Does anyone actually take him seriously?
>>65612244
Yes
harvard, stanford, and berkeley do
>>65612244
Yes
>>65612244
No.
>>65612250
>>65612264
12 years old.
>>65612344
t. 11 year old
>>65612380
Your reply makes me believe I'm wrong. You must be 8 years old
>>65612244
Piero Scaruffi is a cognitive scientist who has been a visiting scholar at Harvard and Stanford Universities, has written several books on Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science, published hundreds of articles on magazines, and been a member of the Cognitive Science Society. In 2006 he published The Nature of Consciousness, a massive survey of cognitive science, neurobiology, physics, artificial intelligence, etc.
>hurr durr dont taek hime srslee
I never understood how this dude became such a huge meme on this board, up to the point where people are actually looking to him thinking he's a proper accomplished critic or some shit.
He's not an accomplished critic, he's just a random guy with a website where he writes mediocre music reviews, one of thousands in that regard.
>>65612455
He's just a renegade fag.
>>65612455
Maybe he just has shit taste
>>65612540
No he's a dead ass
>>65612472
What makes an "accomplished critic"?
>>65612472
>proper accomplished critic
Your problem is believing that critics deserve any respect for their opinions. What are critics? In the end, they are people who listen to a lot of music and then say what they think about it.
Scaruffi has a good WEBSITE, not necessarily good opinions. His toplist also diverges from mere aggregator lists more than your average "accomplished" critic. So his website is worth a visit merely because of the uniqueness of the music that is actually on it. I happen to like quite a few of his top 40 or whatever, but that's not the point.
"Accomplished" critics are critics who were allowed to shitpost exactly, precisely like Scaruffi does in "prestigious" publications. Sure, maybe it's maddening for people to parrot Scaruffi wherever they go, but it's even more maddening to see people who think that music critics can be "accomplished", whatever that means.
>>65612803
This. Also, his saying random shit about the music isn't some precipitous dip in quality from mainstream critics to him. Mainstream critics make up equally random shit about the music they review.
Why couldn't this thread be made about Fantano or any of the pigshit retarded Pitchfork reviewers?
It's almost like people are forgetting that these "PROPER, ACCOMPLISHED CRITICS" are the same ilk that made the Rolling Stones top 500 Albums list.
Also, SCARUFFI IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT DEAD RIGHT ABOUT THE BEATLES.
>>65612970
>gave dark side of the moon a 6.5
>gave Kid A 6.5
>gave ziggy stardust 6.5
>>65613323
You're right, these are absurd.
They are literally all 5/10. Not kidding.
>>65612244
methemusicgenius.jpg
Have you ever read scaruffis' reviews? Or are you just one of those people who sees >beatles >6 and gets huffy.
He writes solid reviews and usually has something interesting to say about the album. Even if his taste is different than yours, there are plenty of amazing albums buried in the ones he's rated 7-8.5.
Most of the time his rating is not reflected by the review, and a 6/10 rating from Scaruffi isn't even that bad.
yes, a lot of people do
not that i ever agree with pedo scaruffi, but his website is an excellent way to be exposed to new music and he is also very accomplished outside of his musical criticism
>>65613323
>>65613323
>muh /mu/core
>>65612244
he has good taste when it comes to most rock
as a person into """electronic music""" however I have to say he's a fucking retard when it comes to that
>>65612261
They don't invite him to speak about music.
>>65613323
but this isn't a "pretend to be a total pleb" thread
>>65613323
this coming from someone who loves ziggy stardust, a scaruffi 6.5 isn't a bad thing and he has a hate boner for bowie to begin with
>>65613901
let me guess you're from /bleep/ and you're mad Scaruffi doesn't apreciate yo MASSIVE CHUNES M8 AY IMA GIT WILLD IN DIS CLUB LAD
>>65614139
no, the thing I specifically remember is him calling Aphex Twin's Druqks a "derivative callback to SAW 85-92" (or something like that.) I was already doubting what he had to say when it came to the various genres of electronic music, but when I saw that and him trying to say breakcore and modern classical piano vignettes are the same as basic ambient techno it kinda confirmed that he's clueless to me.
>>65612455
>/mu/
>he is taken seriously in areas that have nothing to do with music
FFS.
>>65612244
I'm a Mark Prindle man myself.
>>65613323
Objectively correct. These are some of the most vastly overrated things I've listened to.
Still think he should bump all of his ratings up by 1 point, though
>>65615010
kys
>>65612472
It's funny that the only real "acclaimed critic" of rock is Christgau who is an even bigger hack than Scaruffi.
