____twoism

does anyone here actually pay attention to publications like this?

sometimes, just to see if there's anything I listened to

I tend to read Pitchfork more than most online review sites. In general I like the slant they have on stuff.

I read pitchfork too. I think they get too much hate. There's far worse sites out there like playlouder and dis. It's music criticism, take it with a pinch of salt.

Pitchfork is the only music site I read daily. I don't always agree with what they say, but they review a lot of interesting stuff and when they are really impressed with something, it's often worth my while to check it out.

Plus they keep me pretty well up-to-date with tours and news.

Pitchfork is full of people with generally horrid taste in music, but often times they're on target. This is one of them.

I love Pitchfork. I honestly don't understand why they're getting so much hate on message boards.

On topic: I think Geogaddi deserved an even higher place on the list

i don't pay attention to sites like this because the people doing the reviews are more often than not, rather pretentious.

besides, i'd easily trust a fellow Twoismer's opinion on a release rather than listening to some twat pontificating over a release.

and that also goes for films too.

"top ten" or top-anything lists that appear in any publication are completely unfounded, and generate stupid referential "oh i have this album, it was in NME's top ten albums of the 1990s" trendsters who make their purchasing decisions on what happens to be "cool" at the time.

i watch Nathan Barley. you should too

/rant

hGc wrote:I love Pitchfork. I honestly don't understand why they're getting so much hate on message boards.

On topic: I think Geogaddi deserved an even higher place on the list

I do not love Pitchfork, but I agree with the rest. :3

hGc wrote:I love Pitchfork. I honestly don't understand why they're getting so much hate on message boards.

Because they don't and can't have the same musical tastes as everybody who reads it. There will always be somebody who disagrees with a review/rating etc. Anonymous message boards are a great place to complain about it. They rate Geogaddi at 30 right? You felt it should be higher. That's one example.

They do tend to obsess over certain musicians though, but I guess that's normal. Pretty much anything Amon Tobin puts out will get a good review by them for example.

Sometimes the reviews suck though, and have nothing to do with music. But that's what the back button is for on my browser.

Vexille wrote:

hGc wrote:I love Pitchfork. I honestly don't understand why they're getting so much hate on message boards.

Because they don't and can't have the same musical tastes as everybody who reads it. There will always be somebody who disagrees with a review/rating etc. Anonymous message boards are a great place to complain about it. They rate Geogaddi at 30 right? You felt it should be higher. That's one example.

They do tend to obsess over certain musicians though, but I guess that's normal. Pretty much anything Amon Tobin puts out will get a good review by them for example.

Sometimes the reviews suck though, and have nothing to do with music. But that's what the back button is for on my browser.

They orgasm every time they hear Radiohead. Let's not forget that D:

I'm not sure why everyone likes Pitchfork. They're basically Tiger Beat for the pretentious indie set, except they don't even realize it.

oscillik wrote:does anyone here actually pay attention to publications like this?

yes. for release news. and.. who's pretentious?

rubbish

dave_from_2001 wrote:

oscillik wrote:does anyone here actually pay attention to publications like this?

and.. who's pretentious?

i am. but at least i don't go making lists of my own personal favourites and proclaiming them as authoritative.

i would rather trust your opinion on music releases, than trust Pitchforks, or anyone elses. btw that's not a slur on you, i simply meant that i do not know you at all. but i trust that you have good taste in music. and i trust that much more than i trust some ponce writing for Pitchfork.

if it turns out that you're a Pitchfork columnist, my statement is gonna look really silly

oscillik wrote:

dave_from_2001 wrote:

oscillik wrote:does anyone here actually pay attention to publications like this?

and.. who's pretentious?

i am. but at least i don't go making lists of my own personal favourites and proclaiming them as authoritative.

Rate Your Music is full of such people. Totally unrelated, but such people are rampant online.

Neccy60 wrote:

oscillik wrote:

dave_from_2001 wrote: and.. who's pretentious?

i am. but at least i don't go making lists of my own personal favourites and proclaiming them as authoritative.

Rate Your Music is full of such people. Totally unrelated, but such people are rampant online.

it's not so much the fact that people make these lists that annoys me. it's the fact that some people or publications proclaim them as THE ONLY LIST THAT MATTERS, that's what really irks me.

where's Kanye West when you need him?

oscillik wrote:

Neccy60 wrote:

oscillik wrote: i am. but at least i don't go making lists of my own personal favourites and proclaiming them as authoritative.

Rate Your Music is full of such people. Totally unrelated, but such people are rampant online.

it's not so much the fact that people make these lists that annoys me. it's the fact that some people or publications proclaim them as THE ONLY LIST THAT MATTERS, that's what really irks me.

where's Kanye West when you need him?

Here.

It's useless to get worked up about the exact rankings on list like this (and every review site/magazine makes them), but you can takes this as some pointers on albums that might be worth your consideration.

And really, to me, what makes a good critic is not whether or not you always agree on them... rather, it's whether you can look at their review, combine that with what you know about the reviewer (their viewpoint, bias, likes, dislikes) and come out with a decent idea on whether it might be something you'd like (regardless of whether or not they did).