pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Donald
Oh my God, what just happened at P-Fork
Mon Apr 1 07:08:25 2002
63.167.209.146

I'm not going to spew any elitist bullshit, but Alanis Morrissette, Kylie Minogue? Oh my fucking God. I'll stay for a little while to see if P-Fork still serves my needs, but with today's front page, I'm not counting on it. I understand the career move, but I just don't think it's going to serve me any more.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

stu Re: Oh my God, what just happened at P-Fork Mon Apr 1 07:41:08 2002 65.92.243.96

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.

Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I am very disappointed. Could they have made it any more obvious? COME ON, PEOPLE.

David Raposa, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I don't think a web- only publication can attract readers interested in Alanis Morissette and Kylie Minogue.

QUOTE OF THE YEAR.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

What makes me think that things will be back to normal by tomorrow? ;)

Sean Carruthers, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I don't know Sean... it would be April 2nd, which would make it one day after...

Andy K, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

You scalawags, you make me laff. Perhaps.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Speaking of which, HEY NED! My Bloody Valentine are finally releasing their new album!

Sean Carruthers, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

We thought about that as one of the news items.

Dare, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

"i for one will not be returning to this site if you're seriously going to be reviewing alanis. like i can't read that shit everywhere and anywhere? the reason i had pitchfork as my home page was because i could actually find out about the shit i care about. i'm glad you can pay your rent now, it's too bad that you sold out your millions of readers for britney fans in body glitter to do it."

Dare, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

pitchfork as your homepage, classic or dud?

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.

jess, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

he's calling you out, leone. FITE!

Todd Burns, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I think I'd rather read about Alanis and Kylie than most of the stuff they normally review.

Sean, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Their funniest joke came months ago.

Nicole, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I don't know what all you fools are talking about... I only WISH all of it were true.

Well, the Albini thing practically is...

mr. sparkle, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

We thought about that as one of the news items.

Makes sense, really.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

I don't know what all you fools are talking about... I only WISH all of it were true.

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

Brock K., Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

LESS GODDAMN PROG

So, does that mean we'll write about the next Radiohead album, or not?

dleone, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

And that Flaming Lips thing actually is true. I think.

powertonevolume, Monday, 1 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Hein? Is the joke that Pitchfork reviewed some pop musik?? Even their KYLIE review was as dull as www.defra.gov.uk/farm/sustain/default.htm ARRRGHHHHHHHHH!! Then again Pitchfork = dull is a big shocker along the lines of Nelson in COLUMN!!!!!! shocker.

Sarah, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

'On' column? 'HAS' column?! I can see him from my bladdy window but does that help my BRANE I think NICHT.

Sarah, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Dom, how much of the Kylie review was farce? "The song exudes a catchiness that belies its inherent simplicity, so reassuring during an era when chart acts sound increasingly baroque and producers race to see who can ape electronic music trends first" sounds at least semi-serious.

Mitch Lastnamewithheld, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

that is because kylie is, like sophie ellis bextor, going for a retro- mancuso/levan vibe, with all the classicism inherent in such an endeavour.

gareth, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Actually, I did try to write about that record in the same way I would have for anything else at Pitchfork. I thought the gag would be better if people really thought we were changing styles, and Spin may be full of ads, but at least the reviews aren't jokes! As far as I know, anyway. Dullness wasn't intentional though.

dleone, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

best e-mail address ever, eh starbar?

dudley, Tuesday, 2 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

Dead right sir. Power shandies all round to the geezer behind it eh?

Sarah, Wednesday, 3 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

From: DWilliams@EQRWORLD.com Subject: NO, Just Admit You Like It Up There

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

Dare, Thursday, 4 April 2002 00:00 (fifteen years ago) Permalink

five years pass...

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.

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 18:57 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:01 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:10 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

Ned Raggett, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:11 (ten years ago) Permalink

it's more that they used that as their _hook_

x-post

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:20 (ten years ago) Permalink

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.

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 19:46 (ten years ago) Permalink

omg that is horrorshow

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

HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:18 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

HI DERE, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:22 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:23 (ten years ago) Permalink

I'm more bothered by beck as impeccable influence

dmr, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:24 (ten years ago) Permalink

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.

Z S, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:29 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:34 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

lukas, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:35 (ten years ago) Permalink

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.

I eat cannibals, Thursday, 1 November 2007 20:54 (ten years ago) Permalink

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.

nabisco, Thursday, 1 November 2007 22:04 (ten years ago) Permalink

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.

Erock Zombie, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:30 (ten years ago) Permalink

ugh, "impeccable influences" is really repulsive.

Hurting 2, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:46 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

dmr, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:47 (ten years ago) Permalink

He was worked up?

roxymuzak, Friday, 2 November 2007 18:49 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:14 (ten years ago) Permalink

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

elan, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:16 (ten years ago) Permalink

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."

Alex in Baltimore, Friday, 2 November 2007 19:24 (ten years ago) Permalink

Wasn't p4k pretty late on the Bon Iver bandwagon?

Frederik B, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 18:42 (two days ago) Permalink

xxp right, that was my thinking. when they broke in 2002, p4k was still competing with mags & MTV & the last gasps of major label raiding.

oh yeah, add The Decemberists to the list. Microphones/Mount Eerie too.

xp i don't think so fred, i remember them giving a rave review of for emma forever ago before it had even been reissued, though i could be wrong. but they definitely weren't late on that one.

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 18:43 (two days ago) Permalink

other sites rated the lcd album, but p4k did that hagiography of every single one of their tracks when they first "broke up". i feel like their commitment to making them Important goes beyond that of other pubs

austinb, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 18:45 (two days ago) Permalink

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/10709-for-emma-forever-ago/

I don't know, it's positive, but it's not even BNM'd.

Frederik B, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 18:47 (two days ago) Permalink

it was overlooked almost everywhere iirc, broke a year after release

niels, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:01 (two days ago) Permalink

broken social scene

marcos, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:03 (two days ago) Permalink

totally, it may not have gotten BNM but 8.1 is a ringing endorsement, and the fact that they reviewed it in early October 2007 is telling. I certainly found out about the record from p4k and didn't see it written about anywhere else until the early months of 2008.

xp yes! BSS absolutely

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:04 (two days ago) Permalink

every indie act that broke from '04-'09 owes something to P4K, from Grizzly Bear to Vampire Weekend to Dirty Projectors to Sufjan to Hot Chip to The Knife, etc.

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:14 (two days ago) Permalink

otm

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:16 (two days ago) Permalink

might be a more fun exercise to see if there were any indie bands that broke despite neglect or a bad review from pitchfork, can't think of any off the top of my head

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:17 (two days ago) Permalink

a lot of emo and twee stuff was v poorly reviewed in its early years, including early Of Montreal iirc?

Simon H., Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:18 (two days ago) Permalink

these don't really count but they dropped extremely negative reviews on Andrew W.K. and Mumford & Sons pre-breakout.

omar little, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:21 (two days ago) Permalink

Taylor Swift

Number None, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:21 (two days ago) Permalink

iirc maybe the first review of Discovery by Daft Punk was a lot lower than what i'm seeing now?

omar little, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:21 (two days ago) Permalink

Future Islands and early Ariel Pink

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:22 (two days ago) Permalink

Future Islands was neglect, and Ariel Pink's lo-fi records were all trashed. over the top praise for Before Today and making "Round and Round" song of the year in 2010 was a panicked atonement when they saw how many of those fucking chillwave bands that came and went cited him as their primary influence.

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:24 (two days ago) Permalink

iirc maybe the first review of Discovery by Daft Punk was a lot lower than what i'm seeing now?

― omar little, Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:21 PM (fifteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is true, but i think they atoned fairly quickly and put the record in the top 25 or so of their half-decade '00s list iirc

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:38 (two days ago) Permalink

Daft Punk preceded p4k, I saw the "One More Time" video on MTV programmed between Gorillaz and System of a Down. we're talking about bands that emerged after p4k had become the tastemakers. '04-'09 is a spot on window.

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:43 (two days ago) Permalink

That entire circuit of indie rock/Bonnaroo festival bands like Airborne Toxic Event, Silversun Pickups, Cage the Elephant, Cold War Kids did remarkably well w/o Pitchfork's help and sometimes with their direct antagonizing

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:44 (two days ago) Permalink

it's still the same review tho. A Schrieber classic

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/2134-discovery/

Number None, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:45 (two days ago) Permalink

xp those are great examples.

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:48 (two days ago) Permalink

add Minus the Bear and maybe Dr. Dog to that list

Simon H., Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:52 (two days ago) Permalink

Animal Collective, Dan Deacon, Grizzly Bear, etc. all would have had big indie success without a p4k. maybe not as big but "p4k made these bands" is as silly as saying Rolling Stone magazine made Bruce Springsteen

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 19:54 (two days ago) Permalink

menomena

Dat Login was the dname u doofus (Sufjan Grafton), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 20:05 (two days ago) Permalink

Grimes? idk... p4k really only had a monopoly on taste in the mid/late 00s. LCD is spot on, I was gonna say Interpol too but like The Strokes they had that last gasp of support from MTV & radio. Same goes for Kanye.

― flappy bird, Wednesday, January 17, 2018 12:37 PM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

are people seriously suggesting that Pitchfork somehow had anything to do w/ "breaking" Kanye West??

bhad and bhabie (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:26 (two days ago) Permalink

That entire circuit of indie rock/Bonnaroo festival bands like Airborne Toxic Event, Silversun Pickups, Cage the Elephant, Cold War Kids did remarkably well w/o Pitchfork's help and sometimes with their direct antagonizing

― mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:44 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Different demos though? These bands exist in their own universe that's almost as distinct as those of AP magazine.

Evan, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:27 (two days ago) Permalink

if you really want to split hairs between the mid-Aughts cool "i'm white and i'm online all the time and go to oberlin/pratt" indie rock vs. the mid-Aughts uncool "i'm white and upwardly mobile and go to a state school and/or live in California" indie rock, be my guest

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:43 (two days ago) Permalink

huh i thought airborne toxic event was like guitar hero metal or something

bhad and bhabie (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:50 (two days ago) Permalink

can we collapse all of that into mtvu-core or whatever

flamenco drop (BradNelson), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:51 (two days ago) Permalink

or like those bands all named Bad City Chain Gang who opened for Velvet Revolver or Black Label Society

bhad and bhabie (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:52 (two days ago) Permalink

if you really want to split hairs between the mid-Aughts cool "i'm white and i'm online all the time and go to oberlin/pratt" indie rock vs. the mid-Aughts uncool "i'm white and upwardly mobile and go to a state school and/or live in California" indie rock, be my guest

― mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 17, 2018 4:43 PM (six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

you bet your ass i wanna split that hair

flopson, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:53 (two days ago) Permalink

Just saying that it's probably the reason p4k doesn't necessarily have any affect on the success of those bands you've listed.

xps

Evan, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 21:54 (two days ago) Permalink

The difference between those bands and My Morning Jacket and p4k indie bands are pretty fucking minor, the only difference being that they're not immediately embraced by backseat lefsetz office warriors who think the NARRATIVE and THE CONVERSATION have any bearing on an objective financial reality.

There's also like Black Angels/Thee Oh Sees style psych bands that did/fine without P4k too

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:01 (two days ago) Permalink

I mean, yes, if you narrow the pool of music listeners to a specific marketing demo of people that followed Grantland on Twitter and Tweet about how Ladybird made them cry and yearn to taste Cronut then, yes, Pitchfork is everything, slay kings

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:03 (two days ago) Permalink

what if i yearn for cronut but i've also see Tool live? do they cancel each other out?

bhad and bhabie (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:08 (two days ago) Permalink

tbh i yearn for cronut

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:11 (two days ago) Permalink

I mean, there is a distinct difference between bands popular on alt rock radio vs bands that hit it big on AAA.

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:18 (two days ago) Permalink

Is it splitting hairs to differentiate, say, Smashing Pumpkins and the Counting Crowd?

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:20 (two days ago) Permalink

Counting Crows, stupid iPhone

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:20 (two days ago) Permalink

Who is the Counting Crows of being Dan Deacon?

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:21 (two days ago) Permalink

Mister Jobs aaand me

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:22 (two days ago) Permalink

I mean, yes, if you narrow the pool of music listeners to a specific marketing demo of people that followed Grantland on Twitter and Tweet about how Ladybird made them cry and yearn to taste Cronut then, yes, Pitchfork is everything, slay kings

― mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 17, 2018 5:03 PM (thirty minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I mean, this isn't really right either ^

mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:37 (two days ago) Permalink

The difference between those bands and My Morning Jacket and p4k indie bands are pretty fucking minor, the only difference being that they're not immediately embraced by backseat lefsetz office warriors who think the NARRATIVE and THE CONVERSATION have any bearing on an objective financial reality.

There's also like Black Angels/Thee Oh Sees style psych bands that did/fine without P4k too

― mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 17, 2018 5:01 PM (forty-six minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I mean, yes, if you narrow the pool of music listeners to a specific marketing demo of people that followed Grantland on Twitter and Tweet about how Ladybird made them cry and yearn to taste Cronut then, yes, Pitchfork is everything, slay kings

― mag gerwig! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 17, 2018 5:03 PM (forty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is a correct argument against the claim, made by no one ever, that p4k was omnipotent over all rock music

flopson, Wednesday, 17 January 2018 22:52 (two days ago) Permalink

it seems silly to deny that they once had serious gatekeeping/tastemaking power that has significantly declined in the recent past

hoooyaaargh it's me satan (voodoo chili), Thursday, 18 January 2018 00:15 (yesterday) Permalink

bullshit if anyone steps to me with some 7.6 bullshit i'm like get that garbage outta here son i only fucks with BNMs

bhad and bhabie (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, 18 January 2018 00:41 (yesterday) Permalink

re: Kanye, no, p4k had nothing to do with his success, if anything the perfect 10 for twisted fantasy was overcompensation, as good as that record is.

flappy bird, Thursday, 18 January 2018 01:45 (yesterday) Permalink

They gave him very good reviews before. You know, perhaps they just thought it was an incredible album?

Frederik B, Thursday, 18 January 2018 02:15 (yesterday) Permalink

actually yea you're right, I forgot about that. Late Registration was very high on their 2005 list

flappy bird, Thursday, 18 January 2018 02:18 (yesterday) Permalink

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/tracks/justin-timberlake-supplies/

savagely negative pitchfork reviews aren't dead, they're just thriving in the track reviews section

josh az (2011nostalgia), Thursday, 18 January 2018 19:40 (yesterday) Permalink


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