pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (10615 of them)

Seems more intelligent and thought out than usual. What gives?

King Boy Pato, Monday, 7 January 2008 13:15 (ten years ago) Permalink

the email to pitchfork is confounding not because it touches on "serious", unfuckwithable issues but because it's simply unfunny and pointless.

Charlie Howard, Monday, 7 January 2008 14:21 (ten years ago) Permalink

wouldn't this http://www.pitchforkmediadotcom.com/index6.htm get him off due to fair use laws regarding parody? or is the url too intentionally misleading?

kiss out the jams, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 07:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

also, I laughed at "beanbag chair chorizo"

kiss out the jams, Tuesday, 8 January 2008 07:22 (ten years ago) Permalink

<i>No, threatening a lawsuit and assuming everybody's gonna know you were just a-funnin' because, hey, the way you phrased things was totally funny - that doesn't really compare to telegraphing your intentions via ridiculous accent and costume.

-- J0hn D., Friday, 14 December 2007 10:47 (4 weeks ago) Link</i>
Well John, at least you find me totally funny! :-)

Jeff!, Friday, 11 January 2008 00:13 (ten years ago) Permalink

yay a famous person likes meeee

Just got offed, Friday, 11 January 2008 00:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

two months pass...

^^ ahaha !

Charlie Howard, Wednesday, 26 March 2008 12:57 (nine years ago) Permalink

Two of the questions from Pfork's interview of Colin Greenwood, bassist for Radiohead:

Pitchfork: The Pitchfork review of In Rainbows suggested "Radiohead have grown tired of trying to outrun themselves." What do you think of that assessment?

Pitchfork: The Pitchfork review of Hail to the Thief put forth the idea that "anything Radiohead does from here on out will sound like Radiohead"...

stephen, Friday, 28 March 2008 14:21 (nine years ago) Permalink

"For personal questions, please press 2. For favourite Torchwood character, please press 3."

Dingbod Kesterson, Friday, 28 March 2008 14:24 (nine years ago) Permalink

I would wager most of the people who posted in this thread in 2002 and 2003 have gone on to write for the site.

cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 28 March 2008 17:11 (nine years ago) Permalink

I think the only one who has "gone on to" write for the site is Jess. Raposa, Dare, and Leone were already on staff at the time. I mean, unless mr. sparkle is a pseudonym for Tom Breihan or something.

jaymc, Friday, 28 March 2008 17:27 (nine years ago) Permalink

who was dare

J0rdan S., Friday, 28 March 2008 17:27 (nine years ago) Permalink

Christopher "Double" Dare

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 28 March 2008 17:28 (nine years ago) Permalink

mr. sparkle = Ray Suzuki

David R., Friday, 28 March 2008 17:31 (nine years ago) Permalink

mad lolz @ ljag

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 28 March 2008 17:46 (nine years ago) Permalink

xpost: mr. sparkle = http://www.liquidmatrix.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/mrsparkleorig.jpg

stephen, Friday, 28 March 2008 17:47 (nine years ago) Permalink

i posted to ilx before i wrote for pfork, pplz

and what, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:31 (nine years ago) Permalink

the mobb deep quote fits like a high-top fade, but will it make up any of the cred i'll lose forthis??? let's fucking hope so!

-- ethan, Thursday, September 13, 2001 8:00 PM (6 years ago) Bookmark Link

trifnan delong

and what, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:32 (nine years ago) Permalink

there practically isn't any Pitchfork writer on ILX who didn't post here before writing for them, except for a couple PF lifers like Rich@rdson and, well, me.

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:36 (nine years ago) Permalink

and i don't really count cause i was there for all of 3 months.

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:37 (nine years ago) Permalink

yeah i mean i started in 01 but i was posting here in 2000

and what, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:37 (nine years ago) Permalink

xp nice try, lifer

and what, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:37 (nine years ago) Permalink

do we count ramosi here too?

and what, Friday, 28 March 2008 18:38 (nine years ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Oh hey you guys, it's Jeff again. I figured since you all collectively have such a vested interest in my, uh... COMEDY I would let you know that I'm working on a new cartoon series called Starving Muppet Babies.

Oh and here's a direct link to the most recent episode.

More to the topic, what's w/ the grade inflation lately??? So much BNM, not enough monkey urine.

Jeff!, Wednesday, 16 April 2008 00:16 (nine years ago) Permalink

one month passes...

FFS, Cohen, get over yourself: The Cinematic Orchestra Live at the Royal Albert Hall "review"

dblcheeksneek, Thursday, 29 May 2008 22:08 (nine years ago) Permalink

why do you guys bother reviewing albums by your own writers if every single one gets b/w 7.5-7.7

J0rdan S., Thursday, 29 May 2008 22:11 (nine years ago) Permalink

it's kinda played out but i still fuck with every day.

Jordan, Thursday, 29 May 2008 22:19 (nine years ago) Permalink

What is song Ma Fleur?

Raw Patrick, Thursday, 29 May 2008 22:29 (nine years ago) Permalink

pitchforks say oneida in north carolina the 21st


terrastock says oneida's at the fest the 21st


what is wrong, pitchforks?

kamerad, Thursday, 29 May 2008 23:32 (nine years ago) Permalink

today's two main reviews:

Bun B - II Trill - Rating: 7.7 -------------------- Recommended

Steinski - What Does It All Mean? - Rating: 8.7 ----- Not Recommended



stephen, Friday, 30 May 2008 17:39 (nine years ago) Permalink

If the Recommended or Best New Music tags were STRICTLY a function of the ratings, there wouldn't be any reason to have them.

nabisco, Friday, 30 May 2008 17:47 (nine years ago) Permalink

It does say Terrastock on the 21st...of June. Winston-Salem, N.C. is the 21st of August.

Nabisco's right, but in addition to that compilations/archive releases/reissues of older material, etc., don't get those tags. (The other one being "Best New Music" and all.) There have been a few exceptions for collections of recent-ish 7"/12"-type material that most readers wouldn't have been previously familiar with (this was really stretched for the Braxe comp) but that Steinski is a collection of material from the past three decades, so...

scottpl, Friday, 30 May 2008 17:55 (nine years ago) Permalink

good point Scott (i realized it was a comp. after i actually read the review, duhhh)

stephen, Friday, 30 May 2008 18:07 (nine years ago) Permalink

why does pitchfork writers never want to bob their heads to trip hop?

rockapads, Friday, 30 May 2008 18:36 (nine years ago) Permalink

i would like to see a 5.8 rated album get a "Recommended"

matinee, Friday, 30 May 2008 18:58 (nine years ago) Permalink

why do you guys bother reviewing albums by your own writers if every single one gets b/w 7.5-7.7


jaymc, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 17:36 (nine years ago) Permalink

why do you guys bother reviewing albums by your own writers if every single one gets b/w 7.5-7.7


poortheatre, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 17:49 (nine years ago) Permalink

what did rollie pemberton get

deej, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 17:52 (nine years ago) Permalink

I like Festival.

Hurting 2, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 17:54 (nine years ago) Permalink

Not sure if it belongs in this thread (could be classic or dud)... it's known that music journalists often don't listen to records enough to make a true judgment, if at all (see: Black Crowes/Maxim)... but I rather like this admission from Scottpl. in his Pfork review of the new Radiohead best of:

The packaging is merely a few promo photos and a long essay I didn't read (sorry).


stephen, Thursday, 5 June 2008 15:34 (nine years ago) Permalink

nonfamous local chicago bands almost always ratings between like 6 and 8 also, guessing they don't want to offend

n/a, Thursday, 5 June 2008 16:56 (nine years ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

from the Notwist review today:

Acher provides a candid glimpse into a troubled marriage by describing it in terms of the material goods used to prop it up-- "I remember good lies/ When we carried them home with us/ To our bedside tables and the coffee sets"-- thereby keenly drawing parallels between dysfunctional relationships and the IKEA-furnished apartments that house them: the cool surface appearances barely concealing the soul-deadening sterility.

stephen, Thursday, 19 June 2008 20:31 (nine years ago) Permalink

Yeah, the SQUARES are all, like, ROBOTS, man!1!!

Bodrick III, Thursday, 19 June 2008 20:54 (nine years ago) Permalink

METRIC, Grow Up and Blow Away
In fact, Metric's songs are often characterized by a commercial sheen-- they're smart little packets that, even as anti-consumerism screeds, have a compact luster that makes you feel like getting online to price experimental shelving units from Ikea or browsing all-over print hoodies at H&M.

Their second album, Pet Grief, is stacked with syrupy pop songs, as Johan Duncanson's effortless vocals ride the crest of soft-focus synths and programmed drums. But too often, the songs come off like the sonic equivalent of IKEA furniture: highly functional, sleekly designed, and sterile.

TORTOISE, It's All Around You
More frustrating, however, is that, after the scrappy Standards, where Parker spiked the mix with sparks and grime, Tortoise have pressed their music back into Scandinavian furniture. Cold Ikea percussion frames hold downy white duvets of keyboards, the music sterile and functional.

The Sire execs saw to it that all elements of darkness, ethereality and-- gasp in shock here-- black soul were quickly and efficiently excised from the mix, to be replaced by the most predictable, glossy surface settings this side of IKEA.

jaymc, Thursday, 19 June 2008 21:03 (nine years ago) Permalink

use other stores, please

Granny Dainger, Thursday, 19 June 2008 21:06 (nine years ago) Permalink


by 5 different writers?!

willem, Thursday, 19 June 2008 21:06 (nine years ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.