!goose! Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I see your point Louie.you are so cute and clever, cutie! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Killer Whales Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I do think its sad that there's already 3 pages on a review that hasnt been written about an album we haven't heard, but I'll add to it anyway because I'm a hypocrite. Pitchfork does tend to focus a bit much on being hip and breaking the next big thing, but I still read it every day, have already picked up some great records on their suggestion this year (How would I have heard Japandroids?) and agree with around 75% of their reviews. I don't expect them to give this a good review as they completely missed the ball on Ghost and (somewhat) on SBS, but with the amount of influence they have over indie listeners, here's to hoping they focus on the music and give a (hopefully) great album its due. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Clint09eastwood Posted May 7, 2009 Author Share Posted May 7, 2009 Pitchfork is just a website... Their album ratings are pretty consistent in terms of what they rate well or rate poorly. YHF overlapped pretty well with what they typically like, SBS did not. If the new album contains the sort of things they value, it will score well, if it doesn't it won't. If their tastes don't overlap with yours, calm down and read some other music site. I am calm, however, you said it depends on what they value. The thing is, Pitchfork only values what they think is "cool" at the time, and they turn on the artists that have been around (Radiohead excluded). If this is an example of "value," then that alone invalidates Pitchfork. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bird jam Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Pitchfork is just a website... Their album ratings are pretty consistent in terms of what they rate well or rate poorly. YHF overlapped pretty well with what they typically like, SBS did not. If the new album contains the sort of things they value, it will score well, if it doesn't it won't. If their tastes don't overlap with yours, calm down and read some other music site.I don't get this anti-Pitchfork attitude. Like any review site, they review things so you don't have to buy everything that ever existed to find things you like. If they give things high marks that you think are awful, maybe Pitchfork is not for you. If they give things low marks that you think are manifestations of god on earth, then maybe Pitchfork is not for you. I tend to find that Pitchfork matches my taste most of the time and so when they give something a high mark and it sounds like something I would like, I go buy it. I discovered the New Pornographers and Destroyer that way. Of course, they gave the new Mates of State a middling review and I liked it (though not as much as Bring It Back), so they don't represent my exact taste. Really, Wilco reviews are of limited use to anyone here. We're going to buy the album regardless of what anyone says so looking up Wilco reviews seems like an exercise in insecurity -- we want to be sure that other people think that our taste is cool. Sorry, but the really cool kids still don't think we're cool; it's better if we just accept that and be happy liking what we like. These two posts sum up my feelings about Pitchfork pretty well. How can people get so angry about what other people (they have never met) think about an album? Do you really need your love of Wilco (or whomever) to be validated by everyone else in the world agreeing with you? That sounds like a you problem, not a Pitchfork problem. I guess it all depends what you are looking for when you read a record review, whether it is Pitchfork, Rolling Stone, or wherever. If you are looking for someone else's thoughts on something, unafraid of differing viewpoints, then reading record reviews can be interesting, productive, and even fun. If you are looking for a stamp of approval of your own musical taste, I guess they can make your blood boil. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dude Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 What gives Pitchfork (or Rolling Stone or any rock critic for that matter) the authority to determine what records are good and what aren't? That's the $64,000 question. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Is that a joke Louie or are you getting impatient with all of the jocks and frat boys?I have been fed up with them for some time. Not to mention vacuous and sometimes slightly crazy young women too. I see your point Louie.Thanks. I can't believe there are three pages already on something that hasn't even been written.me either. you are so cute and clever, cutie! that kiss should be for me. Since when did pitchfork go with a one out of 10 rating system. I thought they were whatever out of 100?? Guess as the dad of the group I just don't spend enough time on the website to have noticed this. LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Three dollars and 63 cents Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 What gives Pitchfork (or Rolling Stone or any rock critic for that matter) the authority to determine what records are good and what aren't? That's the $64,000 question. The ridiculous number of people who feel like they need somebody else to tell them how they should think about pretty much anything they encounter in our culture. It seems like so many people are afraid to think for themselves these days, and I for one find that pretty sad. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Since when did pitchfork go with a one out of 10 rating system. I thought they were whatever out of 100??That would be a funny onion article: 'Pitchfork reveals rating system is actually based on "1-100"; hates everything ever released' Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I can't believe there are three pages already on something that hasn't even been written. It's people like you that make forums so irritating... If you don't like the thread... you don't have to read it. Otherwise, shut your mouth bc comments like that don't make you seem mature or cool, just annoying Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bird jam Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 LOUD NOISES!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 These two posts sum up my feelings about Pitchfork pretty well. How can people get so angry about what other people (they have never met) think about an album? Do you really need your love of Wilco (or whomever) to be validated by everyone else in the world agreeing with you? That sounds like a you problem, not a Pitchfork problem. I guess it all depends what you are looking for when you read a record review, whether it is Pitchfork, Rolling Stone, or wherever. If you are looking for someone else's thoughts on something, unafraid of differing viewpoints, then reading record reviews can be interesting, productive, and even fun. If you are looking for a stamp of approval of your own musical taste, I guess they can make your blood boil. This is what frustrates me about forums, the poster merely commented that Pitchfork reviews based on the "hip scene," but of course people find room for criticism in order to make themselves seem intelligent, mature, and loyal to the band. The poster never stated that he or she seeks approval for their own musical taste in pitchfork. they were just commenting on an often frustrating aspect of a music reviewer. Don't question whether or not someone's love of the band needs to be validated, because that is NOT WHAT THEY SAID. Pitchfork's influence is undeniable, it is just unfortunate that they approach music, or music scenes rather (in general) the way they do. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rhino4evr Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 So...if Pitchfork gives this album a good review will you all love them again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 So...if Pitchfork gives this album a good review will you all love them again? Once again... NEVER SAID THAT... If Pitchfork gives the album a good review, hopefully it will be because of the music, not because the record matches a certain aesthetic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bird jam Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 This is what frustrates me about forums, the poster merely commented that Pitchfork reviews based on the "hip scene," but of course people find room for criticism in order to make themselves seem intelligent, mature, and loyal to the band. The poster never stated that he or she seeks approval for their own musical taste in pitchfork. they were just commenting on an often frustrating aspect of a music reviewer. Don't question whether or not someone's love of the band needs to be validated, because that is NOT WHAT THEY SAID. Pitchfork's influence is undeniable, it is just unfortunate that they approach music, or music scenes rather (in general) the way they do. You seem to have missed my point entirely. There is a lot of serious anger at Pitchfork in this thread and others. If Pitchfork pisses you off that much, don't read it. If any reviews of anything (which are, by their very nature, purely subjective,) piss you off that much, then you should probably steer clear of reviews. Buy a parrot. Similarly, if message boards frustrate you, then posting on them about your frustration seems like an exercise in futility. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 You seem to have missed my point entirely. There is a lot of serious anger at Pitchfork in this thread and others. If Pitchfork pisses you off that much, don't read it. If any reviews of anything (which are, by their very nature, purely subjective,) piss you off that much, then you should probably steer clear of reviews. Buy a parrot. Similarly, if message boards frustrate you, then posting on them about your frustration seems like an exercise in futility. Ha. Ha. You also missed mine... Pitchfork can write what they want, but it is frustrating that they have such an influence. For example, it is common knowledge that Pitchfork has a make or break factor in up and coming bands. A review can be a blessing or a curse. It is just unfortunate that a reviewer that reviews music through factors having nothing to do with the music itself commands such influence. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 It's people like you that make forums so irritating This is what frustrates me about forums OMG I hate the internet Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 You should be so proud of that post! I bet you feel great! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I'm gonna guess you're frustrated and/or irritated right now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
adl6690 Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I'm gonna guess you're frustrated and/or irritated right now. Nah, but I'll guess that there is no possibility that the actual topic will be given any thought, just attempts to make others seem immature and irrational for your own benefit.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Seriously - the "actual topic" is SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T YET EXIST. So, calm down. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Seriously - the "actual topic" is SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T YET EXIST. So, calm down. You're so irritating. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 OK, so here's the story: we're going to get a lot of new posters in the next few weeks, here to talk about the new album, the lawsuit, whatever. New people: please try not to antagonize folks right off the bat. We're a generally friendly group (with a few exeptions ), so please try to make your first few posts at least somewhat constructive and sincere. Old-timers: please try not to jump right into a pissing contest with the new guy. Do your best to be welcoming, and if possible, steer the conversation in a constructive and reasonable direction. I'm not saying that people can't disagree, but it would great to see people making an effort to get off on the right foot with each other. Thanks for playing along. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 OK, so here's the story: we're going to get a lot of new posters in the next few weeks, here to talk about the new album, the lawsuit, whatever.Damn! Kid's we better straighten up! Get that underwear off the floor! Company!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Three dollars and 63 cents Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 I got hazed when I was a n00b, and I still came back Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gogo Posted May 7, 2009 Share Posted May 7, 2009 Oh, and don't think I won't delete bullshit posts. Because I will. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.