pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Anybody read Joe Colly's review of Nick Oliveri's Death Acoustic this morning. Makes me wonder what kind of editing process these reviews go through before they're posted. I mean:

...the album features the same brutality and hostility as his contributions to Queens and other groups, and offers a bleak, sometimes frightening character portrait of Oliveri as an outcast not fit for normal society.

Death Acoustic is a pretty strange record and there isn't much precedent for it beyond perhaps the outlaw country of singers such as Hank Williams and Waylon Jennings, men who sold the idea of themselves as kinds of modern-day desperados. The difference, I suppose, is that Oliveri seems to actually be that character in real life, and when he offers up lines like, "I use crystal methane by the boatload/ I live off straight booze, I just don't fucking care," in "Outlaw Scumfuc", you don't really question the validity of that statement for a second. In some sense, it's effective songwriting, as the listener gets some insight into Oliveri's persona, but often the material here is presented in such a violent and misogynistic manner that it makes it difficult to feel much sympathy for the storyteller.

"Outlaw Scumfuc" is a fucking G.G. Allin cover, dude! That's the goddam "precedent for it." It's got some new, Oliveri-specific lyrics, but it's obviously intended more as comedy than confessional. As is the cover of the Dwarves' "Dairy Queen", which inspires Colly to note that, "one doesn't easily root for a guy who paints his ex as a prostitute who 'went down on every guy in town.'" I mean, jesus christ, how hard is it to notice that this record consists in large part of covers of intentionally offensive and comically OTT punk rock songs? 2 from the Dwarves and 1 each from GG, Moistboyz and the Misfits. It's not a soul-searching expose of the artist's deep thoughts. Hard to understand why you'd even consider treating it as one.

Which leads to another general suggestion for music critics: stop telling me about the bullshit artist persona that you imagine this record fucking reveals.

just in case there was a demand for an acoustic cover of "I Kill Everything I Fuck"

I wonder if this type of thing is a result of journos only getting e-mailed a link to download some mp3s with no other type of information. At least a CD with bare bones liner notes would have allowed Colly to have noticed that Oliveri didn't write all the songs. If he was unfamiliar with GG or the Moistboyz he might have just assumed they were originals and went from there. OBVIOUSLY a little research on his part (or editing, as you point out) could have alleviated the problem, but I can't help but wonder if the reliance on digital files with no liner notes can be leading to more and more of these incidences, especially when the writers are either under too tight of a deadline or too lazy to do additional research.

It totally is the result of that, you need not wonder.

That's all true, but I think there's also a tendency in a lot of reviews to treat lyrics as a direct sort of window onto the artist's soul, with no apparent awareness that they can just as easily be a stylized construct. That the persona seemingly behind the song(s) can just as easily be part of the artistic creation as a view of the artist's undisguised "true self".

Plus, it's really damn hard to imagine anyone taking the lyrics to "Dairy Queen" or "Outlaw Scumfuc" seriously. The only reason we do so in GG's case is that he went to such absurd lengths to prove that he really was, in fact, speaking from the heart.

Point taken about the files with no info business. It's not like I think JC's is a doofus for not being up on his Dwarves and GG. Nobody's obliged to be familiar with that stuff. So forgive me if I'm being too harsh...

No no, I'm totally with you. I've just noticed this happening more often and was feeling out theories.

yeah, the problem with the rise of the "google expert" music critic is that there's some things you can't google.

But even typing "Outlaw Scumfuc" into Google immediately reveals its a GG Allin song. I just think some people can't be bothered to even do that. Or, as noted, if it doesn't fit with the persona they're trying to paint onto the artist.

yeah but tbh if you DL a new album without hearing anything about it containing covers how likely are you to google/allmusic every song title just to see if anyone else recorded it first?

That goes back to my original point, even perfunctory liner notes would have solved the whole problem. If you can't be bothered to glance over the credits when reviewing something, well, maybe you should be trying a little harder.

does the shit people review even come w/credits anymore?

how likely are you to google/allmusic every song title just to see if anyone else recorded it first?

― some dude

Which goes back to Whiney's comment about the rise of the "google expert". It's hard to write intelligently about music when you're ignorant of its larger context. Knowledge and deep familiarity really do count for something, and this relates to those gloomy panel discussion summaries curmudgeon linked to in the role of a critic thread.

does the shit people review even come w/credits anymore?

― call all destroyer

If it doesn't, is it maybe a good idea to do some research before rendering an "expert" opinion about it?

Towards the end of my time writing for the metal mag that just folded, I was typically getting sent a link to a zip file with the mp3s and nothing else.

yeah that's what i'm talking about. so should reviewers like google every song title to make sure it's not a cover or something?

god no. that would take a whole minute.

The Fork review of my old band's new record had all kinds of understanding problems. Called the dude who mixed it the producer and extrapolated some ideas about the music due to the producer's role. One of the guys in the band wrote to the reviewer and pointed out his mistakes he changed his review around.

im sympathetic to the plight of reviewers getting their zip files w/ no other info but its not that hard to email the publicist and ask for the press release, the liner notes, etc. i do this not cuz i dont want to be wrong but cuz it can be a lazy way to find a hook for a piece if im having trouble figuring out what to write.

i mean it's just kind of like if record companies don't care enough to address these things not sure reviewers should

i don't review a record without asking the publicist for a one-sheet, which every record has, without exception

Duh
"Called the dude who mixed MASTERED it the producer

i don't review a record without asking the publicist for a one-sheet, which every record has, without exception

tbh I think this should be standard policy for everyone

I'd imagine that it's in a reviewer's own best interest to look like a non-idiot as often as possible. Ignorance that parades as "expert opinion" reflects badly on the reviewer, the editor and the publication as a whole. So yeah, don't do that. It's not the fucking record company's fault. "Well, you didn't give me enough information to protect me from saying stupid shit, so..."

um yes it is also the record company's fault

i can totally see being like "well this is what they gave me so this is what i'm going with" but a) i don't review records b) i can be a jerk about things like that

Okay, HD, but the critic's exposed ignorance only the record company's fault in an indirect way. A very indirect way. I read criticism due to a presumption of expertise/intelligence, not a presumption of ability to transcribe one-sheets.

Seriously LOLing at that review. No matter how it happened, that reviewer looks like an idiot. It's some kind of a success for the artist though, since his attempts to de-contextualize the original material has obviously proved to be somewhat successful. At least to pull the wool over this dork's eyes.

Best part: "...a bleak, sometimes frightening character portrait of Oliveri as an outcast not fit for normal society."

u should get credit for dude changing it

lol

judging by recent accounts of olivieri's temperament, you can see why the reviewer thought it was his own song.

getting sent MP3s with nothing else is an annoying trend. what are PR companies for if they're just gonna email you the music?

I could picture a Vietnamese whore saying that whilst doing a striptease.

oh man, I get so paranoid about exactly this thing with mp3s, to the point of creating these elaborate, ridiculous worries -- what if I don't realize it's a cover album of 60s obscurities, what if this line I say I hate is actually a reference I'm not catching, what if I criticize the drumming without realizing the drummer lost an arm in an accident and is re-learning to play like Rick Allen, what if there was a mistake and I got sent the wrong album entirely and I write that it's a ridiculous Bowie rip-off when they accidentally sent me a mix of Bowie b-sides I didn't know about, etc. etc. etc. sometimes it gets you; it's something it's normal not to know, googling won't turn it up, and you just eat it and make corrections.

This probably says more about what I write about (namely, stuff that's either too small to have a publicist working it or too big for anyone working it to care about me, and things sent directly too me by artists and/or by artists that I already have a good working knowledge of), but I almost never ask PR people for anything, unless they happen to mention something I'm actively interested in in some mass e-mail I get. I mean, it's not that hard to find one-sheets or equivalent info just with a quick search anyway if I'm really in the dark on some detail I don't want to get wrong in a review.

pretty sure nick oliveri has a publicist

he murdered his publicist

the review told me

he murdered his publicist

^^^well done

actually GG Allin murdered his publicist first

oh man, I get so paranoid about exactly this thing with mp3s, to the point of creating these elaborate, ridiculous worries -- what if I don't realize it's a cover album of 60s obscurities, what if this line I say I hate is actually a reference I'm not catching, what if I criticize the drumming without realizing the drummer lost an arm in an accident and is re-learning to play like Rick Allen, what if there was a mistake and I got sent the wrong album entirely and I write that it's a ridiculous Bowie rip-off when they accidentally sent me a mix of Bowie b-sides I didn't know about, etc. etc. etc. sometimes it gets you; it's something it's normal not to know, googling won't turn it up, and you just eat it and make corrections.

― oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Friday, October 9, 2009 1:18 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

rap music's constant self-referentialism makes this even harder fwiw

and hilarious when new-jacks fuck it up

rawkan

jk <3 u tom

The sound has many names, but none of them seem to fit just right. Dream-beat, chillwave, glo-fi, hypnagogic pop, even hipster-gogic pop

Results 1 - 1 of 1 for " hipster-gogic pop".

is Marc trying to create the world's worst meme, just for larfs?

Results 1 - 10 of about 333 for "hipstergogic pop". (0.21 seconds)

Not actually 333 different mentions of the term, but still

i don't review a record without asking the publicist for a one-sheet, which every record has, without exception

the problem arises when you find that a potential issue crops up here but your deadline is RIGHT THERE FIVE MINUTES AWAY

xpost oh yeah, I read the Reynolds article. I guess the term didn't have any epoch-defining effect on me, for some reason.

That's all true, but I think there's also a tendency in a lot of reviews to treat lyrics as a direct sort of window onto the artist's soul.

^ this. Also, overemphasis on lyrics in reviews of bands/music where lyrics plainly aren't the main focus. Up to, and including, peppering the review with random couplets. Dunno if this is because critics are more likely to be 'words' type people, or whether the music side is harder to write about.

I think it really is that more critics are writers who like music than musicians and/or students of music theory who also can write well. A really stunning number of critics seem to talk about only the text of the lyrics as if they're writing about poetry, and treat the music as almost incedental.