Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-20-2010, 08:08 PM   #141 (permalink)
Melancholia Eternally
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 4,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr dave View Post
i think the whole point with the Audioslave reviews is that for the most part it's not the kind of album or band that the average target reader for Pitchfork would give a crap about, so why should they? especially not in 2005. i mean really, why would you go to a place known for reviewing independent and less than mainstream releases for a blatantly mainstream supergroup's 2nd release.

i must say the lyrical replies were quite funny. Cornell's double baked lyrics worked phenomenally well in Soundgarden but then again Thayil studied Philosophy in university as opposed to Political Science like Morello. a forced fit will never be as smooth as a natural one.
Exactly. Why bother?
__________________

Last.FM | Blank Slate | Echoes and Dust
Mojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2010, 08:35 PM   #142 (permalink)
one big soul
 
Alfred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayvan Cowboy View Post
though the review was mostly negative and the album deserves 10/10, that is funny as hell.

EDIT: To tell you the truth, I think the anti-afro thing going on is a little unfair, as i've always wanted hair like Cedric's, rather than overly large short ginger hair.
but still, funny article!
I completely agree, the album is a perfect 10 in my mind too, but that doesn't take away from it being one of Pitchfork's funniest reviews.
__________________
Alfred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2010, 08:41 PM   #143 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: -_-_-_-_~__~-~_-`_`-~_-`-~-~
Posts: 1,276
Default

Pitchfork have such a large catalog of writers that finding well-wrought ones is next to impossible, as the ridiculously pretentious outweigh those with genuine writing ability... I've found a few, but then again I don't consider myself interested enough in Pitchfork to 'scope those writers out' for more reviews. Their website can't be defined by two terrible reviews, but it's also undefined by the few good ones.
clutnuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 02:57 AM   #144 (permalink)
nothing
 
mr dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 4,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mojopinuk View Post
Exactly. Why bother?
for a joke. unfortunately it seems to have sailed over FAR too many heads.
__________________
i am the universe

Quote:
Originally Posted by bandteacher1 View Post
I type whicked fast,
mr dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 11:10 AM   #145 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Goblin Tears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 336
Default

Some people here have a peculiar notion as to what a review is. A well written review may well make your blood boil, and you may completely disagree with it, but agreement is never the point. Witnessing the effect of music on an articulate individual, and exploring the similarities and differences between their reaction and yours is. Sloppy reviews are easy to pick out; they're usually generalised, or overly focused on image or character, while being dismissive or vague about other notable musical qualities. A good journalist will be analytical, to the point, and immediately focused on the merits or detractors, differenciating between personal preference and genuine craftsmanship without losing their own personality.
Goblin Tears is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 12:26 PM   #146 (permalink)
dac
MB's Biggest Fanboy
 
dac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 2,847
Default

Pitchfork admittedly isn't a bad place to look for new music. Stuff that they usually rate around a 7 or so is often worth checking out. Whatever band they happen to be hyping at the moment should probably be avoided at all costs though.
__________________

dac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 12:54 PM   #147 (permalink)
Partying on the inside
 
Freebase Dali's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,329
Default

Merged.
Any more Pitchfork threads will be burned at the stake.
Freebase Dali is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 01:20 PM   #148 (permalink)
Himself
 
loveissucide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Leuven ,Belgium, via Ireland
Posts: 1,325
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dac View Post
Pitchfork admittedly isn't a bad place to look for new music. Stuff that they usually rate around a 7 or so is often worth checking out. Whatever band they happen to be hyping at the moment should probably be avoided at all costs though.
Not the band's fault pretentious people deem them a bandwagon to be jumped onto though.
loveissucide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 01:49 PM   #149 (permalink)
Me llamo Marijan
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 6,983
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mojopinuk View Post
I don't read Pitchfork or for that matter, the music press in general. To be honest, i don't see the point. I'm capable of forming my own opinions and so the opinions of others, especially faceless strangers I know nothing about don't matter to me one little bit.

However, even from my limited exposure to Pitchfork I do wonder why they publish reviews such as these. That Audioslave one for a start is an absolute joke. It may be a fairly novel idea, but giving me some info on the album and maybe an opinion might at least make the whole concept of a review a worthwhile one.
Wow, that's interesting. How about going back to what music press is supposed to be about, you know, letting you know about good music, not trying to tell you if you like what you've already heard. Crazy right?

I know I've probably said this a hundred times by now, but I like Pitchfork because I think they write well and their taste in music is very compatible with mine and since I sadly don't have the time anymore to download the whole friggin internet and listen to every goddamn underground band whose grandma paid for their recording session I need a filter, a site to give me recommendations which I will then listen to and either like or dislike.

Also, those kinds of reviews account for about one millionth of their output. Sure, sometimes they like to take the piss out of some band/albums, but most of the time they write thought out reviews...
adidasss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2010, 01:59 PM   #150 (permalink)
dac
MB's Biggest Fanboy
 
dac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 2,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loveissucide View Post
Not the band's fault pretentious people deem them a bandwagon to be jumped onto though.
But what I'm saying is, in my opinion, most of those bandwagons aren't worth jumping on (think Panda Bear).

I agree with a lot of their high ratings, but I disagree with far more of them.
__________________

dac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.