is that they have their own specific angle to persue. I'm not saying it's necessarily political motivations, a la Fox News or The Daily Show, but like Spin, Rolling Stone, and every other publication, Pitchfork has thier own intended audience as well as a specific image they wish to put forth.

In the case of Pitchfork, the angle/intendedaudience seems to be "post-collegiate, former slackers/potheads who are confused that their once artistic superiority is now viewed mostly as mere condisention". Or, to put it more bluntly, knowing cool bands won't get you laid forever.

i agree with that point. a good friend and i always laugh when rolling stone comes out with their yearly list of top cds of the year. obviously whoever chose those cds does not hang out with us and thinks nothing like us. but on the other hand, they hang out with someone and think a certain way. their tastes and audiences (especially in a magazine article) influence their choices in music. does that mean that everything they say is crap? not really. i think it means, read and pay attention to the sources of music criticism that you can identify with, and the rest, well, leave them for someone else.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rockbotle:

Or, to put it more bluntly, knowing cool bands won't get you laid forever.

---

Wow...I didn't know it got you laid AT ALL! I must have missed something in my days as a college DJ...

Pitchfork certainly has its angles, and I often find the reviewers to be either too precious or deliberately combative in their reviews (owing, I think, to the fact that rock criticism is not a well-respected genre of criticism), but they cover a lot of good bands that get no uptake elsewhere and provide good daily doses of news.

In the end, I don't think anyone should give too much credit to any one review or reviewer...I tend to read reviews for what I feel are the more relevant pieces of information about the artist or the record, and not merely the reviewers opinions. Of course, there are always going to be people whose musical opinions carry more weight with me than others, but it's still only an opinion.

first off i love pitchfork...i like reviewers who put personal light and personal references or experiences in reviews.Instaead of the robotic approach some magazines use..or the 50 word review...that gives u nothing.

anyways...i was at a record store...itis kind of independant...it is located strategically near many major mall sin the greater puget sound area of washington state.It is usually grotequely over priced...but it is conveniant because they carry alot of stuff that u will not find anywhere...i went in just to look...mainly looking for a couple imports that they might have been hiding away.As I was looking i overheard one man asking the worker about a "dfa" comp...which i owned and bought the first day it was out at my local indie shop.What was funny was another man came in literally minutes later after the first gentleman had walked out...he again asked about said compilation.They both referenced pitchfork...like..."you know the one pitchfork gave a 9.0"..or something along those lines...since i couldnt ask the first man...i asked the second man...why he was so excited about this album...he had never heard of the label...or any of the artists...which is cool...i like new things.But then he said...i try to buy anything pitchfork gives a good score to...whether i like the style or have heard of it or not.

I strted to laugh and walked away...i mean this guy was in his mid 30's and was clearly trying to hold onto the one sliver of youth he had left...i am not going to bash that though...i am sure there are many of you who frequent this site.

But i asked myself...why would a man who seemed intelligent and mature...put all his beans into an album which he may not like.I mean i have boughten albums on a whim...after hearing a few songs...and have been totally dissapointed.

I guess pitchfork is special...or maybe not...i dont know...i guess seeing in my own eyes two people referencing an album that is extremely overrated...by many sites...by the biggest review site(sorry i dont count amg as a review site...because it sucks).I guess that is just my opinion...are people that easily foiled into buying an album...or anything for that matter if it gets a good review...reviews are biased and they can be payed to push a certain album...i guess it just makes me a bit sad thats all...people cant make decisions for themselves...

this was just on my mind...i am sure it is hard to read...it just kind of spilled out of my brain...and my typing sucks...so let me know what u think!

Okay, I personally like the reviews of the bands that I actually know. I generally stay away from this rerun of the grundge era, but they gave the first SOAD album a 7.5, they gave the only good Korn album, Follow the Leader, a 6.9, and they gave Kid Rock and 1.3. Overall I think they did a good job. Seems they dislike giving hundreds away and use the entire scale. With most critics a 6 is bad and 8 is good and a 10 is above average. I do not know most of the bands there but I think they are doing a pretty good job.

quote:

---

I guess pitchfork is special...or maybe not...i dont know...i guess seeing in my own eyes two people referencing an album that is extremely overrated...

---

quote:

---

are people that easily foiled into buying an album...or anything for that matter if it gets a good review

---

I enjoy this site but I generally do not listen to the critics that much. They can, of course, have bias, or they just dislike some things that I do like. People like that depend soley on other people to tell them what is good music, I do not totally agree with that.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: St. Mike,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Imprezu21:
I strted to laugh and walked away...i mean this guy was in his mid 30's and was clearly trying to hold onto the one sliver of youth he had left...i am not going to bash that though...i am sure there are many of you who frequent this site.

---

Imprezu21, you are a credit to these forums. I hope you make this a virtual home for a long time. Well, at least for another ten years or so because on behalf of the handful of thirty-somethings and older around here, I am so ABSOLUTELY GOING TO RUB YOUR NOSE IN THIS ONE DAY!!!

Whipper snapper...

Now Playing: NPR's All Things Considered

quote:

---

Originally posted by LinnTate:
on behalf of the handful of thirty-somethings and older around here, I am so ABSOLUTELY GOING TO RUB YOUR NOSE IN THIS ONE DAY!!!

---

As a young lad, back in the 1970's, I would buy anything that Creem Magazine gave a good score to...whether I liked the style or had heard of it or not.



Well, anything except the New York Dolls, that is.

.

PITCHFORK ROCKS NUFF' SAID

You don't need Pitchedfork or any other baloney magazine to tell you what to listen to. Listen to Megatron, and i will impart my wisdom upon all of you. Your assignment for next week is to buy 2 copies of "Rubber Factor" by the Black Keys. Keep one copy for yourself and give the other copy to someone you love. I give the album 2.8 out of 3 stars.

Gentle readers take note...THAT is the way to recommend an album!

Bravo...Megatron...bravo...

Now Playing: "White Horse" Laid Back on XM 80s channel

It's a different rating system anyway. That's refreshing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Imprezu21:
i guess it just makes me a bit sad thats all...people cant make decisions for themselves...

---

It's difficult enough keeping up with music in your teens. Add a 60-hour a week job, maybe a dependent, a meek attempt at a social life, perhaps a personality disorder you've somehow developed — Holy crap! — now you're 30.

So not everyone has the time to listen to every album and make "informed" choices. The guy was just looking for a little direction; if not for iTunes and 9 hours on the internet, I'd be in the same position, my hatred for Pitchfork not withstanding.

It would be cool if a magazine had a variable rating system. Like, one review would use an "X out of four", another could use a X.X, and whatever other numerical systems you could come up with. Said magazine could also use one-phrase ratings, like "This will slay your face off" or "Download it" or "Fans of the genre will love it". They could also use Buddyhead's pictures of Axl Rose.

I strongly believe in the short sentance rating system as opposed to numbers and stars. Good call.

reccomendation:
- Buy immediately
- Buy when it goes on sale
- Good for Valentines
- Not for human consumption
- Should be shot on sight

...that kinda thing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filmore Holmes:
I strongly believe in the short sentance rating system as opposed to numbers and stars. Good call.

reccomendation:
- Buy immediately
- Buy when it goes on sale
- Good for Valentines
- Not for human consumption
- Should be shot on sight

...that kinda thing.

---

I like non sequiter reviews...this new record by (insert indie band here) is (explitive)(adjective)(vague stylistic description). I give it one cheeseburger out of a possible squirrel cage.

I like Pitchfork. Of course, some of their reviews are off the mark, and their novelty reviews (see their "Slanted and Enchanted: Luxe and Reduxe" one) can be annoying, but a means of discovering relatively unknown, indepenent artists is always good.

Pitchfork has announced a major relaunch scheduled for 01/10/05 to include 1) a major site redesign, 2) new daily columns, and 3) a larger weekly feature.

I'll be glad to see a redesign. What I'm mostly interested in, though, is how they handle expanded content. Daily snarky reviews and glib takes on select stories in music news are fun and all, but don't take nearly the effort of conducting interviews and throwing another couple of thousand or so words on a weekly basis.

Now Playing: "In A Silent Way" Don Byron Ivey-Divey (Blue Note)

I wonder if they're going to get all Flash-y (note the uppercased F) with the site.

I can imagine the new intro to the site:

Indie lookin' dewd is about to go out into the day, and we see him unhooking his ipod from his computer after (we all know) putting on some songs that he found out about from Pitchfork.

He walks out onto the street and hits play. It zooms in to the guy's head, and we see a quasi-psychadelic montage of indie bands goin' nuts "creating the music that fills our lives" set to some Broken Social Scene song or something like that. Then, the Pitchfork "pitchfork" logo crashes from above and a wave of electricity cascades through the screen. Finally, the word "Pitchfork" fades in to the right of the logo. Then you are redirected to the homepage.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buck "Sweetie" McGuck:
Then you are redirected to the homepage.

---

.....but not before they slip in a popup ad for "suicidegirls.com"

.