AOTY?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
AOTY?
>>64769970
it will always be, in our hearts.
THIS ALBUM IS NOTHING SPECIAL.
>>64769970
I don't hate Pitchfork, and I enjoy this album, but for fuck's sake that review was cringe-worthy. The forced tie-ins to previous Radiohead lyrics was just fucking silly. The review is so fucking dramatic it feels like the journal entry for a moody 17 year old girl.
>It sounds for all the world like the most cloistered and isolated soul in modern rock music opening up and admitting a helplessness far more personal than he’s ever dared.
>“This is a low-flying panic attack,” Yorke announces, explicitly linking to the bad old days of air crashes, iron lungs, and wolves at doors.
> It’s a vintage splash of Radiohead stomach acid, a cloud of gnats unleashed in your cranial nerves.
>It also feels like an exorcism for what follows: a plunge into something scarier than the military industrial complex, or the insidious nature of propaganda, or human nature’s disturbing tendency towards unquestioning obedience.
>Radiohead albums are the stuff of dreams and nightmares, and the band retains a healthy resistance to clarity; their music is a maze of signs you can peer into any way you like.
>” Yorke sings, and it’s a strikingly ordinary image: the Paranoid Android himself, picking up the phone and calling someone to tell them he’s just arrived.
> It is the message they leave us with, this very open-hearted song that has always felt like an open wound in their discography, a geyser of feeling erupting out of scorched earth
For fuck's sake. I hope the writer looks back on this in a couple of years and feels nothing but embarrassment.
>>64769970
>AOTY?
At the current rate, I think p4k's AOTY will be Beyonce.
>>64769970
Yes.
Until the new Swans comes along and blows everything out of the water.
>>64771734
Whaaat?
>>64773851
But gira is a rapist
>>64772143
Jesus this reads like p4k circa 2003 and not in a good way.
>>64771734
Says your mum while she looks thru your baby pictures
We are in the middle of an important fucking year. Whether or not it's AOTY doesn't matter, AMSP is a perfect example of why 2016 will be looked back as being a key year of this decade when it comes to music.
>>64774057
That's pretty good if original
>>64774077
Yeah man these past four weeks even have been nuts. The only bad thing is that everyone seems to have shot their wad for 2016 so we may have very little to tide us over until 2k17
>>64772143
This doesn't even cover the absolute worst line in the entire review:
>A throbbing cello appears like a lump in the throat
I mean, wouldn't it have just been easier to post a picture of a BBC deepthroating the author?
>>64772143
The Kid A review is so much worse than this.
>>64769970
According to them, it's worse than Currents
>>64774077
I actually agree with this. I don't know if I'd ever use the word "important," but it's a fucking great year for music. This year has already taken a giant shit on 2015 and 2014.
>>64774007
I had pretty much the same thought. I know people love to hate on p4k around here, but I actually think their reviews have gotten less pretentious and less cringe-worthy over the years. 10-15 years ago everything felt like some pompous english major at a community college who was trying to write the most 3deep5u shit they could. This review, though, is just the reviewer sitting in his room jacking off to picture of Thom Yorke and crying softly to himself.
>>64774205
There is a very good reason why some of their older reviews have ascended to meme status.
>>64774171
>believing those numbers mean anything, even to pitchfork writers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTEhEUoTzqo
>>64774150
nah man, immediately imagining black dicks is on you
Has pitchfork reviewed BP yet?
>>64769970
>tfw pitchfork will never ever be the same pitchfork that gave bricolage a 10.0 again
>>64772143
Pitchfork cares more about lyrics than the actual music
>>64774286
>implying pitchfork is reviewing an album
These reviews are just reviews on bands and how they want the band to be perceived.
>>64774205
It reminds me a lot of 2012. I look back at my Top 50 at the end of that year, there's still a ton of albums on there that i hold in high regard. Can't really say that about a lot of other years in this decade (the last 3 years, especially). So far, this year has - for the most part - been nothing but growers. Tons of albums that have gotten significantly better with each listen. Only 1 or 2 real disappointments for me so far.
Not just in music, but how it felt like that year was building up to something big, even out of music. In 2012, it was the mayan "apocalypse". In 2016, our new apocalypse will be the american election.
>>64774298
Agree. The sad thing is /mu/ still posts and cares about their reviews
>>64774057
B T F O
T
F
O
WHY HAVEN'T THEY REVIEWED BOTTOMLESS PIT YET THE USELESS FUCKING CUNTS.
WHO FUCKING CARES ABOUT FAGGOTHEAD AND JAMES BLAKE
no.
>>64773880
This
Swans will get PANNED, then forever be completely ignored by media
