pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

 These are excellent records that we feel transcend their scene and genre. 

I hate this line of thinking, just offensive to me

the best music transcends all scenes and genres dontchaknow

i also think it sucks but whatryagonnado

Back when I used to write for P4K there was also a sense that BNM selections needed broader editor/staff momentum behind them. “Transcends genre” is probably code for “a broad swathe of writers as well as the editors listened to and rate this.”

If I wanted to give a 8.0+ score to a techno album that barely any other writers would be inclined to check out, there would usually not be too much pushback or eyebrow-raising re the score I proposed (perhaps on the basis that barely any readers would notice - different if we were talking about an album from a well-known pop star) but the prospects of getting a BNM were very limited. Other than that he’d days readers are much less precious about what sort of music Pitchfork can endorse, I imagine things have not changed that much in the past half decade.

Though that said Caribou is exactly the sort of artist you’d expect to be BNM’d so it might just be a question of timing.

They're using the red breaking news chyron for album releases now, huh? Or have I just missed this before?

surprise releases, maybe

Yeah I guess maybe that makes sense, just typically used to seeing it for a death or arrest or something. For a second I thought Lil Uzi Vert had died.

The new Caribou record is amazing, “Our Love” was stinky-poo but they gave it a 9 or something,

really enjoyed 'new jade' and the album closer

(Retroactive) 10 for Björk’s Post! Wow

Deserved.

I know the math makes sense but the realization that Björk has a 33 yr old son does make me feel vv old.

Realized I can’t think of a single album from the past 25 yrs to which I would assign a 10.0 (which I take to mean, “This album is so perfectly realized and historically significant that no other rating would make sense, and identifying any ‘flaws’ would feel utterly superfluous”)... guess it’s good I’m not a Pitchfork editor, lol.

from the past 25 years?:

midtown 120 blues
aaliyah
discovery
third

it's odd that whenever I've talked about Björk with millennials they've brought up that TV clip

I had never heard of it until now.

voodoo

yes

was gonna offer BLACKsummers'night

that too

Cuban linx

it's odd that whenever I've talked about Björk with millennials they've brought up that TV clip

what TV clip?

Ready To Die misses by three months

Some of the old stuff that’s gotten 10s are “flawed masterpieces” and some of the old stuff gets treated more harshly I don’t totally get it

what TV clip?

It’s linked in the beginning of the review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A78yTvIY1k

(It’s cute, but I’m not sure why it’s worth spending the first two paragraphs of the review on...)

Pivot to video

the review wasn't linked tbf

That’s why I answered yr question; I assumed you hadn’t seen it.

Anyway, does this mean Telegram deserves, what, a 12.0(?) Because the mixes are better, plus it has “My Spine”?

lemonade

The review concedes that Post is, at best, Bjork's third-best album:

She would soon leave London for the south of Spain and then New York, recording her two towering masterpieces—1997’s Homogenic, which Missy Elliott once gleefully likened to “Mozart at a rap show,” and the introverted microbeats of 2001’s Vespertine

Post > Homogenic > Vespertine is such a perfect run of albums.

And I love Debut.

her two towering masterpieces

^I think you can see the superfan revealed thru the critic’s veneer here

FWIW, Homogenic also received a retrospective 10; though Vespertine, which was reviewed upon release, got a 7.2

So this is it. The great follow-up to Homogenic we've anticipated since that overcast late-September afternoon in 1997 when we first sat listening to the album for the first time, wondering what she might do next. Somehow, it doesn't seem worth the wait.

a state of emergency iirc

Imagine listening to an album for the very first time, wondering what the artist “might do next”!

Uh, I do that all the time

Was going to say. Usually it's after the album is over, but still. "Can't wait to hear what this artist does next" can't be that odd of a thing to imagine when listening to something you really enjoy. Especially if it's an artist already known for drastically changing up their sound/approach.

A brand-new album? “This is good and all, but what else you got coming down the pike?” To each their own, I guess.

Eh, for me it's more, "I love this, I want to hear more" excitement. Doesn't mean I'm dismissing what I'm currently playing.

these days an artist isn't going to drop a new album for 3-5 years so it's kind of like speculative fiction

'Oh wow, there are so many great ideas on this album, you could build on these ideas for at least two more albums! Can't wait to hear what they thing up next, I need more!!'

I think the answer to this question 75% of the time is "will go disco"

Post and Homegenic are 10s in my book.

I think the answer to this question 75% of the time is "will go disco"

― Muswell Hillbilly Elegy (President Keyes), 9. marts 2020 16:39 (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Lol, I've mostly asked this question lately while diving into the metal poll, so this made me laugh

A brand-new album? “This is good and all, but what else you got coming down the pike?” To each their own, I guess.

Like I said, to each their own. I can honestly say that within the first album of absorbing a new album, my thoughts have never turned to what the artist's next release would be like... but I see that's not universal. (I still think the framing in the Pfork review is bizarre: wondering about her next album as you sit listening to the one that dropped that day.)

weird framing in a pitchfork review from 2001? are you sure?

morrisp has nitpicks (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)