Music Banter - View Single Post - Pitchfork
Thread: Pitchfork
View Single Post
Old 08-11-2008, 03:02 PM   #28 (permalink)
Rainard Jalen
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,221
Default

I think y'all are TOTALLY underestimating the degree to which Pitchfork (OFTEN) actually just give good reviews based on what they expect the general level of hype to be from other major critics. The indie critics play off each other in this way. Pitchfork don't exclusively control taste, they are not its sole arbitrators. More than half the time they rate stuff as they expect it to be generally received. This allows them to "get it right", so to speak. Conversely, other indie sites rate stuff according to how they expect Pitchfork to receive it. This is how the indie hype machine works. Follow carefully you will see how this is the plain truth.

On the topic of Brent DiCrescenzo, you might not like what he says but he's an exceptionally skilled music journalist with some of the highest quality writing you are likely to find within the field.

I personally think Fleet Foxes are a derivative (and irritating) pile of poo. That band's a perfect example of the indie hype machine licking its own a$shole. Pitchfork's responsibility for them, again, stops at them merely singing the collective tune.

Last edited by Rainard Jalen; 08-11-2008 at 03:08 PM.
Rainard Jalen is offline   Reply With Quote