― jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
I wonder if it's going to serve anyone's needs. I don't think a web- only publication can attract readers interested in Alanis Morissette and Kylie Minogue. To my knowledge, no one actually hunts down information about such artists. People just hear about it on tv and that's it. Let's give Pitchfork a few months, until the corporate contributors pull the plug.
― Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― David Raposa, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
QUOTE OF THE YEAR.
― Sean Carruthers, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Andy K, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Dare, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
the first thing i thought (after, well, this is no all cure all the time) was that i wished they really had "sold out" (what the fuck, is this 93?), because maybe it would mean LESS GODDAMN PROG.
― Todd Burns, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Sean, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Nicole, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
Well, the Albini thing practically is...
― mr. sparkle, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
Makes sense, really.
Well, the Albini thing practically is... huh???
― Brock K., Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― dleone, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― powertonevolume, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Sarah, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― gareth, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― dleone, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― dudley, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
― Sarah, Wednesday, 3 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
You have completed your learning of life's lessons. Now, you suck ass just like all the other bores before you. Kylie, Alanis? Whatever, bitch. I am sure you already have the defense mechanisms in place so, this will mean nothing but, another exercise in...oh, who cares. Looking elsewhere for reality...or maybe I can pretend to be a rubber worm like pitchwhore.com...here big fishie, look, I rounded 'em up for you in a arrel. A whole demographic!
Not Funny
― Dare, Thursday, 4 April 2002 00:00 (11 years ago) Permalink
Y'know sometimes they really are asking for it:
"White Williams issues a debut album layered with impeccable influences-- including Roxy Music, Beck, and T. Rex-- and a sense of calculated disaffection."
Well shit SIGN ME UP.
― lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:57 (5 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, that was a bit of a repellant blurb if I ever saw one.
― Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:01 (5 years ago) Permalink
Wait, are you saying that doesn't seem accurate?
― nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:10 (5 years ago) Permalink
I read 'White' as 'While' and thought "The Saul Williams album sounds like that?"
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:11 (5 years ago) Permalink
it's more that they used that as their _hook_
x-post
― lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:20 (5 years ago) Permalink
The front blurbs are always stripped/condensed summary descriptions from the review inside -- in this case
His songs are thin and languorous, with impeccable influences and the sort of calculated disaffection that comes from an MFA in design and a good weed connection.
― nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:46 (5 years ago) Permalink
omg that is horrorshow
The blurb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the article quote
― HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:18 (5 years ago) Permalink
I assume that's an article quote; nabisco, if you just made that up then SHAME ON YOU.
― HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:22 (5 years ago) Permalink
why would a critic ever try to guess where a song comes from?
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:23 (5 years ago) Permalink
I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence
― dmr, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:24 (5 years ago) Permalink
The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me. I guess I like my disaffection to be natural, not carefully planned, so I would never recommend something like that.
Then again, I've never heard it so what do I know and so on.
― Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:29 (5 years ago) Permalink
b-but someone at pfork said "hm, how can we get people to read this review? I know! we'll mention the artist's impeccable influences and calculated disaffection! that'll reel 'em in!"
RIP satire etc
― lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:34 (5 years ago) Permalink
they could have collaged+mis-used _anything_ from the article, and they collaged+mis-used that
― lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:35 (5 years ago) Permalink
The White Williams album reminds me much more of late 10cc and Bread than of Roxy Music. That bit was like the classic "Let's over-hip our influences" review.
― I eat cannibals, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:54 (5 years ago) Permalink
The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me.
See, this sounds like the blurb WORKED for you -- i.e., efficiently let you know you would probably not like this act.
I agree, though, it looks kind of weird to have such a neutral-to-disparaging summary blurb on a recommended album.
― nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 22:04 (5 years ago) Permalink
I like how they gave the new Babyshambles, which is actually tuneful and a good all around album, a 4.0, but gave the first one, which is dreadful and hard to listen to / bloated, a 7.3,
Yeah, it was definitely TWICE as good as the new one. Fuckin' morons.
― Erock Zombie, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:30 (5 years ago) Permalink
ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.
― Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:46 (5 years ago) Permalink
(xpost) was that a parody or are you really getting worked up about an internet score for babyshambles
― dmr, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:47 (5 years ago) Permalink
He was worked up?
― roxymuzak, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:49 (5 years ago) Permalink
wait, i thought the grading scale was logarithmic. like 5 is twice as good as 4. somebody email ryan schreiber to find out.
― elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:14 (5 years ago) Permalink
shit, now i need to reevaluate all my purchases of the last five years.
― elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:16 (5 years ago) Permalink
It's actually modelled after the Richter Scale, hence the superlative designations of various well-reviewed albums as either "Reccomended," "Best New Music," or "Whole Lotta Shakin' Goin' On."
― Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:24 (5 years ago) Permalink
Wilderness were kind of a weird non-entity even in Baltimore, although i only heard one of the later albums so maybe i just missed what the excitement was actually about
― some dude, Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:40 (1 month ago) Permalink
but yeah maura otm, i'm much more impressed when a band can sell out in a smaller market than in nyc
But good point about "who's the author?"
― I'm a lover, not a partner (flamboyant goon tie included), Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:43 (1 month ago) Permalink
arcade fire/pf feels very 'print the legend' at this point
― some dude, Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:46 (1 month ago) Permalink
But Maura they went from Bowery pre pitchfork to Irving post pitchfork, it wasn't a big move. It seems ridiculous to consider this stuff ~now~ but they weren't a huge band in 2005 by any means
― I'm a lover, not a partner (flamboyant goon tie included), Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:46 (1 month ago) Permalink
If anything Wilderness is the purest counterexample I can think of that a big pfork push on its own doesn't bestow success in the absence of other support (did Wilderness get pushed by anyone else?)
― anonanon, Thursday, 11 April 2013 19:50 (1 month ago) Permalink
I love Wilderness so much. Fav of 2005 for me, and honestly I may have missed them if not for that review.
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:19 (1 month ago) Permalink
Sometimes the taste-making that happens comes from a collection of BNM selections when the albums aren't as accessible and strong as an Arcade Fire all by themselves.
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:22 (1 month ago) Permalink
strawman: is metacritic arguably as/more important as a tastemaker than pitchfork?
― Chuck E was a hero to most (s.clover), Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:28 (1 month ago) Permalink
no
― J0rdan S., Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:31 (1 month ago) Permalink
do people even read metacritic
― J0rdan S., Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:32 (1 month ago) Permalink
Hard to say:
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/metacritic.com#
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/pitchfork.com#
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:33 (1 month ago) Permalink
I use Metacritic for movies; that's about it.
― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:34 (1 month ago) Permalink
so basically people go to metacritic to read about video games
― J0rdan S., Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:36 (1 month ago) Permalink
What's funny to me is I often see the average score on metacritic practically match pitchfork's exact score.
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:42 (1 month ago) Permalink
I look at Metacritic's music section regularly but mostly as a handy list of recent/upcoming releases.
― jaymc, Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:48 (1 month ago) Permalink
heaven is a place on earth with you
― http://bit.ly/oIujXP (markers), Thursday, 11 April 2013 20:49 (1 month ago) Permalink
Wilderness were the shit, I keep checking their Wiki to see of they have new stuff coming
Derivative? Oh yeah they were but SFW
― Raymond Cummings, Thursday, 11 April 2013 21:59 (1 month ago) Permalink
I've purged my physical music collection tons of times but just don't have the heart to rip/sell the Wilderness CDS
― Raymond Cummings, Thursday, 11 April 2013 22:02 (1 month ago) Permalink
Though even if you did you could buy them all back second hand for maybe $7.
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 22:07 (1 month ago) Permalink
All together.
― Evan, Thursday, 11 April 2013 22:08 (1 month ago) Permalink
derivative AND safe for work!
― your holiness, we have an official energy drink (Z S), Thursday, 11 April 2013 22:42 (1 month ago) Permalink
AND pitchfork approved! this is like the holy triumvirate
― your holiness, we have an official energy drink (Z S), Thursday, 11 April 2013 22:44 (1 month ago) Permalink
http://web.archive.org/web/20011121175939/pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/h/handsome-boy-modeling-school/so-hows-your-girl.shtml
Old review of the first Handsome Boy Modelling School album. Do you even underground, bro?
― Popture, Friday, 12 April 2013 01:43 (1 month ago) Permalink
haha that was one of the first pf reviews i ever read
― some dude, Friday, 12 April 2013 01:50 (1 month ago) Permalink
In the wake of the fatal car crash that claimed the former Princess of Wales, concerts across a grieving U.K. were cancelled en masse-- including a handful of Primal Scream dates in London, the promoter of which claimed the band were kiboshing “out of a mark of respect for Diana.” This came as news to the band, who issued a reactionary retort claiming, “We wanted to play... We have no respect whatsoever for Diana Spencer or any member of the English Royal Family. We are totally opposed to the monarchy.”
i am being a pedant but just in so many ways this is not a "reactionary retort"
― daft on the causes of punk (schlump), Wednesday, 8 May 2013 17:20 (1 week ago) Permalink
it's a retortive reaction
― Eyeball Kicks, Wednesday, 8 May 2013 17:31 (1 week ago) Permalink
that timeline about their political "awakening" seemed a little screwy to me, it glosses over Vanishing Point ("Star", the title track) which foreshadowed XTRMNTR pretty clearly
― four Marxes plus four Obamas plus four Bin Ladens (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 8 May 2013 17:40 (1 week ago) Permalink
the review did make me a lot more interested in this album than that first video did, I'll give it that
lol you dorks still read pitchfork ??
― H3LP, Wednesday, 8 May 2013 17:47 (1 week ago) Permalink
― Evan, Wednesday, 8 May 2013 17:54 (1 week ago) Permalink
give 'em H3LL
― congo nattefrost (DJ Mencap), Wednesday, 8 May 2013 18:10 (1 week ago) Permalink
can someone explain to this print dinosaur if there is some internet economy / click-based / revenue-driven reason for Advance to NOT have a pause button? it's maddening. ok that might be overstating it a bit.
― alpine static, Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:24 (1 week ago) Permalink
I wonder if labels insist?
― jay-z's ansari (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 10 May 2013 19:09 (1 week ago) Permalink
this interview with dude from surfer blood about his domestic battery arrest is not very good
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 10 May 2013 19:18 (1 week ago) Permalink
oh you didn't hit her? oh ok. you want to talk more about what did happen? no? oh ok. so maybe we should talk to the other person involved instead of just relying on your perspective? no? ok.
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 10 May 2013 19:19 (1 week ago) Permalink
like maybe they just couldn't get the full story, which is fine, but then you don't have to run the story instead of just publishing this mild, vague, spineless thing
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 10 May 2013 19:24 (1 week ago) Permalink
I kinda feel like the interview gives the guy enough rope (although it could stand to link back to the previous PF news item with the police report that disturbingly details what he did that was not 'hitting'). A q&a with an individual, even a controversial one, need not be held to the standards of a reported piece with multiple sources.
― seanpennderizer (some dude), Friday, 10 May 2013 19:46 (1 week ago) Permalink
wow yeah, I just read that. I was wondering why he was being so precise about saying "I never hit anybody" multiple times.
― wk, Friday, 10 May 2013 19:54 (1 week ago) Permalink
i don't really see what was wrong with it? except surfer blood is a horrible band regardless of the singer's record.
― call all destroyer, Friday, 10 May 2013 20:04 (1 week ago) Permalink
ha otm
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 10 May 2013 20:11 (1 week ago) Permalink
i guess some dude is right but the thing just felt pointless and perspectiveless and like there was a big hole in the middle with missing questions and answers
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 10 May 2013 20:12 (1 week ago) Permalink
Surfer Blood getting desperate for "hits"
― Evan, Friday, 10 May 2013 20:16 (1 week ago) Permalink
either that or it's something to do with streaming royalty rates. it's more expensive to have a completely on-demand service and less expensive to have "Internet radio" where the listener has more limited control over what's playing.
although since it's obviously set up in collaboration with the record companies I don't know if they pay royalties on that or what.
― dmr, Friday, 10 May 2013 20:17 (1 week ago) Permalink
― call all destroyer, Friday, May 10, 2013 4:04 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark
i think the problem with that piece is that even though it tries to stay neutral, by design it works really hard only to engender sympathy for someone who doesn't really need or deserve it (i.e. "did this case make it harder to concentrate on your music?")
― J0rdan S., Friday, 10 May 2013 20:43 (1 week ago) Permalink
i doubt his victim would want to talk about this so that seems like a pipe dream to me and i admire PF's willingness to wade into the fire here because surfer blood is a band everyone could ignore with no consequences but i think it wasn't pushy enough in places and just... sort of a lose-lose proposition
― J0rdan S., Friday, 10 May 2013 20:47 (1 week ago) Permalink
Holy shit, I forgot that Surfer Blood was even a band, let alone this happened. I assumed they were touring in bizarro world with Tapes n Tapes and Clap Your Hands and some other oh-yeah bands.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 10 May 2013 20:55 (1 week ago) Permalink
Surfer Blood recently played a cafe here, so I don't know that you're far off
― P is for Poo Poo Doo Doo (Sufjan Grafton), Saturday, 11 May 2013 04:26 (1 week ago) Permalink
Blood Surfer would have been a much better name
― Treeship, Saturday, 11 May 2013 04:27 (1 week ago) Permalink
yet another mistake for surfer blood
― your holiness, we have an official energy drink (Z S), Saturday, 11 May 2013 04:27 (1 week ago) Permalink