Worst music critics
 

What a stupid "profession", thanks to the internet we now live in an age where good recommendations aren't hard to get, because you can always find people who are compatable with your tastes.

And thus this makes "professional" music critics pretty much worthless, then again they always have been. Obviously most of them wouldn't know good music if it bit them in the ass so consumer advice is obviously not what they excell in. So what is their job? If it's being a huge music snob that doesn't know sh*t about the subject, then they earn every penny.

Thanks to blogs and music journals, it won't be long until these overpaid c*ntbags will be long forgotten, but in the meantime, let's look back on the ones that really boil our piss. It seems like all they were ever good for was describing everything but the actual music, instead they just make stupid generalizations about the artists backgrounds and intentions which usually end up being far from the truth and falling into the horrible misconception that the only way to review a song is talk about it's lyrical content.

A lot of them don't even give more than an incredibly brief description when it comes to the actual music, it's a lot of linguistic masturbation and what better example than Pitchfork? It's as if talking about the music is too goddamn easy and straightforward, they have to be pretentious chodes about it and rant about how music quality is somehow tied to superficial things like class and "authenticity". Music is the last thing they have on their mind.

If they only talked about what the music means to them, it would be ok. But they don't, they try to be objective, and by that I mean try to pass of their clearly subjective opinions as objective facts. A lot of them these days don't use a vocabulary all too different from the average internet troll.

Most of the members of this forum could do better than these idiots, seriously.

Lester Bangs, Robert Christgau, Rob Sheffield, Jimmy Guterman. Raging retards every last one of them, the fact that they are considered the deans of western music critics is nothing short of horrifying.

I used to say Christgau was the absolute worst, that is until I found this guy.

Only Solitaire: George Starostin's Music Reviews

This guy is a linguistics researcher and apparently one of the brightest in his field. But yeah, being smart at one subject can't prevent you from being a total retard at another. As this guy's other hobby as a music critic clearly proves.

So let's see. He rates artist's whole careers on letter grades. And thus The Beatles, Stones, Dylan and The Who are the only A grade artists in rock music history. Black Sabbath, The Residents and Pretty Things are a D, and Syd Barrett is an E. And ABBA a C. What more needs to be said? :laughing:

His reviews are even worse, I won't quote them, I let you find out for yourself if you're willing to endure the blinding stupidity.

Robert Christgau, does this guy even like music? Honestly every review Ive read by him he makes the album sound like its crap yet he gives it an A. I dont think I've ever read anything by him saying something positive about an album. Fuck this guy.

This Starostin guy is pretty much the exact same way. He'll give an album what seems like a high rating and still call it a piece of sh*t. The only thing I've seen him review without any criticism at all are some Dylan, Stones and a goddamn Sade album.

Saying Pink Floyd lacked originality and saying Yes lack diversity, while lauding Rolling Stones as having both. That was the real ticker for me. :laughing:

Music critics really are just another form of troll. I mean if this guy hates prog so much, why review so freaking much of it?

you're worse than each and every one combined

Thank ya.

A defence of music criticism is that it offered the only written dialogue about music--which was valuable as long as you didn't take it as gospel truth. It's kind of futile now with the internet.

That sonic youth song "I destroyed robert christgau with my huge fucking ****" pretty much sums up what I think about the guy. Half of his reviews are just a bunch of non-sequiters that only his circle of friends might get...plus he gave thin lizzy a c+ and all the steely dan records A's.

On the other hand I enjoy hearing other peoples opinions. Some people can express there opinions more clearly than others and that's why there is paid music critics just like newspaper columnists...music critics should piss people off...otherwise people wouldn't buy music magazines and the likes. I read the newspaper editorial everyday so I can be pissed off at someday.

....and authenticity isn't a superficial thing...using somebody's else's definition of it instead of your own intuitive sense is.

Christgau couldn't argue music worth a damn, if he tried posting here Jackhammer or Urban would rape the f*ck out of him.

Using the thesaurus like it's an obsession doesn't translate to better reviews, quite the opposite. Music critics really don't have anything to say, a great deal of them just use fancy words to mask what are in fact very brief and mostly invalid descriptions, which are just based on subjective opinion.

Lester Bangs told unsuspecting people that Metal Machine Music was the best album ever made, it's obviously not about consumer advice. And it's just insulting, the very idea that we can't just do what we know we're capable of, use word of mouth and recommend music to each other. Like we really need some overpaid, overprivilaged c*nt telling us what to listen to and telling us that we're stupid for liking so and so.

...of course it's subjective opinion...and they shouldn't have to put a disclaimer on any piece of music criticism saying "this is subjective opinion". I like it because I can get pissed off or wholeheardetly agree with what they're saying....there's passion involved.

I think music would probably suck if an objective opinion existed on it, and music was reviewed just like car brakes were. ..having some guy...it doesn't really matter whom, praising or talking badly about an album gives a human face to a music mag...and makes it seem like I'm not just reading a catalogue or "consumer reports".

Overpaid?..they take however much the magazine is willing to pay them, just like I would. Since it is just subjective opinion you can't really put any kind of price tag on it.

I know it's a dubious distinction to be "the" critic that get's there opinions heard...but I'm glad there is some kind of opinion.

its really not a compliment at all

Oh but it is.