Pitchfork

Sonic Youth - NYC Ghosts and Flowers

0.0/10

f'uck pitchfork. the best album SY have done, along with Washing Machine and ATL, since Daydream.
 
Yes. All the ones that I like.


Which idiotic presumptions? You probably don't have a clue who you're talking to. I'm practically a PITCHFORK FANBOY~! Get it? FANBOY! I visit the site religiously every working day of the week. I download all of their best new music recommendations. The whole f'cking lot. 90% of my favourite albums in my top 20 for this year I heard about first from Pitchfork. It is my favourite indie music news and reviews site bar none. But if I feel that either THEY or the generality of reviewers get something wrong, then I will goddamn say so.

In fact you misunderstand me to such an extent that the fact is, I'm MORE likely to like something if it DOES get good reviews and IS critically acclaimed. That might be a bad approach, admittedly, but it is how my personality works, and above all it goes to show just how poorly you've managed to judge me on the basis of a mere couple of comments.

I know. That's what I find so abominable. If it were just Pitchfork I probably wouldn't have said anything. It's the point that they have been so widely praised that annoys me so much.

That is, by any low standarRAB.

It was. It received a 9. 9 or above is an extremely rare occurrence on Pitchfork. I should know. I had the geekiness to follow them for so long.

So others hyped it more than Pitchfork did. Whoop-te-do. What does this prove? Only that the indie hype machine's been licking its own a$shole pretty damn ferociously lately.

Seeming as we've now established that your supposed premise of mine was not entirely accurate, I'll end by saying that I DO have a perfectly legitimate reason for trashing Fleet Foxes: it's just not a particularly good album. Good for a debut, maybe. Signs of promise, perhaps. But much good in and of itself? Surrrrre.
 
sex%20ed%20play.JPG


Go.

They try to apply to sides of the popular scented mass sheepacy, and the mispoken up north haggles with the side of brunt hipocracy. So pick an alternative to alternative to bite down on and you realize you become different from listening to **** everyone knows about but never understand completely.
 
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.
 
I really don't see why people get worked up over an indie rock site... they're gonna make some questionable decisions. That's why they're popular, because they appeal to a certain crowd. Get used to it. It's the same reason why Alternative Press (the magazine) appeals to 14 year old scene kiRAB. Not everyone can have the holy, infallible opinions that you do Norg. And if you ask me, Pitchfork gets it right a lot more often than any of the other popular media sources do.
 
I'd certainly suggest giving Stage Names a proper go - it unravels its mysteries and deeper qualities slowly but surely. Certainly some of the most profound lyrical imagery I've heard captured in music.
 
I agree with RJ, Okkervil is a pretty good band and stage names, while not my favorite has held up well for me. It took me awhile to get into the whole lot, but I have to admit I really appreciate their style. Don't put the on the OC PMO please...

Also I have no opinion on Deer Hunter (inside thread joke)
 
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!
 
Back
Top