On the death of REAL music criticism

[PopTodd]

It's a video, only about 10:00 long; and very engaging.

http://idolator.com/5243982/see-there-is-a-way-to-make-people-care-about-rock-criticism-again

 

Dig it.

[cloudsofhiss]

It's a video, only about 10:00 long; and very engaging.

http://idolator.com/5243982/see-there-is-a-way-to-make-people-care-about-rock-criticism-again

 

Dig it.

 

Entertaining. He talks about the insularity of blog/indie world, but I'm not sure where he's coming from. Rolling Stone (can you get more traditional than this?) gave the new U2 and new Bruce Springsteen ablums 5's. The new Dirty Projectors album gets a 3. RS isn't exactly challenging their readers to seek out new stuff are they?

[brianjeremy]

It was an entertaining video. I did like what he said about people not saying why they like a band and the absence of dialogue about why we like or dislike something. I don't twitter or anything, so I guess I'm not hip to some things he's talking about. All I have is woefully out of date myspace page and my musical taste seem to be in line with what the man is talking about: insular.

 

I guess that's okay for me. I love music but I won't ever listen to things like rap or whatever - that sort of music doesn't matter to me.

 

I don't know about you guys but I don't listen to music critics too often. I may pick up a record that gets a good review every now and again but I really could give a rip about what some critic has to say. I will pick up an album from p-fork review because they are in line with my tastes. Take Wavves for example, so many people hate that band and there's all sorts of trash talk about them. I don't care - the record is jam up and jelly tight. If I like it, I like. The indie-tast makers can come beat down my door and rip me a new for all I care.

 

It sucks that these guys are losing their jobs and such but I have always been wary of Rolling Stone reviews and such. Who in their right mind gives Mick Jagger a 5 star? U2's latest a 5 star? Ugh, who cares what they have to say? IMO - Get a real job and keep your opinions to yourself, you mouthy sum-bitches.

[Vacant Horizon]

well, i love this stuff. thanks for posting. i must say, however, that music is ultimately self-centered. just as this individual's opinions about music criticism are self-centered. he does make a great point that i keep coming back to myself...the idea of the lowest common denominator. it's real and it's huge. not to sound elitist, but most people are average or below average in EVERYTHING and are quite adolescent in their psychology. so, the markets are gonna go for the middle and since that's where most people are, it's gonna get the most noise. the outliers, incidently, are either masterful or complete crap. a good example is any band discussed on this board. wilco-masterful...fleet foxes-complete crap. of course, that's my opinion and i do like some of the lower common denominator myself, like the Eagles:)

 

another point that he makes is that music is so immediate and there's so much and everyone listens to everything. this, i can't stand. it's ruined music for me to some extent. i miss the days i would save up to buy one cd i really wanted every few weeks and just wear it out. now, music seems so disposable.

[Golden Smoghead]

now, music seems so disposable.

 

I do not know that I totally agree with this. Yes, albums are probably much, much less important. Recordings are effectively free and therefore of far lower value than they were previously. But to me that just means that the most valuable parts of music have left the recording studio where they lived for 80ish years, and migrated back to stages and porches.

 

In a lot of ways I'm OK with that. Bring on the ephemeral magic of music-in-the-moment! I think it's good to put music back into instruments and out of machines / earbuds / what have you.

 

Of course this is exaggeration, but I support the arc of music-emphasis AWAY from recordings and TOWARDS making the live show be the pinnacle musical experience.

[John Smith]

When I read rock critics, as well as movie critics, I don't generally give the overall rating much more than a quick glance(stars, 1 - 10 scale, condemend etc...). Generally they don't give a basis for those rankings. Are they ranking against all time albums? Current releases? Current releases in the same genre? The artists past work? There is no real point of reference. Nope, what I generally do is read the critics just for a point of reference on what the album is all about. I also generally don't read them for artists I intend to buy until after I listen to the album a few times. For instance I expect the next Wilco album to be heavily reviewed and I most likely won't read any reviews until I have the album a couple of weeks. I don't want the review to spoil my view of the work. And I like to read it after mainly to get the perspective and to see if I agree or disagree.

 

Just my .02.

[Vacant Horizon]

I do not know that I totally agree with this. Yes, albums are probably much, much less important. Recordings are effectively free and therefore of far lower value than they were previously. But to me that just means that the most valuable parts of music have left the recording studio where they lived for 80ish years, and migrated back to stages and porches.

 

In a lot of ways I'm OK with that. Bring on the ephemeral magic of music-in-the-moment! I think it's good to put music back into instruments and out of machines / earbuds / what have you.

 

Of course this is exaggeration, but I support the arc of music-emphasis AWAY from recordings and TOWARDS making the live show be the pinnacle musical experience.

 

 

thanks...these are very good points. i certainly enjoy hearing myself on guitar:)