yeah the Zedd calls Diplo a "Jealous Little Bitch" story lacks gravitas in this new format
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Tuesday, 22 March 2016 13:57 (eight years ago) link
lol
― marcos, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 13:58 (eight years ago) link
yeah, you really have to dig through to find stuff that isn't "news", and the news is the same stuff that every other music blog takes from other sites and barely bothers rewording writes about.
― Karl Malone, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 13:58 (eight years ago) link
lol both fader and p4k have a weeknd' house of balloons feature today
― marcos, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 13:59 (eight years ago) link
lol complex too!
― marcos, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:00 (eight years ago) link
The Pitch was always kind of an odds n ends category anyway, with some of the worst stuff they've ever published alongside some good stuff, but now i guess it's been demoted to a tag that's sparingly used? i don't know how many first time pfork visitors there are, but to the extent that anyone notices it anymore they must be like "wtf is the pitch?"
or who knows, maybe they're like "wow this endless series of squares looks great on my mobile phone"
― Karl Malone, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:02 (eight years ago) link
― marcos, Tuesday, March 22, 2016 9:59 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― marcos, Tuesday, March 22, 2016 10:00 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
who wore it best??
― Karl Malone, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:03 (eight years ago) link
match the outlet to the correct headline:
'Caine & Abel: Why 'House of Balloons' Was the Weeknd at His Purest
The Weeknd’s House of Balloons Remains Pop's Great Mysterious Entrance
How House of Balloons Changed R&B
― marcos, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:05 (eight years ago) link
can u guess?
― marcos, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:06 (eight years ago) link
Pop's Great Mysterious Entrance
ewww
― boxedjoy, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:08 (eight years ago) link
one benefit of a catastrophic shift in gravity that altered the orbit of earth would be that that all the anniversaries would be thrown out of wack. what do you do when your birthday now takes place every 458 earth days? do you still count all the previous birthdays, and just accept that you now get "older" more slowly? do you retroactively adjust everything to the new, longer orbit, so that maybe you've been married for only 15 years now instead of 18? and most importantly, how would that affect the 5 year anniversary of the weeknd's house of balloons?
― Karl Malone, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:10 (eight years ago) link
brb, i have to pitch that idea to the pitch tag
― Karl Malone, Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:11 (eight years ago) link
hasn't the industry planted the weeknd deep enough yet
― μpright mammal (mh), Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:16 (eight years ago) link
yeah it's pretty hilarious to see "Vince Staples Yelp Reviews Kentucky Chicken Restaurant" in the momentous headline presentation of the new format.
― sam jax sax jam (Jordan), Tuesday, 22 March 2016 14:25 (eight years ago) link
Feel like the new format will the thing which moves me from 'still checking in once a day' to 'often forgetting to check in whatsoever for days at a time'
― in twelve parts (lamonti), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 10:03 (eight years ago) link
^ Yeah, this. It feels really messy at present. There's something to be said for very clearly defined sections of content.
― Position Position, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 13:49 (eight years ago) link
yeah i essentially have no idea where anything is on the site lol. but maybe casual readers can't tell the diff either way & most websites have weak homepage traffic as it is.
― J0rdan S., Wednesday, 23 March 2016 13:58 (eight years ago) link
The single worst thing about the new redesign is that you have to click on "The Latest" and then "Tracks" just to see a list of the latest tracks they covered, when it used to be right there on the front page. I don't really see the logic in moving that off the front page.
― thom yorke state of mind (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 14:19 (eight years ago) link
is there some reason designers are incapable of like styling designs to fit the platform? didn't that used to be a thing? did they give up on that?
is the pitchfork news just a ploy to keep the site at the top of all hot music-related searches
― j., Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:11 (eight years ago) link
people saying that homepages aren't that important remind me of the gag where the cover of a book is misprinted and someone goes "you're ok, nobody looks at the...cover"
― some dude, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:14 (eight years ago) link
Don't know if this has been commented upon, but when did Pitchfork become "The Most Trusted Voice in Music"?
― MarkoP, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:16 (eight years ago) link
When I'm looking for a voice in music, I'm looking for a voice I can trust. And that is why I choose ... Robert Wyatt. Robert Wyatt: The Most Trusted Voice in Music.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:22 (eight years ago) link
yeah, i mentioned that upthread. of all the slogans to rip off, they went with CNN. lol
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:32 (eight years ago) link
― MarkoP, Wednesday, March 23, 2016 1
Walter Cronkite called him that in 1961 iirc
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:32 (eight years ago) link
is there some reason designers are incapable of like styling designs to fit the platform?
if you mean like having different device-specific designs versus the currently more popular device-responsive approach where the design, in theory, adapts to your device then the reason is that there are way too many devices with wildly varying screen dimensions now. also, there was some idea that the old m.website.com-style mobile site confused readers who were used to the look of the desktop site.
also the shift to mobile-dominated traffic is just a fact, especially for younger-skewing media companies. saw a presentation from a Buzzfeed dude the other day and he said ~70% of their traffic is mobile.
― rob, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:42 (eight years ago) link
it's not up to the designers. web standards are constantly changing. for the 90s it was a lot of static self-contained HTML pages. nowadays every webpage is modular and dynamic whether it's designed for mobile or not. everything cross-platform all the time.
automated processes are there to help apply a brand style to every piece of posted content. but nobody goes in anymore and individually adjusts the text and photos for each article. it becomes a dance of tweaking the computer's input (often an in-house proprietary developed set of editing tools) to get the right balance where it looks closest to the sample someone designed way way way back in the process (before it had _this_ widget and _that_ widget added in for good measure).
honestly it's a miracle we see any of it at all.
― AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 18:22 (eight years ago) link
― some dude, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 17:14 (1 hour ago) Permalink
This would make sense of people frequently accessed books by reading a single page after seeing it on their Facebook page
― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 18:28 (eight years ago) link
Today they bnm'ed Wadada Leo Smith & Vijay Iyer and Charles Bradley's new Black Sabbath cover. Are they changing away from indie-hype as well?
― Frederik B, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 18:52 (eight years ago) link
Nah, they just looooove Vijay Iyer. They've been polishing his knob for well over a decade.
Historicity
Accelerando
Solo
Tragicomic
In What Language? (with Mike Ladd)
― the top man in the language department (誤訳侮辱), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 19:15 (eight years ago) link
A Charles Bradley cover that was originally released in 2013, and then later re-released late last year in promotion of his upcoming album now gets "Best New Music"? Better late than never, I guess.
― MarkoP, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 19:22 (eight years ago) link
Charles Bradley's retro soul is standard fare for indie fans as well
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 19:24 (eight years ago) link
kinda feel like indie is not a thing anymore, like it doesn't exist
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 19:25 (eight years ago) link
lol, sorry to rail on this one more time but now they have to do a quasi-news item to explain that they've named something a best new track:
http://i.imgur.com/Xtt1aa1.jpg
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:16 (eight years ago) link
"there's got to be a better way"
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:18 (eight years ago) link
Because it's a "big deal" duh!
― Evan, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:23 (eight years ago) link
lol at Charles Bradley's Cover of Black Sabbath's "Changes" is Named Best New Track. Too bad the Senate will never vote to confirm dudes.
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:37 (eight years ago) link
Would find it really funny if this "news" gets reported by another Music website, given that a lot of them just seem to report on the same stories.
― MarkoP, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:47 (eight years ago) link
Aggrefork blog BNMNOW.com begins to outperform the hub site; buys conde nast and vows to become the new home for meta-millenial men
― ulysses, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 20:54 (eight years ago) link
baaaaha, i thought it was just a one off mistake but it looks like it's a thing
http://i.imgur.com/8LTm4l7.jpg
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 21:17 (eight years ago) link
Pleeeeease let a band called Track release a really good song with Track in the title, so it can be named best new track, given the best new track tag, and also the tracks tag
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 21:18 (eight years ago) link
i don't ask for much
― Karl Malone, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 21:19 (eight years ago) link
they'll be reviewing the reviews next
― Number None, Wednesday, 23 March 2016 23:40 (eight years ago) link
Charles Bradley's Cover of Black Sabbath's "Changes" is Named Best New Track, And That's Okay
― denies the existence of dark matter (difficult listening hour), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 23:46 (eight years ago) link
is the blessed impossible day upon us
is ilm seceding from pitchfork
― Laertiades (imago), Wednesday, 23 March 2016 23:58 (eight years ago) link
every site looks like pitchfork now. blame facebook. (kind of not kidding.)
― maura, Thursday, 24 March 2016 13:55 (eight years ago) link
I usually just blame Apple.
― MarkoP, Thursday, 24 March 2016 14:35 (eight years ago) link
surprised (okay, very slightly) that ratings below 5 are hardly used if this index is correct:http://www.albumoftheyear.org/ratings/1-pitchfork-highest-rated/2016/10
― niels, Tuesday, 29 March 2016 11:46 (eight years ago) link
btw redesign has introduced abstracts for all reviews, thx p4k!
I'd be like "hey good point we should probably include those summaries in the actual reviews as introductory paragraphs in boldface or smth like they do in the papers"― niels, Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:31 PM (1 month ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― niels, Tuesday, February 9, 2016 2:31 PM (1 month ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― niels, Tuesday, 29 March 2016 11:49 (eight years ago) link
x-post Not too surprising, as p4k tends to only review the sorts of albums they are predisposed to like (as opposed to Spin or RS reviewing Dave Matthews records and such)
― Blowout Coombes (President Keyes), Tuesday, 29 March 2016 12:02 (eight years ago) link
yeah, that does make a lot of sense too - guess it's kind of old school to position yourself through disliking (even if any reader will get the implicit dislike in ignoring a popular artist entirely)
― niels, Tuesday, 29 March 2016 12:12 (eight years ago) link