>The last album pitchfork gave a perfect score to for best new music was 6 years ago
That's why they're one of the most respected music review sites. They don't give out perfect scores for nothing, like most other sites do. I honestly expected To Be Kind to get a 10 just because of all the hype leading up to it and it still didn't get one.
>>64050058
>pitchfork
>respected
HA HA HAHAHA HAHAHAH AHA HA
it doesn't take taste to recognize this decade has been absolutely terrible for music
>>64050058
>pitchfork
>respected
only retards think this
are you a retard?
>>64050340
>>64050324
These guys think Scaruffi is relevant.
>>64050324
>>64050340
>If I don't respect it, no one does!
Yikes.
>>64050404
>yikes
>>64050027
So? Why does it matter? Why do you people keep talking so much about pitchfork and other review sites instead of just talking about music itself?
>>64050507
First week on /mu/?
>>64050058
>They don't give out perfect scores for nothing
yeah they just give a dozen 9.2-9.6's every year, as well as a million 8.5s
let's face it Scaruffi is the only modern critic who doesn't have horribly inflated ratings.
he's give only a few 8s this whole century with only ONE of them being an 8.5, and no 9s or above at all.
and on top of that, he actually reviews MORE music than Pitchfork, and he's one person running his own website.
>>64051143
>inflated ratings
I fucking hate this meme
Rating scales are subjective like music itself
>>64051143
>doesn't liek anything modern, only gives high scores to circus music and 2deep4u trash
How is that supposed to be good?
>>64051143
>inflated ratings
i hate this notion, it's so fucking stupid. what if there are legitimately a bunch of really fucking good albums that come out each year? how is that so ridiculous to believe? there is SO much music constantly being made, how is it remotely realistic to believe that 80% of them won't be above a 7?
it's just ridiculous. there's this misguided notion that if you give an album a high rating it's automatically better than the "best" album
>>64050558
this is a music board and pitchfork is a music site. as simple as that.
>>64050058
>most respected
not a chance, buddy
they give out hyper-inflated scores like peanuts as well
>>64051205
>>64051198
>>64051183
poptimists detected
name one album actually deserving of a 9/10, as in "original, unique masterpiece that will be regarded as a classic", that was released after the 90s
protip: nothing Pitchfork or Fantano have praised qualifies, because all they like is "indie" and hip-hop and memes
>>64051143
The average pitchfork rating is like 6.7. Also pitchfork doesn't review everything because some music isn't worth reviewing.
Fucking NOBODY takes Scaruffi seriously. His reviews don't get cited anywhere.
>>64051264
The Glow part 2
>>64051264
>name one album actually deserving of a 9/10, as in "original, unique masterpiece that will be regarded as a classic", that was released after the 90s
we have a le wrong generation memer over here guys.
>>64051264
oh you're baiting. that's cool.
by the way, "9/10, as in original, unique masterpiece that will be regarded as a classic" is a SUBJECTIVE description that you put on your ratings. If you actually won't give a 9 to an album you think is almost perfect but may not be unique, original, or regardless as classic then that is a retarded rating system
>>64050027
what album was it?
>>64051300
>bland indie rock that did absolutely nothing innovative
topkek
>inb4 "b-but the FEELS maaan"
>>64051280
Scaruffi doesn't review music that isn't worth reviewing either.
>>64051312
nice meme
>>64051320
if you literally hand out multiple 9/10s every year, your rating system is completely fucked and you have absolutely no standards
>b-but music is subjective!!!
not 100 percent
>>64051353
>not 100%
Yeah, it kind of is. How is music objective AT ALL?
>>64051338
My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy
>>64051353
So music after the 90s just suddenly, out of nowhere stopped being good?
Just fuck off, I bet your favorite band is like some dad rock instrumental wankery.
>>64051353
this is some next-level stupidity right here
>people actually defend Condé Nastfork's pants on head retarded rating system
L M A O
O
L
>>64051280
>>64051389
you may not be aware from this because you are probably 14 but music is an artform that has been documented, studied, critiqued, and developed for thousands of years. there is a whole written tradition to it, which is the reason entire pieces of music that were composed before recording music was possible can still be performed in their exact entirety today. this written system is built on many largely-agreed-on theories and themes and ideas from scholars and musicians throughout these thousands of years.
if you say "I like this because it sounds good or makes me feel" to someone who is actually educated about music, they will laugh at you.
>>64051397
so below 9/10 means "not good" to you?
>>64051264
>>64051353
>look mom i'm shitposting
>>64051264
Funeral and Person Pitch where extremely original albums that have been immensely influential.
Konnichiwa comes out in a month that'll definitely get a perfect score.
>>64051353
>>64051531
Holy shit now this is some serious fedora tipping
>>64051531
>he thinks some dickweed scholars are arbiters of what sounds good
you share a board with this person
>>64051531
who said that the opinion of those people "educated about music" is necessarily superior?
>>64051390
kek, did these morons really gave that 5/10 album a 10?
wew lad
>>64051320
yes, but their ratings being subjective doesn't stop me from considering their ratings aren't shitty.
I think they have subjectively bad taste and no journalistic integrity.
>>64051531
Music isn't a science. Fuck off.
>>64051264
Scaruffi gives some pop good ratings though. Solex has 2 7s and an 8 and St. Vincent has a 7.5 and a 7.
>>64050058
On Hipinion Pitchfork ex-writers have *literally* admitted to reviewing albums without listening to them and just regurgitating whatever the press release for the albums said.
Pitchfork's "high standards" is a marketing ploy just like lady gaga's dumb outfits were.
>>64051702
>caring about this bullshit
so what? It doesn't change the fact that the album is just another overproduced mediocrity
do not compare scaruffi to pitchfork
>>64051737
where did they admit that?
>>64051563
>Funeral
whiny indie rock
>Person Pitch
LOOK MOM I'M SAMPLING!!
>>64051220
Underrated
>>64051953
empty criticisms that you could level against literally any artist with some minor tweaks
>>64051264
Spirit They've Gone, Spirit They've Vanished
>>64051353
wow you are dumb as fuck. you actually think, out of all the music made in the ENTIRE WORLD, in the year 2016, there won't be TWO albums that are above 8/10.
also, music is entirely, 100% subjective
>>64052053
>Beach Boys ripoff with some noise thrown in
>>64052074
>music is entirely, 100% subjective
holy shit people like you are cancer
what you feel from music is subjective, the way it is composed and performed is not
this is literal fact
>>64052096
>equating music theoretic standards and quality
>>64052077
>Spirit They've Gone, Spirit They've Vanished is a beach boys rip off
You share a board with these people
>>64051531
i even somewhat agree that some people can be more qualified to rate/talk about music than others, but holy fuck is it retarded to say that there hasn't been a 9/10 since the 90s.
god it's like looking at some fucking avant teens rym where they have like 80% of their ratings below 3. fucking infuriating
>>64051882
yeah it insults pitchfork
>this thread
>>64052096
>the way it is composed is not
wtf? it's totally subjective you idiot. that's why everyone feels differently about different music. it's why different artists come out with different music.
i don't even know what you mean by that
>>64052077
explain how that album is a "beach boys ripoff"
>>64052077
>Beach Boys ripoff with some noise thrown in
>>64052178
they ripped off Beach Boys melodic and harmonic styles
but you'll probably just say melody and harmony is subjective lol
>>64052177
people with extensive knowledge of how music is actually made tend to have similar opinions on quality
maybe not on how exactly they feel about it, but no one who is educated on music would say something like "Bach sucks" because they would acknowledge Bach is a genius composition-wide. they might say "I don't personally like Bach" or "I feel nothing from Bach" but they wouldn't be like /mu/ and say he's "shit", "overrated", "pretentious" etc. they would respect talent and give credit where credit is due. that's what I mean when I say it isn't 100 percent subjective.
>>64052160
dumb frogposter
>>64050027
>Still cares what Pitchfork thinks
>They gave fucking Yeezus a 9.5
>>64051205
>hurr durr 10 should be inobtainable hurr
lmao kys fag
>>64052266
ok, i agree with that. bach is objectively good. however, we're talking about ratings. i'm assuming his mass in b minor isn't one of your 10/10s?
that's the point i'm making. while music can have objective value/quality (especially relating to the influence it had on subsequent music), when it comes down it YOUR person ratings are still subjective.
and it's also why i think the idea that a good album hasn't come out since the 90s is so stupid. if anything, music should be getting better each year. it's like science, we build off of other people.
just like scientists used newtons ideas to discover new laws, musicians used bach's ideas to create more complex music.
>>64052347
you are literally retarded for not understanding that i meant the exact opposite of that. also the word is "unobtainable"
>>64052304
>>64052266
>ripped off beach boys melodic and harmonic styles
do the beach boys own vocal harmonization or something? did i miss something?
>>64052266
Nothing about that album is a rip off of the Beach Boys unless you're new (which I'm fairly sure you are) and think every album with harmonies and melody is a beach boy ripoff
>>64050372
When was scaruffi's last 10/10?
Hm, ok den...
>>64052486
When was Scaruffi ever relevant?
Hm, ok den...
>>64052486
Scruffles would've given TMR a 10 if he wasn't self conscious about his "muh uninflated ratings"
>>64052441
what a wacky year for music
>A PERFECT ALBUM CAN'T EXIST CUZ DEN IT'D BE THE ULTIMATE ALBUM
proof that scaruffi is a retard
>>64052533
He is the deflaTed rated
>>64052382
holy shit I'm not saying good music hasn't come out since the 90s, plenty of GREAT music has come out since the 90s, but no true legendary classic masterpiece has come out.
>>64052668
>but no true legendary classic masterpiece has come out.
Not him but of course there are.
>>64052668
Most of Kanye's albums are classics by now especially college dropout. It's one of the albums the whole city of Chicago is the most proud of.
>>64052668
but that's fucking wrong dude. le wrong generation gets thrown around a lot but that's exactly what this is.
and if i name a classic album you'll just go HURR MEMERAP HURR INDIE BULLSHIT
but the point stands
>>64052684
not in popular music. in art music maybe, but certainly not in music that adheres to the album format (in a traditional sense at least).
>>64052696
>Kanye
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
>>64051264
Hurry Up, We're Dreaming
>>64052723
>not in popular music
I'm specifically talking about pop music.
Are you talking about art music? If so, your standards are probably unrealistic.
>>64051220
Don't be coy, there's a difference between talking about a website, reviewers, and actually talking about music.
>>64052441
You'd think 2013 was shit based on this image, but it was actually quite alright.
>>64050324
there's no such thing as a bad decade senpai
>>64051953
name some albums you like, i can be stupidly reductive about them too
>>64054036
Don't be coy, you don't actually discuss the music either.
>>64052077
>hasn't heard it
>>64051531
>if you say "I like this because it sounds good or makes me feel" to someone who is actually educated about music, they will laugh at you.
i make a living playing the cello and you seem very very misinformed kid
no art is objectively good or bad
go and do your homework
