pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

I wonder if it's going to serve anyone's needs. I don't think a web- only publication can attract readers interested in Alanis Morissette and Kylie Minogue. To my knowledge, no one actually hunts down information about such artists. People just hear about it on tv and that's it. Let's give Pitchfork a few months, until the corporate contributors pull the plug.

QUOTE OF THE YEAR.

the first thing i thought (after, well, this is no all cure all the time) was that i wished they really had "sold out" (what the fuck, is this 93?), because maybe it would mean LESS GODDAMN PROG.

Well, the Albini thing practically is...

Makes sense, really.

Well, the Albini thing practically is... huh???

You have completed your learning of life's lessons. Now, you suck ass just like all the other bores before you. Kylie, Alanis? Whatever, bitch. I am sure you already have the defense mechanisms in place so, this will mean nothing but, another exercise in...oh, who cares. Looking elsewhere for reality...or maybe I can pretend to be a rubber worm like pitchwhore.com...here big fishie, look, I rounded 'em up for you in a arrel. A whole demographic!

Not Funny

Y'know sometimes they really are asking for it:

"White Williams issues a debut album layered with impeccable influences-- including Roxy Music, Beck, and T. Rex-- and a sense of calculated disaffection."

Well shit SIGN ME UP.

Yeah, that was a bit of a repellant blurb if I ever saw one.

Wait, are you saying that doesn't seem accurate?

I read 'White' as 'While' and thought "The Saul Williams album sounds like that?"

it's more that they used that as their _hook_

x-post

The front blurbs are always stripped/condensed summary descriptions from the review inside -- in this case

His songs are thin and languorous, with impeccable influences and the sort of calculated disaffection that comes from an MFA in design and a good weed connection.

omg that is horrorshow

The blurb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the article quote

I assume that's an article quote; nabisco, if you just made that up then SHAME ON YOU.

why would a critic ever try to guess where a song comes from?

I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence

Wait, are you saying that doesn't seem accurate?

The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me. I guess I like my disaffection to be natural, not carefully planned, so I would never recommend something like that.

Then again, I've never heard it so what do I know and so on.

b-but someone at pfork said "hm, how can we get people to read this review? I know! we'll mention the artist's impeccable influences and calculated disaffection! that'll reel 'em in!"

RIP satire etc

they could have collaged+mis-used _anything_ from the article, and they collaged+mis-used that

The White Williams album reminds me much more of late 10cc and Bread than of Roxy Music. That bit was like the classic "Let's over-hip our influences" review.

The description of "a sense of calculated disaffection", a combination of words that makes me imagine the shittiest band of all time, followed by "recommended" was repellant for me.

See, this sounds like the blurb WORKED for you -- i.e., efficiently let you know you would probably not like this act.

I agree, though, it looks kind of weird to have such a neutral-to-disparaging summary blurb on a recommended album.

I like how they gave the new Babyshambles, which is actually tuneful and a good all around album, a 4.0, but gave the first one, which is dreadful and hard to listen to / bloated, a 7.3,

Yeah, it was definitely TWICE as good as the new one. Fuckin' morons.

ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.

(xpost) was that a parody or are you really getting worked up about an internet score for babyshambles

He was worked up?

wait, i thought the grading scale was logarithmic. like 5 is twice as good as 4. somebody email ryan schreiber to find out.

shit, now i need to reevaluate all my purchases of the last five years.

It's actually modelled after the Richter Scale, hence the superlative designations of various well-reviewed albums as either "Reccomended," "Best New Music," or "Whole Lotta Shakin' Goin' On."

"White Williams issues a debut album layered with impeccable influences-- including Roxy Music, Beck, and T. Rex-- and a sense of calculated disaffection."

if anything, that reads like a good reason not to check out the album....

richter scale is logarithmic xpost

but kudos nonetheless

I really like the album but I like this kind of exotica soundtrack stuff like this. Her whistling is much less silly than Andre 3000's flute playing.

That being said I did a double take at the line in the review that refers to it as an "inviting ambient record". In what universe is this ambient? Have been really annoyed lately at ppl's tendency the last few years to throw that word around to basically mean "kinda chill vibes".  Was talking to a friend recently abt Light in the Attic's reissue of Pete Jolly's Seasons which they are billing as "ambient jazz" in the press release - my friend was surprised when he listened to it and found it was just a nice mellow jazz album. I know that there's a huge postpandemic surge of interest in ambient & new age, but every non-rock instrumental album can't be "ambient".

haha wow yeah that's super silly

maybe they meant Ambien, that it put them to sleep

I think people are using Ambient to mean Atmospheric.

Im a super duper ambient snob but basically

any music can be used as ambient music in the right context

there is also a style of music known as ambient music that is more about creating an atmosphere. a lot of that music sucks because it tries to do too much and be foreground music.

feel like the genre and the idea of coffee shop non-verbal music are different

cue 1000 people saying aphid’s selected ambient works vol 1 is NOT but vol 2 is, only for someone to say it’s not

aphid? Aphex

ambient for a rave vs ambient for a bank vault

no that’s not quite right, back to unpacking

no new reviews today, is this a us holiday?

or an ominous sign...

This is not a U.S. holiday!

There are new reviews

^reporters CUmmings and Keyes doing the lord's work

Something weird is going on because they removed a bunch of recent reviews. there was a schoolboy q review this week but its gone now. Some others too - very odd.

Huh

yeah there's a big gap in the bnm and 8.0 review sections - between march 2024 and october 2023

PAnon over here

if you google the schoolboy q review, you can find it https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/schoolboy-q-blue-lips/

but within the site itself you can't find it.

what're they hidin

https://i.imgflip.com/1amtvd.jpg

I thought I was going crazy today when they had the news feature on the Dreamville lineup announcement and there was no Nicki link, nor did any of her reviews show up when I searched her on the site. I was starting to think I was crazy like surely Pitchfork has reviewed Nicki albums and then I finally found one of her most recent album on its wiki page.

https://slate.com/culture/2024/03/pitchfork-oral-history-music-festival-conde-nast-review.html

it's weird that this had zero mentions of any list that pitchfork ever did. the year end lists couldn't drive attention week to week like best new music could, but they felt like an important part of building and maintaining a pitchfork editorial voice.

why do we have two "pitchfork is dumb" threads?

ilx is dumb

It's a series

this one is gigantic and ancient so a sequel thread was made at some point but people keep using this old one anyway

thread names are too similar

i feel like having to ask demonstrates the reason. in the original thread there was a discussion about it being too big and being impossible to go back to if you're after anything but the latest few messages. but that message is buried forever because the thread is too big and is impossible to go back to if you're after anything but the latest few messages.

(and obv i do know this is the original thread i haven't lost my mind just yet)

Condé Nast should buy out this thread.

this one is gigantic and ancient so a sequel thread was made at some point but people keep using this old one anyway

lol I thought this one *was* the sequel and that the earlier discussion of the Slate oral history was on the original. ah well.

Thread names too similar

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/tracks/future-metro-boomin-like-that-kendrick-lamar/

As exciting as it is to finally have a full-length from the duo, “Like That” doesn’t show either at the peak of their powers. In fact, it’s boilerplate by their standards, Future boasting about nameless one-off flings and endless supplies of drugs over a so-so Metro beat that splits the difference between modern Atlanta and vintage California and Memphis.


the beat is literally "Everlasting Bass" by Rodney O and Joe Cooley

That was not good.

I haven’t listened to the song but rap nerd internet seems to be pointing out that the beat is sampling Three 6 Mafia sampling Rodney O

Or referencing or whatever, again, I haven’t listened to the song

I dont buy the three 6 thing. idk maybe he was inspired by how they flipped it. but metro flipped rodney o and joe cooley on the 21 savage album too hes not like ignorant of them

I just saw an article where Rodney O said Metro approached him about it

The cut up vocal sample is from Three 6's 'Ridin Spinners', no? Not sure where it was from before that.

you mean the Eazy E sample?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdf_GIV9Svo

that's the one

chops up vocals from eazy e's "eazy duz it"

right

that little chant has been sampled in duz-ens of songs through the years

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQTHxGdWv4

A lot of people sampled Gumby's hightop fade

I feel like lazy/obvious sampling in current hip hop could be a thread of its own