Jump to content

Pitchfork Media's reaction to the new record


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 184
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Among my first purchases as a kid: Europe, Mister Mister, Pseudo Echo, and, um, Bruce Willis.

 

My first albums I owned were a K-tel Beach Boys LP, the Eagle's "The Long Run" and several Kiss albums. All gifts from adults, and all LPs.

 

The first music I bought with my own money (cassettes) were Van Halen 1984 and the first David Lee Roth release. Then I got Van Halen 1 and didn't buy any other music for three or four years. Those years were spent being shuttled around by my dad listening to the Big Chill soundtrack, and a little bit odf Neil Diamond. Eventually, I got a casette with Dead Kennedy's "Fresh Fruit for Rotting Vegetables" on one side and Circle Jerks "Wonderful" on the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My early music catalog (5 yrs old) included Grateful Dead - In The Dark, Vanilla Ice - To The Extreme, The Big Chill OST, Michael Jackson - Bad, and some MC Hammer, Fat Boyz, and Kool Moe Dee. WTF? :lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

My early music catalog (5 yrs old) included Grateful Dead - In The Dark, Vanilla Ice - To The Extreme, The Big Chill OST, Michael Jackson - Bad, and some MC Hammer, Fat Boyz, and Kool Moe Dee. WTF? :lol

 

That stuff was dope when you listened to it on a Teddy Ruxpin like I did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Pitchfork.

 

Try reading the articles section. They're usually interesting and well-written.

 

I also like Dandy Warhols, which Pitchfork take delight in bashing, but that doesn't stop me liking either of them.

 

Don't take it so personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people take reviews so seriously?

 

Curiosity leads me to read Pitchfork reviews of albums I like, but doing so never affects my enjoyment of the album. Especially since Pitchfork doesn't seem to know how to actually review albums, instead of merely discussing band images and blog hype.

 

If you disagree with the review, then ignore it. It's so simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

That was actually a pretty well-written review, except for that fact that they seem to be ignoring the fact that they were the ones calling SBS "dad-rock."

 

Considering how the bashed SBS, it was strange to see it mentioned in a positive light, but all told, it was a rather fair review. I probably would give it about a 7.3 myself.

 

I'm shocked, really. I expected them to give it a 3.something, and write a review that had nothing to do with the actual music, instead focusing on the band's image.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"but the record is more comfortable than exciting or interesting"

"Being a chilled-out grown-up may not always be exciting, but it's certainly something to admire and respect."

 

I've never really gotten this complaint at all. To me, exciting is when I find 5 bucks in my pocket.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Miraculously, the disparate strains within the group's catalog have somehow flowed together into a unifying aesthetic, largely due to Jeff Tweedy's distinctive singing voice and remarkable consistency as a songwriter."

 

This is basically what I've been saying for a long time. The Wilco sound is all based around Tweedy's voice and melodic style. Other than that, there really isn't one.

 

I'm kind of disappointed with the score, but I knew it wasn't going to do that well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly that's about what i'd give it myself.

not usually a big fan of Matthew's writing, but not a bad review.

 

i definitely agree that it's a very pleasant and enjoyable record, but with little fanfare/excitement either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That was actually a pretty well-written review, except for that fact that they seem to be ignoring the fact that they were the ones calling SBS "dad-rock."

 

Considering how the bashed SBS, it was strange to see it mentioned in a positive light, but all told, it was a rather fair review. I probably would give it about a 7.3 myself.

 

I'm shocked, really. I expected them to give it a 3.something, and write a review that had nothing to do with the actual music, instead focusing on the band's image.

 

I think the SBS review was just a bad one. This one was reviewed by a different critic - and while he did exactly what some people have complained about by carrying on a bit of a dialogue with the previous critic, I think most of us will let it slide in this case. On the whole, Pitchfork is pretty good to Wilco.

 

"Miraculously, the disparate strains within the group's catalog have somehow flowed together into a unifying aesthetic, largely due to Jeff Tweedy's distinctive singing voice and remarkable consistency as a songwriter."

 

This is basically what I've been saying for a long time. The Wilco sound is all based around Tweedy's voice and melodic style. Other than that, there really isn't one.

 

I'm kind of disappointed with the score, but I knew it wasn't going to do that well.

 

I think 7.3 is about right. Like another poster said, I don't think it would've been right for this one to get a higher score than AGIB. 7.3 is a good solid score for an album on Pitchfork. They use their entire scale (and then some), unlike publications like Rolling Stone who give pretty much every album 3-1/2 stars.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do people take reviews so seriously?

 

I always wonder the same thing. You don't need specialized training to be a rock critic, they do the same thing we all do: sit a home and give a record a listen a few times and then they write about it. Their opinion is no more or less qualified than anybody else. On the other hand, I have been on the other side of that and when my first record came out

my very first review, which was quite favorable, had suggested that I resorted to a few "melodramatic cliches" and I nearly cried!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reviewer seems pretty sure that Tweedy used to consciously write to "challenge the listener." I'm not really sure that is what Tweeedy thought when he sat down to write any of those records: "Hey, let's challenge these folks, sweet. And how can I do that?" Hm...doubtful. Writers just write, there's no "pandering" or "subversion" to it, at least as far as I know.

 

But overall it's actually the most level-headed review I've seen from Pitchfork in a long-ass time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...