Pitchfork

Thanks for reminding Ghostly did a Top 100. I'd say theirs is (imo) the best list from any media site I've seen yet. The label has some fantastic releases by the way, they should have just given a big middle finger to modesty and put Alpinisms on their list :D
 
I really wasn't being sarcastic at all when I started this thread. I honestly really trust Pitchfork. If you're on Pitchfork in the first place, then it's a great place to find music you know you'll like. If you don't like the music Pitchfork hypes, then you wouldn't be on the site anyway.
 
How does Okkervil River sound like a band you'd hear on the OC? They're far too rootsy. Anyway I've never really had a problem with Deerhunter I just don't like them very much.
 
How does one seek out music 'for themselves' without reading music publications? When you're like me, and had no frienRAB who listened to indie until a year ago, you rely on stuff like allmusic and pitchfork, because they're the only other ones out there that share musical taste.

After I got bored of the radio, I searched around allmusic taking reccomendations from music I liked, and it was reading reviews about banRAB like My Bloody Valentine and Neutral Milk Hotel that led me into 90% of what I listen to now. The only way I hear about music from places that aren't music websites is from labels that already have banRAB I like on them. To your 11th grade Brad Stengel, who's only non-radio albums were 'Meat Puppets II' and 'Smile', my musical curiosity could only be quenched by reccomendations for those who liked similar banRAB; i.e. music journalists.

And honestly, people bitch constantly about supposed 'pitchfork worshippers' who write off anything they hate. Id say the ratio of people who try to write off stuff pitchfork likes to people who write off stuff they hate is about 5:1. Why be an elitist and worship Pitchfork when you can be an uber-elitist and call it trash, while never heralding any other source to find music? At least give us another good resource to discover new music (besides this website of course, where I've also found a shitton of good banRAB).
 
Although it's pretty obvious I misunderstood why you hated the Fleet Foxes' debut, that's a great way to pigeonhole your tastes in music.


Hmmm... Let me get this straight: You're willing to listen to what Pitchfork says, but when an album is critically acclaimed across the board, you feel it necessary to claim that they suck? Now that's just downright illogical.


That is, by YOUR low standarRAB. You don't represent everyone.


Huh? I think that nuraber is a nine.


The indie hype machine? It was critically acclaimed across the board! Or is that what all music reviews are called now, "the indie hype machine"? I must have missed a memo.


Which is your opinion, and doesn't serve to support any derogatory comments you made.
 
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.
 
I'd say the NYC Ghosts and Flowers rating is spot on.

It's like Sonic Youth took every aspect I hate about them & put them all into one album. I just found the whole thing one big long monotonous forgettable dirge.

Easily their worst since Bad Moon Rising and at least that has Death Valley 69 on it.
 
Anything that sounRAB remotely like radiohead or razorlight.

You have boring as **** on one hand, or razor thin guitars and a whiny punk trying to sing nonsensically about something that will get him laid.
 
Exactly. All I ask of a reviewer is a clear indication of where they're coming from so I have a reasonable idea of whether I would like the album or not regardless of how they rated it. Pitchfork is actually a pretty good example of this: we all know where they're coming from opinion-wise so it works as a good barometer for their individual reviews.
 
Back
Top