 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 263 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613489 Today 15 Topics 127504 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I just wasted good money on that Trail of Dead album, Source Tags and Codes, on the theory that if so many critics like it I must be missing something. Well I wasn't. :-( I knew I should have picked up Thought for Food by The Books. Zammuto is a fricking genius. I will have to content myself with the MP3s until next weekend... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
which mag was reviewing if it is rolling stone, it is a crap mag |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Most mags are crap... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i tust Q |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Fuck Q, it gave Druqks 5/10 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
or was it 2/5.... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Actually, it was pitchfork. The guy who reviewed it was practically *rimming* them. I should have recognized the spoor of the fanboy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well you have to understand rating 2 out of 5 means it is for listeners of that kind of music only meaning for idm listeners not somebody who is into country music 5 appeal to everybody 4 lots of people and recomended 3 you might wanna investigate if you are adventurous 1 that is your own choice...wanna avoid it and get something else |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't trust reviews! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Here is pitchfork's rating system: 10.0: Essential 9.5-9.9: Spectacular 9.0-9.4: Amazing 8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year 8.0-8.4: Very good 7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable 7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough 6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong 5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful 4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit 3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities 2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad 1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track 0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible On that scale I would have given it 7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable or 7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough Essential?! My ass. Not by any standards. Someone polished that reviewer's knob till it gleamed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sometimes pitchfork are up their own arse. they way overhyped trail of dead - their songs are decent vintage sonic youth tributes at best. also they gave the shalabi effect album an emphatic 10/10 and it's an annoying, pointless, pretentious album. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
q, at least in this country, is for volvo-driving middle-aged twats that wear black shoes with ironed jeans and go on about how much they like the gallachers (pronounced with a "k" sound) in a bland attempt to pretend like their youth slipt away from them long ago: on the way home from buying a copy of q and booking a holiday in tuscany for his family with children called timothy and olivia, he turns off his stereophonics cd and starts crying... he is a hollow shell of middle class escapism and fakery... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sorry, rant pushed me over the edge "youth didn't slip away long ago" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Pitchfork has turned me on to good music in the past but must be approached with extreme caution. Sometimes they're dead wrong--they gave Go Plastic 5/10 which is unbelievable. Are they stone deaf? What's amusing is that Confield was one of their albums of the year yet the reviewer freely admitted he didn't quite know what to make of it. This is why people like Basquiat get famous. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That Trail of Dead album is pretty rockin but nothing spectacular IMO. I still give it a spin once in a while but I don't dwell on it too much. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
