How much does a pitchfork review cost?
>>65857143
WILL GET IN HERE
None. That's the sad truth about hipster filth. It's not even about money or gain, it's just the high that comes with power and imaginary cool kid points.
pitchfork.com/business/review-pricing/
It doesn't cost anything.
Certain albums are more marketable than other albums.
Pitchfork knows this.
>>65857183
I think that some new groups definitely paid Pitchfork for a review.
Depends on how much of a minority the artist is.
Women - 50% off
Black - 25% off
Mexican - 5% off
African - 60% off
Gay - 40% off
Lesbian - 70% off
Trans - 90% off
Discounts stack to a maximum of 100% off.
>>65857205
Pretty sure P4K just wants to be able to say they broke them first in case they turn out to be big. They just want every band to be their next Arcade Fire.
>>65857212
stay mad
>>65857205
Someone definitely pays for them to shit on the Mars Volta
>>65857241
or radiohead
Does anyone know of websites that accept money for reviews of albums?
>>65857143
Approximately 4 privileges
>>65857241
In that spirit, let's post some bands that Pitchfork tried to make "the next big thing"
>Bands that released one mediocre amateurish albums that had some great elements but the reviewers / staff added tons of depth and substance that wasn't there.
>Bands that would get on the frontpage of Pitchfork every time someone recorded an out of focus cell phone video of them performing a half assed out of key cover at a show for two months and then completely disappeared off of the face of the earth.
>Bands whose first album got BNM and whose second album got a >6.5 review write up without the reviewer even actually listening to it
>>65857423
pic related
>>65857480
p4k needs to get off the emo revival's flaccid dick in general desu
>>65857423
Here's a classic
>>65857423
Literally every late 00's/turn of the decade indie pop/rock buzzband
>>65857143
Your dignity
what will be th next p4k circlejerk genre?
>>65857268
I think they are just cursed
t. not soothsayer
>>65857636
so in the late 00's/early '10's it was stuff like Girls, Beach House, Best Coast, Wavves, Fang Islands, from 2012 to 2016 it's been hip hop so it's only natural that the only new hip genre will be owl field recordings.
>>65857241
...and thus be beholden to their publication, by needing to do followup stories, their over/under segment, and by attending their festivals if called to do so. all about content creation, creating fake levels of exclusivity and niche fame, and $$ making at their festival
>>65857154
Who?
>>65857423
YOU WILL THINK THIS IS A GOOD BAND
YOU WILL THINK THIS IS A GOOD BAND
YOU WILL THINK THIS IS A GOOD BAND
YOU WILL THINK THIS IS A GOOD BAND
>>65857212
kek
>>65857325
A lot of publications will. I know of friend sin bands who had reviews from Kerrang/Metal Hammer and the like (admittedly shit rags but still) they will get in touch and essentially say "we reviewed your album at 3/5 but will publish a 4-5/5 for X amount"
your dignity by becoming a normie band
>>65858641
that's interesting. i wonder if you make a generic indie record and have enough money and dedication to find and pay literally thousands of magazines, blogs, sites, radio shows, podcasts what kind of hype you could generate.
>>65858765
It's one method, as you rightly say though it all depends on the capital you'd need to put in to make it happen. I wouldn't be surprised if labels were willing to front the cost if it's for a new artist they're really keen on pushing as a flagship act. It's risk and reward on the part of the band really, you can get a label to plough thousands into advertising, press, merch etc. but you have to be relatively sure of making enough cash to pay them back in the end.
>>65858870
i just need to find some money now
....oh yeah and learn how to make music too
>>65857948
Car Seat Headrest
>>65857277
lmao p4k didn't make Radiohead
>>65857423
this was a good album though
>I had never even seen a shooting star before. 25 years of rotations, passes through comets' paths, and travel, and to my memory I had never witnessed burning debris scratch across the night sky. Radiohead were hunched over their instruments. Thom Yorke slowly beat on a grand piano, singing, eyes closed, into his microphone like he was trying to kiss around a big nose. Colin Greenwood tapped patiently on a double bass, waiting for his cue. White pearls of arena light swam over their faces. A lazy disco light spilled artificial constellations inside the aluminum cove of the makeshift stage. The metal skeleton of the stage ate one end of Florence's Piazza Santa Croce, on the steps of the Santa Croce Cathedral. Michelangelo's bones and cobblestone laid beneath. I stared entranced, soaking in Radiohead's new material, chiseling each sound into the best functioning parts of my brain which would be the only sound system for the material for months...
>>65859201
disgusting
>>65857257
not an argument
>>65857154
hahahahaha
>>65857183
Yeah, except Pitchfork = exposure. Exposure = more money. Plus, more readers for Pitchfork = more advertising dollars for them.
The only people who lose in this situation are the faggots on /mu/ who just hate Pitchfork because it's cool to hate them.
>i really hate them and don't value their opinion SO I MUST CONSTANTLY TELL YOU ABOUT THEM!
>>65857143
>95% of the time pitchfork albums that are well reviewed are also well reviewed all across media
>pitchfork rarely out of step with popular culture
>angry detractors assume pitchfork is getting paid off
Stay buttmad.
>>65861849
pitchfork is paid off by sponsors, sperglord
they seek out bands that most identify with corporate partnerships. for example, if you're from chicago, and you can play p4k fest, you will get a better score. if you can be marketed, you can get BNM.
just read the reviews, seriously. you can tell by how something is written when it's just shilling.
>>65857423
Girls wasnt one of them, girls was legitimately great.
But They did that blatantly with rich kids Shamir, Haim, Tobias Jesso Jr, and Diiv
not enough
25 schmeckels
>>65857774
I put my money on hard rock revival
>>65861811
The losers are
1. the bands who deserve coverage but don't get it because they won't suck dick for it and
2. The music listeners who are being manipulated in the name of ad revenue.
>>65862502
>the bands who deserve coverage but don't get it because they won't suck dick for it and
The music business is a business. Nobody deserves fucking shit. You want to make money in music? Fucking hustle and suck dick. You're too proud to do that? Then fuck off. Nobody's stopping you from working a regular desk job and making music for your own personal art enjoyment on the side. Nobody owes anybody a goddamned thing.
>>65862502
>The music listeners who are being manipulated in the name of ad revenue.
Yeah, because there are all those great music review publications out there that aren't funded by ad revenue.
For fuck's sake. It's a business. The whole thing is a business. Making music for mass consumption is a business. Producing albums is a business. Marketing music is a business. Performing is a business. Writing reviews is a business.
>>65862158
Lol what is this picture supposed to be exactly
>being so upset with p4k that you have to make a thread making fun of it on a chinese cartoon chat board
Pitchfork has already won. They're inside your head. You know what the average person does with things they don't like? They ignore them. It's a big ol' internet.
>>65857143
Ask will
>>65862981
I'm not making fun, I'm legit interested.
It's free if you're a jew
>>65857325
Definitely Pitchfork. Most definitely hip-hop sites and obviously sites that are more pro-pop music like the MTV associated blogs.
Various writers admitted to existing a PR team-writer publication business/contact to push some artists. Like those girl bands, Lana Del rey-Lorde clones and Lil Yachtys.
Sites like Atrilli, RapDose, RapRadar and Complex tried to planting Raury and Troy Ave recently. Some writer said someone was "paying" to some critics make good press about Car Seat Headrest.
Obvious publications do their reviews and posts based on data, trends and marketable artists, most obvious example are Pitchfork, NME, Complex Magazine and MTV.
The Payola 2.0 is a real thing. The most hard thing is to get into a great Record label. They gonna push you, marketing plans, aim public, these things.
>>65857423
Definitely the band DIIV, Jlin, Kamasi Washington and recently and they're forcing PC Music so hard thats hilarious.
>>65857423
Fuck buzzbands.
Labels/media need to invest in bands which can actually put out more than one good album.
>>65866362
>Labels/media
>invest in bands
