 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (3)w M w Tony Danza dariusgriffin ...and 200 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614114 Today 11 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
let's start a betting pool on what pitchfork is gonna give upcoming albums. we can start guessing now long before we (or they) hear the albums because pitchfork are so predictable. radiohead: 6.5 massive attack: 7.2 mogwai: 7.8 aphex remixes: 6.0 zwan: 4.2 cat power: 8.8 autechre: 3.2 blur: 5.4 kid606: 6.3 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this is purely a GUESS.....but i know they like to BASH....tee hee radiohead: 7 massive attack: 8 mogwai: 7 aphex remixes: 8 zwan: 6 cat power: 7 autechre: 5 blur: 7 kid606: 5 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
somehow i agree with most pitchfork reviews........ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i liked how they trashed the new godspeed album for not having "cool samples." good logic there. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol pitchforrk suck. so does the NME. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i read my own reviews |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
So...why read a rag that's undoubtedly bias? Why not work on your site and give out information that people can find out for themselves and decide on the quality of an album and/or band? You have better info and links than any of these music mags have, so why waste your time venting on something that's going to do whatever the hell it wants, regardless of the facts? Seriously...I'm tired of hearing: "This magazine is obviously biased and doesn't what it's doing!". NO SHIT! I KNEW THAT ALREADY! Rolling Stone Spin Pitchfork NME You can't polish a turd... ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
www.allmusic.com |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
is much better i agree :) and is a very good idea. though i like reading some pitchfork reviews, they aren't reliable at all but sometimes they are funny. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
reviews are opinions on music - if we all read reviews and followed them closely we'd all share the same opinions sounds 1984 to me |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sounds LIKE 1984 - god i suck don't read my reviews on boards |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i rread rreviews beforre i get a CD. if allmusic gives it 1 starr i know to steerr clearr. if NME give it 5 starrs i know to steerr clearr. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but allmusic gave bogdan shit reviews - they just have a good way of talking about the music - as in what the artist tends to sound like, uses, etc - i dont follow the stars - that system is ALL fcut up they also have good "similar artists" so you can figure if you like this band then you MAY like this other band rock on like wesley willis |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I can see it now: Wilco - Yankee Motel Foxfire - 2003 10.00 Who would've thought these once nu-country act cum alt-rock art pop superstars could outdo themsleves after last year's near-flawless epic 'Yankee Hotel Foxtrot'. Well, we have an answer. With impeccable song structures, more creative lyrics, and shining production from renaissance man Jim O'Rourke, 'Yankee Motel' picks up right where the last one left off and is inseparable from it's Nonesuch companion. Thank God for Wilco in an age when truly landmark and groundbreaking albums do not come every day. meanwhile... Autechre - Draft 7.30 - 2003 0.7 Wow! A new sound effect! With this release, Ae churns up another piece of rehashed unlistenability that they experimented on last year's travesty: gantz_graf. .. ... ... I can just feel it :| |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lil weezey: you don't have to agree with someone to get something out of what they say. i look at MOST pitchfork reviews as examples of what i consider bad journalism (and cliche rock culture). some reviews i look at as outstanding and exemplary of what music journalism should be. they have some gifted writers. the point is, it can be fun to read heavily biased material. occasionally i'll agree; usually i won't. but almost always do i not only get a good study out of pitchfork, i get the names of some songs to check out (and decide for myself if they're as good or bad as pitchfork claims). also, i have the right to vent whatever i want to vent, especially since so many people look at pitchfork for advice on what albums to buy (or download). i want people who don't already realize pitchfork's pretensions and stereotypes to realize them. there've been so many good, even classic, albums given terrible reviews from pitchfork just because they thought it would be cool to rebel against what's popular (whether in the mainstream or in the burgeoning "underground"). as for my site..... i wasn't aware i was competing with music journalists? my page has info about UPCOMING albums. once the thing is out i remove the entry. it's not meant for reviews, just tidbits of information to tide over eager fans like myself. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and i agree, AMG gives an excellent portrait of what the album sounds like, but don't trust their rating system, it's rubbish. i rarely agree with their "top song" and "top album" choices for artists i like, but i do trust them when it comes to learning about artists i don't know anything about already. call it blind faith. but at least AMG make an effort to be more objective than pitchfork media which is just a bunch of trendy music nerds showing off their adjectives, manufactured "ironic" senses of humor, and cheesy pop culture references. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if i know an arrtist VERRY well and have done forr a long time my opinions tend to match the starr rrating. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
youre sarcastic, right? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
of course. their godspeed review was terrible music journalism. they gave the album a bad review for every reason but the music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the zwan cover!!! well it certainly is different if it's the real thing from hmv.com |
||||||||
| Attached picture | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
GYBE is so year-and-a-half-ago. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This is not pitchfork but yet this is a candidate for I will try not to let that load of crap poison me against the album... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
radiohead: 5.0 massive attack: 8.0 mogwai: 4.5 aphex remixes: 5.6 zwan: 5.0 autechre: 1.0 (what is this garbage???) blur: 4.0 kid606: 7.0 and then some new rock phenomanon that inevitably gets a 10.0 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what in holy hell did i just read??? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i take music reviews very lightly, though i really enjoy reading them. what i hate is when writers write as if it's a fact that 'this album is crap', as if it's not an opinion. IT IS' PUNK! there, i feel so much better now ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that Zwan cover is fucking awesome. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ha ha ha it's brilliant because it's stupid, meaningful because it's meaningless, and if you don't appreciate it you're not in on the joke of self aware postmodern criticism and are therefore a laughable yokel. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hate how they keep using the word 'wanking' completely out of context. The morons. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pitchfork/bitchfuck whatever. Download random tracks from the new album, only a few so you don't fuck and ruin it, listen, you will know if you like, buy CD or Vinyl. easy. Most websites have samples anyway. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I belive that pitchfork will give a fairly high grad to autechre... Maybe bitching and moaning for any particular reason... Like lack of originality, or something of the sort...but in the end they will give them like a 7 or a 8... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yr wrong about confieled and the other one - even though some of it is daft and unlistenable both records still contain their best ever work .. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well.. . reviews are for morons I have to say.. . especailly if you allready know the band.. . IF for instance you are just looking for new things to listen to I think your better off among your peers in places like this.. . where someone says.. . "hey check out so and so.. . the new album blahdeblah is amazing" at least then you can go "hmm" and download or listen to a track or two and then decide yourself.. . some obvious retard with far too much water on the brain and incest in his family gave one of my favourite albums in the world (Ulver: Perdition City) a 2.6.. . and not only that but they also said that it was a direct rip off of coil which it effing isnt.. . I listen to a lot of coil and fucking know what Im hearing. .. to sum up.. . reviewers are scum.. . and anyone that likes to pigeon hole things can stick their stupid pointy fingers up their nose and swirl it around in their brains until they die !!!. .. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
albarn is a pretentious fuckwit with a shockingly bad voice and did 1 good album sometime around 1994. radiohead... yawn. massive attack - prolly d/l it and if its anything like the last album it won't get bought, i like the other two though. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
blame the rreaderr not the rreviewerr. a rreviewerr can think what they like about an album, if anyone is "scum" its those who rread it and take it totally to harrd and shun an album on the basis of the rreview. we all rreview albums when give an opinion, but we arre not all scum. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
harrd = hearrt |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
very true - people actually read the sun and think its non-fiction - fugwits |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The Sun... *shudders* |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the sun should scrrap the news (and i use the worrd news VERRY VERRY loosely) section and just have a paperr full of naked women. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes mr anus.. . I will agree with part of what you said.. . but like it or not reading or hearing another persons opinion before actually finding out yourself (if you make it that far) about an album will damage your overall outlook.. . first impressions count and all that malarky.. . anything and everything has an impact in its own way.. . even however small or slight is still an impression not shaked. .. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's called the daily sport |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
o no i totally agrree. i hate having my perrception tainted by otherr peoples biased opinions. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i like the fact that pitchfork review music and give their own honest opinion but too many people rely on articles and reviews like some official stamp of approval to like something. my ten-cents |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
just wondering, would you say the same thing if the writer gave you 9.7, and said it was the best thing since coil? it's funny how, if someone drives slower than you, he's an asshole, if someone drives faster than you, he's a maniac. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no of course I wouldnt.. . if they had given the band that score then Id be in agreement with the reviewer.. . but Id not be happy with that unnecessary Coil reference.. . it just seems like the sometimes get the wrong reviewer for the job.. . itd be like asking a catholic preist to have a few words with teen girls about birth control. .. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'd be happy if they gave britney spears a 10 if it was a "10" album. but the fact is, they DON'T critique albums base on the music. it's far from their honest opinion, the way i see it. i don't think their ratings should align with my own opinions--though their selections of "essential" albums are highly suspect--i just want them to be less full of themselves and be honest reviewers of the MUSIC, not the trendiness, of an album. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Pitchfork just released their top 50 of 2002 and there are some familiar names: 46: Blackalicious - Blazing Arrow 44: Hrvatski - Swarm & Dither 39: Kevin Drumm - Sheer Hellish Miasma 36: DJ /Rupture - Minesweeper Suite 33: Rjd2 - Deadringer 29: Sigur Rós - () 17: Fennesz/O'Rourke/Rehberg - The Return of FennO'Berg 13: Keith Fullerton Whitman - Playthroughs 12: Max Tundra - Mastered by the Guy at the Exchange 8: Boards of Canada - Geogaddi #39 - Kevin Drumm and #34 - Tim Hecker sound pretty interesting too, I'll have to have a listen. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's decent i thought as well. dont forget #42 beck - sea change |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well. They placed The Books in their top 10 of the year, so I can't bring myself to call them chancre eating dogfuckers, but they still have that fucking lame Trail of Dead album ahead of it. I have listened to it many a time and I still don't hear anything particularly special. Has anyone here heard The Books - Thought for Food? It's better than they can describe. Also happy to see Max Tundra on that list. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
also: #30 mr lif - i phantom #11 el-p - fantastic damage |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i don't get the appeal of that 60 minutes of tones album. i mean it has its place but really, 13th best album of the year, in the year that saw brilliant releases from talib kweli, blackalicious, cinematic orchestra, venetian snares, etc.? i don't think so. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
