pitchfork is dumb (#34985859340293849494 in a series.)

someone start a popula thread

Oh nm, I thought circanm's post was about early Pfork, not the recent list.xp

circa1916

Like, I absolutely have heard "everything except heavy metal" as much as "everything except country".

― The nexus of the crisis (Sund4r)

i guess i was too oblique, my point was more that both genres are absolutely riddled with racist pieces of shit, particularly in terms of their fanbases

Oh lol

harsh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1JqA3A7uXU

alternative nation gives pitchfork review 1.6 out of 5

The Doors and Greta Van Fleet, flagship bands of the "Alternative Nation"

"the point of reviewing music is to provide your opinion"

oh shit the secret GVF fans at p4k get called out

RIP Pfork Reviews Reviews

WATCH Alternative Nation absolutely *OBLITERATES* pitchfork

Alternative Nation? The Kennedy show?

Rewatching this, I feel like someone should really have told her not to post it, or at least to go back and work out what her arguments were and then make a new video.

that video is fascinating. I find this whole thing fascinating. not only does she fundamentally misunderstand what music criticism is, her anger betrays an insecurity that p much every GVF fan has expressed since the p4k review was published. if p4k really doesn't matter, if they really are just preaching to the choir, just churning out haters and think pieces, uh.... who gives a shit? your new favorite band is #1 on the Billboard Top 200. they're selling out theaters everywhere they go and will probably be playing arenas within the year. why so upset by p4k's scorn? it's Trumpian to me, doing air quotes every time she says "article" or "review," as if they're fake. she says there's a difference between expressing an opinion and "just bashing"... uh, no there isn't, a harsh opinion is still an opinion.

seems kinda needlessly mean to link to a video of someone's onstage breakdown in the middle of what's already a sharply negative review of their new album

lmao a 3.5

guess after deleting the stay what you are review from the archive they needed a replacement

Saves the Day brought emo and its cultural associations to the mass audiences of MTV

iirc and imo, std were never mtv big, this was dashboard

the opening riff from one of the singles was a dead ringer for "fly away" so I assume the album's probably not so hot, but still

and yeah that seems revisionist

the album is very good, this review is not

the opening track is way more tongue-in-cheek and fun than the writer makes it out to be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=appHBD7ut80

Absent of emotional context, it feels delusional and desperate: “Let’s sing along another 20 years,” Conley begs, conjuring up the cursed image of a wrinkled, 50-year-old Saves the Day performing “At Your Funeral” at some kind of twelfth-wave emo revival cruise full of retirees.

... ok but it's a two minute pop-punk jam

v good sign that the reviewer is here to take it down is that the 21-minute song that takes up half the album is only mentioned in passing

i prob come off as a stan for this band but i really disliked their last record and loooooved this one on first blush even though it's full of kinda dodgy ideas ("side by side"'s main riff being one of them, but it's grown on me a lot). the 21 minute track contains several amazing songs inside of it

maligning a band for putting out a tour diary when they're not sun kil moon lol

yeah STD were never MTV big. they were the first band I ever saw live though, opening for Green Day & blink-182 at MSG in 2002. is that the biggest tour they ever went on?

STD were on MTV *briefly* iirc. They were basically the third biggest band of the initial mainstreaming of emo iirc

i was a pretty devoted mtv-watcher at the time but it's possible i completely missed "at your funeral"

same

They may have been MTV2 joints

Wiki: Stay What You Are was released in 2001, peaking at number 100 on the Billboard 200. It spawned two successful music videos on MTV2, for the singles "At Your Funeral" and "Freakish", and has since sold 300,000 copies.[1]

yeah i figured that was most likely, that they didn't ever really graduate to the parent channel like dashboard did

next time i review a mewithoutyou record i'm gonna say they brought christian post-hardcore and its cultural associations to the mass audiences of mtvu

and they never had a string of hits like Jimmy Eat World

typing out these band names i am reminded of the above band's recent tweet warning young artists to consider the initialisms of their band names very carefully

Lol

where i was, Saves the Day didn't even feel like they were in the same universe of popularity as Dashboard and Jimmy...not even close

i think they were on the cusp. if they had something like "The Middle" or even "Sweetness" they would've been. I mean, Jimmy Eat World opened for Green Day & blink on that same tour I saw, STD were on second leg.

LOL'd at this awesome Kathleen Hanna quote: "I am voting because watching the Kavanaugh hearings was like having Fred Durst sing 'Nookie' into my face for 12 fucking hours."

https://pitchfork.com/features/lists-and-guides/musicians-on-why-theyre-voting-in-the-2018-midterm-elections/

This is a well-written and interesting review (of 9-disc live release from a band that seems difficult to say something new or interesting about): https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/rem-rem-at-the-bbc/

yeah I lol'd at that Kathleen bit too

xp

no links to my mortal enemies itt

R.E.M.?

Taking Back Sunday, The Used, AFI, Unwritten Law were all more popular on rock stations.

Weird to read "a band whose legacy is largely undecided" about your all-time favorite band. I am decided.

For the Julia Holter one, I found the score of 8.2 confusingly low for a review that read like sheer impassioned accolades. I felt like something was left unsaid like a unspoken characteristic of the release that disqualified it from the top shelf and made it simply a perfect execution within the limits of it's sort instead of an absolute classic.

Think a long way upthread we were talking about how the score is not usually chosen by the reviwer, still seems crazy to me.

ah I see. I guess the scores are too narrative-bound to be kept off the leash of centralized control

that only really makes sense if you're going to get someone to write a review who agrees with whatever the narrative is though, when there's an obvious disconnect like that it feels really weird

in the olden days, some albums used to get very high scores without getting the editorial BNM.

here's an example: https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/12454-the-59-sound/

the gaslit anthem

8.2 is the only score that seems to get both BNMs and non-BNMs these days

not sure what the difference is supposed to be since editorial decides both these days right?