pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Does anyone actually listen to Speedy Ortiz or do they only exist in retweet form?

― clikbait ikatowi (Whiney G. Weingarten), Thursday, 23 April 2015 20:33 (Yesterday) Permalink

Whiney, I do, and I don't have a Twitter account

Each of those 5 music writers who like Speedy Ortiz must have listened to their songs around a hundred thousand times on Spotify

their show at the bowery ballroom saturday is sold out though i know that place only fits like five music writers

"Only five music writers liked Speedy Ortiz, but each one who did went on to stream those songs a hundred thousand times." - Brian Eno

Shitty, gatecrashing "noise band" loves Rihanna now, Pavement-sounding indie rock band cites influence of hip-hop, rockists beware etc.

Shitty, gatecrashing "noise band" loves Rihanna now, Pavement-sounding indie rock band cites influence of hip-hop, rockists beware etc.

― Jimmywine Dyspeptic, Friday, April 24, 2015 2:33 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

JFK BLOWN AWAY WHAT ELSE DO I HAVE TO SAY

Uh I think you guys misread Whiney a little. He was saying he knows of only 5 music writers that may listen to Speedy Ortiz. Not that their entire audience consists of those 5 writers.

I think he said their entire audience consisted of nobody, since those writers don't count as anybody

Well tbf it was a question not a statement, he wanted to know if anyone listened to this band, you guys checked for him, now he knows, excellent crowdsourcing Whiney

I think he means that if you're a music writer and you decide to listen to Speedy Ortiz your identity dissolves and you technically exist but you become a faceless entity with a lost, senselessly wandering soul that has no purpose yet yearns endlessly. You know because you look others in the eye and there is no recognition or connection. You drift forever and nothing can undo it.

tickets on sale now

"We played to a packed house. It was mostly ghosts."

http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/753-drake-kanye-1d-and-the-rise-of-emotional-men/

close thread

that piece really could have used more than one reference point that predates 1999

Are we sure the writer predates 1999?

This thread is basically becoming a bunch of guys pushing/past 40 rolling their eyes at the work of twentysomething women...

*jamie foxx voice* "This is your conscience... Maybe Pitchfork isn't for you anymore?"

the world has turned and left y'all here

Like it was fun when we were all fresh-faced kids in 2002 stunting on pseudo-intellectual bloviator bros getting their first writing gigs straight outta lollege, but it's been like 15 years or something, we need a new hobby

Mods lock thread, R.I.P.

this is closer to how i feel about the pitch

http://barrybailbondsman.tumblr.com/post/114878061070/the-only-thing-i-have-to-say-on-the-thing-that

Oh, I know exactly how old I am, and where I fit into the pop market (I don't). There's a reason I only write for The Wire and jazz outlets at this point.

"we need a new hobby"

have you tried spelunking?

I Love Spelunking

This thread is basically becoming a bunch of guys pushing/past 40 rolling their eyes at the work of twentysomething women...

Circle of life: http://pitchfork.com/thepitch/750-ageism-lou-reeds-lulu-madonnas-tongue-and-jazz-fest/

I liked that piece tbh

can i recommend pottery?

the pitch is written and edited like a blog i guess, so it does feel a bit mean-spirited to treat it in the same way as something else that's ostensibly more, you know, edited.

but yeah i also agree that clowning on young writers for not having a fuller sense of history is nagl. i don't think an in-the-moment thing necessarily needs to be burdened with knowing what dylan thought of sensitive men or w/e.

"but yeah i also agree that clowning on young writers for not having a fuller sense of history is nagl."

This is most of the reason why Anthony Fantano gets clowned right?

i think thats a v small part of the (many) reason(s) why fantano gets (justifiably) clowned

v small or actually like 50% why?

but yeah i also agree that clowning on young writers for not having a fuller sense of history is nagl.

part of why i linked to that blog post was to clarify that i'm not expecting younger writers to have a fuller sense of history, but for editors to check for assumptions etc. I think it's a shame that pitchfork's apparent outlet for a more diverse group of opinions and subjects is being used basically like a college op-ed page

the normal reviews may well be just as poorly edited, but people are more likely to read grand thinkpieces (or tossed off blog posts with grand thinkpiece titles) than reviews of obscure artists

and as proven by the hubbub over mike powell's lazy jim o'rourke thing it's not like people are only annoyed by it when it's twentysomething women talking politics

also can i just note that This thread is basically becoming a bunch of guys pushing/past 40 rolling their eyes at the work of twentysomething women... is big talk from a guy who less than a week ago was dismissing the idea that Speedy Ortiz merits discussion

also can i just note that This thread is basically becoming a bunch of guys pushing/past 40 rolling their eyes at the work of twentysomething women... is big talk from a guy who less than a week ago was dismissing the idea that Speedy Ortiz merits discussion

Dude, we've been over this. Whiney's apartment is a rabbit-warren of full-length mirrors coated in spittle.

that's park slope for you

Like it was fun when we were all fresh-faced kids in 2002 stunting on pseudo-intellectual bloviator bros getting their first writing gigs straight outta lollege, but it's been like 15 years or something, we need a new hobby

― clikbait ikatowi (Whiney G. Weingarten), Tuesday, April 28, 2015 7:10 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is quite possibly the stupidest post ever written in the history of ILM.

straight outta lollege !

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/67/20/fa/6720fa9a1d730dbf4dc5621c3da1fc35.jpg

how "young" are we talking because I am pretty sure not everyone mentioned in this thread recently is just out of college

clarify that i'm not expecting younger writers to have a fuller sense of history,

heaven forbid

I'm a big fan of PC Music and don't generally go too hard on Pitchfork, but this is frankly ridiculous:
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/20542-pc-music-volume-1/

it's a bit breathless, but i give it an A for effort. i mean, it took some thought to come up with. which i appeciate. i am all for thought. i kinda want to know what this is though: "in its "South Park"-ish warehouse artlessness."

just trying to picture what that would be...

http://i.imgur.com/MYyEXOo.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdLvp630plc

yeah what was ridiculous about it, seemed pretty well written to me

it's like aliens sinking a jukebox in acid mannn

i thought that was a great review, number was much higher than i would have gone with but the review felt like you could have shifted the number any direction & it would be pretty well unchanged

one criticism i might have about PC music after reading it, for example, is: Like all of these networks and products, PC Music answers our desire to escape the burden of physical presence —this feels like a very old experience of the internet—like, now its my non-physical presence which feels like more of a burden. PC Music kinda run on pre-Facebook ideas.

but anyway

anti-physical music for an anti-physical time

Not sure I understand what this means

"PC Music kinda run on pre-Facebook ideas."

i've come to like them more than ever in the past few months, but this is so otm