pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

In the UK this is not AUS

Shame it was pure shite era Kerrang

Yet the 'pure shite era' is what Kerrang treats now as the totem age. Helps matters that many of their key bands of the time are popular with Gen Z.

the period after is actually when they got peak sales and over 50% of readership was female. I don't really know what they were covering though (Brad emo?) as I stopped buying it because of the pure shite era beforehand.

White Stripes were getting coverage in that so called totem age. Along with the darkness and the hives + the remains of nu metal.

Sex and Candy is a lazy groove banger. It was huge here in Aotearoa NZ and I can see why. Nobody can convince me it isn't a great song.

Oh god Maroon 5 covered it... Travesty

don't love the song but if there's a musical moment to it that hooks it's his kind kind of slinky dragging behind the beat phrasing and nice descending guitar lick of after a quick rest in the chorus the *pause* i smell sex and can....day then *pause* "who's that loung....in" part

not really enough to make it a good song but that is the musical thing that made the song popular imo

― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, October 7, 2022 1:00 PM (eight hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

like disco lemonayyyyyde

Oh god Maroon 5 covered it... Travesty

― The Ghost Club

Adam & the Levines would know.

Let me tell you about Wheatus

Today I learned that "Teenage Dirtbag" is my ten-year-old niece's favourite song.

“Here Comes the Hotstepper” = notable omission from the One Hit Wonders list (even if it wasn’t deemed worthy of Best Songs).

(checks site idly post-12am EDT Sunday)

Whoa… did Wu-Tang die or something?

how a 90s song list that doesn't include sugar ray's "fly" is criminal.

proto-Fleet Foxes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtVORaI-f0s

Their 90’s house list is agreeable for the most part.

The music doesn’t begin so much as surface, as if “Around the World” arises from some great depth, that lowpass filter cutting out the high-end without obscuring the “fundamental” signal. And then the song fully emerges, the bass suddenly going like something stolen out from under Bernard Edwards’ fingertips, the hi-hat doing that bright, open chhh business on the offbeat. The up-from-underground stuff turns out to have been sort of poignantly appropriate. “Around the World” was an exhumation, disco as reworked in post-industrial Chicago and Detroit, then adapted anew by two blessed weirdos from Montmartre, Thomas Bangalter and Guy-Manuel de Homem-Christo.

Who says dance music isn't exciting?

damn another classic by that guy

i've said it before and i'll say it again–"da funk" destroys "around the world" any day of the week

agree 1000%

1000000000000%

what if they are both good songs?

they only picked one

My only complaint about this list is that they picked a bunch of songs that they already wrote up blurbs about in the top 250 songs list.

missing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no1vf854aUc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSwda46cNMg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNSpLqmY6K0

Hard pass on the David Morales and there are much much better AVH productions. The Bucketheads was pretty much peak Kenny Gonzalez though true.

oh yeah, didn't even realize "the bomb" wasn't on there! damn

Fly Life in its Brix Mix is a top 10 record of the 90s

and the Extra mix is a stunning catwalk of bass and freeform white noise

Pitchfork doesn’t really have any authority to run such a list, afaic— why would I pay attention to it?

What does authority have to do with it? It's just some people's opinions about music.

Pitchfork let their music opinion license lapse.

What does authority have to do with it?

well they call it "The 30 Best House Tracks of the ’90s" so you might think they were experts on the genre

don't imagine people who care deeply abt 90s house look to p4k for coverage

enjoyed the list

are there reasons to assert Sherburne and Cardew aren't experts here? I'm no expert, so I genuinely don't know

I meant merely what corrs understood— P4k is not a site that has much to do with the genre, and p4k wasn’t even around during much of that decade. Sherburne is a fine writer and a nice person, from my
memories, but it just seems like a primer that has been done before by publications that come from the culture. Yeah, it’s a boring ‘authenticity’ argument, but oh well— that’s what a site is subject to when it is a clearinghouse for criticism of every genre of music.

Yeah, that's fair; I feel similarly when they turn their attention to Jamaican music. Plus there is something undeniably opportunistic or just trend-chasing about big-upping house in particular right now

(my q was based on the fact that Sherburne is the primary reason I read their reviews these days, but I hear you)

I really enjoyed Rich Juzwiak on Janet Jackson's The Velvet Rope today.

I’m pretty sure Pitchfork is a business, not a… idk individual person or whatever. I don’t think the business is trying to be hip or authentic or something with a list of house records I think they’re just trying to get clicks. And I agree that’s wrong.

There are other ways to get clicks, you know. I hear tell of this Kanye guy.

Well I've been saying for years Pitchfork should open an unaccredited academy

finally got around to this one
https://pitchfork.com/features/lists-and-guides/great-records-you-may-have-missed-spring-summer-2022/

so much good stuff in there, weird that it's kind of hidden away

not sure what the point of having a rating system is if every album gets a 7.8

oh cool, a new Sloan album.

oh yes i was looking forward to another dose of "Ferguson's power-pop wimpiness" lol... yeah ok pretty much

not sure what the point of having a rating system is if every album gets a 7.8

― na (NA), Tuesday, October 25, 2022 9:02 AM (thirty-two minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

oh cool, a new Sloan album.

― jmm,

lol, before i checked, i thought "but doesn't Sloan always score in the 6.8 to 7.2 range?

i guess they've ranged across the 7s before

my post wasn't about a specific album, it was about how any time i actually open a review on their site it's always a 7.8

Probably because 7.8 is low enough they don't have to think about tagging it "Best New Music" but also high enough that they don't have to deal with the rabid, angry fanbases that see anything less than a 7.6 as a career destroying pan.

the rabid, super angry Sloan fans

if they they think they can safely avoid the ire of the dry cleaning stan army, they’ve got another thing coming

7.8 basically means 'yeah it's great but it doesn't really fit our current editorial profile for BNM content', disregard and move on, we don't need these cynical cowards