Jump to content

The 20 Worst Hipster Bands


Recommended Posts

If by brutal, you mean very very incorrect, and I'm not even talking about their opinions, but facts. I find these reviews more pretentious than the actual bands themselves. What's even sadder is that I can't even pick up a lick of sarcasm as hard as I try.

 

As Linda Richman might say, they're neither about beaches nor house music. Discuss.

How is this a discussion point?

 

The supposed "soul"-indie fusion of their early work

You named it soul, not them. You also labeled it indie, not them. Way strawman them arguments.

 

Also, Alexis Krauss started wearing her own band merch at shows, which you're really only allowed to do if you're Morrissey.

Obviously great and penetrating critique on the music itself. It's so blunt and penetrating. Man, if Pitchfork needs to sharpen up their hate, they should pick it up from these haters.

 

They spend more time on expensive and fastidious arrangements than choruses, which they sound annoyed to have to throw in occasionally.

All songs should be one eternal never-ending chorus, forever. I can just imagine it now. "Oops, I did it again. Oops, I did it again. Oops, I did it again."

 

Just more people trying to put down popular things to gain popularity. Seen that shit in high school.

If they're trying to pat themselves on the back, they're doing a good job. If they're trying to write an auto-biography and project it onto other musical figures, they're doing it very well.

 

This is the exact type of manufactured shit that keeps top 40 monotonous. This circular thinking. Man, if only my mind were that simple.

 

EDIT: Deriving humor from things that are false doesn't work. Please examine Stephen Colbert, Jon Steward, Louis C.K., and more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find these reviews more pretentious than the actual bands themselves.

 

Agree. The only thing worse than "hipsters" are people continually whining about "hipsters" and how they dress, what they listen to, etc. It's ironic how they're complaining about the very same type of snobbery they're demonstrating with their own words.

 

Just relax and let people enjoy what they enjoy. Or let them pretend to enjoy what they think is popular/cool/whatever with their social group... it's not the first time this has happened and it's not the end of the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the exact type of manufactured shit that keeps top 40 monotonous. This circular thinking. Man, if only my mind were that simple.

 

EDIT: Deriving humor from things that are false doesn't work. Please examine Stephen Colbert, Jon Steward, Louis C.K., and more.

 

this last sentence--pot kettle black. no one's innocent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey they are just trying to make a living. (Bon Iver though, yea pretty much correct.)

 

Luckily from working at Pitchfork the last few years I have encountered most of thse bands so I don't feel totally out of it.

 

(Meanwhile LA Weeklly needs an award for the most code heavy website ever.)

 

LouieB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I liked Bon Iver when he came out with his first EP.. And he was great live opening for Wilco in a room of about 50 people.. But when he started working with Kanye, it was all down hill from there..

 

And I agree, Black Keys shouldn't be on that list. They may be a hipster band to some, but they kick ass way too much to be labeled as a "worst hipster band".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The probelm is that if these are the worst groups (I liked Beach House this year at Pitchfork, though I knew nothing about them) then who are the good ones?

 

That's a good question. It is certainly easier and more comfortable to indict the artistic shortcomings of a band than to defend them. Especially when your nose is high in the air.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all three of those men are particularly funny.

Yes, they are very funny. I'm saying examine as in "please study the following comedians before you try to assert your voice in disastrously horrible comedy where you have no control of English, or language, or vowels."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Snarky is the new insightful.

 

Remember when music journalism wasn't a total oxymoron?

 

Remember Lester Bangs?

 

Remember Greil Marcus, Mikal Gilmore and Dave Marsh before they Ossified?

 

Now, people who write about music want to see how cute and snarky they can be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think youre confusing tongue in cheek/snarky blog posts designed to get web hits with music journalism.

 

Same animal, different stripe. The buggy whip factory that is the hard copy music magaine/newspaper have been pushed to irrelevancy with the anarchy of the interwebs. These guys want web hits just like the magazines and newspapers wanted to sell you printed paper.

 

It just makes me feel like an old man railing against 'progress' when it is in fact 'regress'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think youre confusing tongue in cheek/snarky blog posts designed to get web hits with music journalism.

 

That's why I've never really been big into music journalism. Crow is right. Most of it is very snarky and they all seem to follow the same cliche's. I mean, I don't think anyone at Pitchfork has an anus. At least they don't think they do...

 

When deciding to purchase an album, I either come here or skip right to the comments sections of album reviews..

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I've never really been big into music journalism. Crow is right. Most of it is very snarky and they all seem to follow the same cliche's. I mean, I don't think anyone at Pitchfork has an anus. At least they don't think they do...

 

When deciding to purchase an album, I either come here or skip right to the comments sections of album reviews..

 

It's true. I can see a level of snarkiness, or analness, might be a response to the deluge of artists. People trying to filter through a sea of new albums might feel more effective by being pickier, and therefore more cynical.

 

It seems the best music journalism warrants another listen after reading the review. It might bring up points to enhance, or challenge the listening experience. Some writers at Pitchfork seem pretty good at that. If anything a site like Pitchfork gets picked on because of their cultural relevance. People resent a false pretext that what Pitchfork says is necessarily true. It's kind of like that old forum argument of wanting people to qualify every strong opinion on music with a couple IMO's, or IMHO's.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of other, snottier, music blogs.... like this top 20 one. Which makes some good points, but maybe decided to weaponize snark. That's what seems to draw people in. That's what can pass for authority.

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...