I'll start, try to top it
http://www.thefader.com/2015/10/08/hipster-runoff-ezra-koenig-carles-interview
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/style/2015/09/17/a-loss-for-words-listening-to-the-post-verbal-brilliance-of-young-thug/
Topped.
Bad idea for a thread. It requires reading.
>an article not written by p4k
>most pretentious
please
>>60857471
mup da do didda po mo me gub dat muhfuggin bix nood coh be hin dat muhfugga
>>60857471
That's just a really outsider/white article.
>>60857414
carles is still around? gay
>>60857414
the fader is the single worst place on the internet
>>60857484
It's half-written by Ezra Koenig. I dare you to read.
tippy topped
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/3/5/mozart-meets-electronic/
>>60857414
>Fader
read this:
"The Fader is 100% pr-driven and sales based. They won't cover your music unless you pay them a specific amount of money. That's how they make their business. All of their staff (who also do shit for pitchfork, stereogum, etc.) are all sales department people who only deal in that and not actual journalism.
They're not a legitimate source for actual music criticism. It's totally pr-driven.
This is kinda insider industry stuff. I don't expect you to believe me. I've been having these back-and-forth messages with one music critic (for a much smaller music site but still relevant and talked about on /mu/) that said this and that's how I know. He's in the whole music journalism industry so that's how he has this info. Again, I don't expect you to believe me. but thats how i found out.
p4k will still cover your shit if you don't pay them money, but only if you're interesting and hype-worthy enough. p4k aren't as bad as The Fader when it comes to this stuff but they aren't entirely innocent either.
not every music site does this. tinymixtapes and other site around that stature have never done that but magazines in the big leagues like Fader are totally guilty of this shit.
i guess /mu/ really is right at the end of the day when they say we should post more about independent sites like TMT rather than p4k
TinyMixTapes are great. So are FACT Magazine (a great replacement for Fader). I wouldn't mind so much saying that you should read Dummy Mag but I'm not entirely sure if they're completely innocent either.
My advice: read the smaller ones, they're almost always your best bet for reading legitimate, non-pr-driven sources of music criticism."
sourced from: >>60855930
>>60857414
This doesn't really seem pretentious.
see any tiny mix tapes review. especially when it concerns ferraro and co.
>>60857530
it's a shit site whose only saving grace are the kickass free shows at sxsw every year. other than that they're garbage.
>>60857414
Pitchfork's Kid A review can never be topped.
>>60857544
what a bunch of pretentious millennial pieces of shit. The industry is so fucked
>>60857586
How so?
>>60857606
Good point.
"The Unbearable Blackness of Indie"
>>60857659
>How so?
What do you mean? I can't really prove a negative. Which parts are pretentious?
>>60857704
>mid-2000s was full of fake geniuses. I won't name names
>I feel most ‘authentically immersed in culture’ when I am sitting at an independent, artisanal cafe reading a book by a left-wing journalist with my phone flipped-over on the table in front of me.
Fuck Ezra that pretentious. Constantly shitting on the people that gave him a career. That's basically what Contra is and it's great but doing it outside art is just douchey and pretentious beyond belief.
>>60857799
That first sentence is fine. But that second sentence: holy shit.
>>60857854
Yeah, the first one is somewhat accurate (as it also describes himself) but that second one is like, okay man tone it back it a bit.
>>60857799
He's right though. The indie period they're talking about was chock full of hollow, for-the-looks "authenticity" that was as calculated as anything else. Say what you will about Ezra but he has always embraced the yuppie preppy thing and never fell into that category. How on earth can you consider it pretentious that he's shitting on pretentiousness? I have nostalgic feelings about that period for sure, but there's no doubt it was full of fake bullshit.
>>60857907
Every period are full of fakes. However, he's dismissing an entire period. It was an entire period that bought him his upper-east side apartment, mind you.
>>60857969
Are we not allowed to criticize things we were apart of, or even currently are apart of? That's just being self-aware. Regardless, that part they were just fucking around. The next line is hilarious.
>The post-artisan cafe vibe wave we’re seeing in L.A./N.Y.C./London is less old-timey shit and more Scandinavian/art gallery minimalism. My cafe would take this to its logical extreme: all-white, backless benches and one large brewed pot of coffee today (when it’s done, it’s done). I would play the Billboard Top 10 singles on loop all day.
>>60858076
He's funny, but people on top of the INDEH scene show SO little respect for their piers. They should take some tips from the Hip Hop scene in this regard. Just, being real and treating people like people is just about what he's always been about talking about (see: I Think Ur A Contra, Oxford Comma, Finger Back) and he's being just what he critiques. He's right, essentially. It's just the way he's going about it is disrespectful.
>>60857544
Good. I only like The Quietus, FACT and Brainwashed
>>60858209
those are good choices. i know great people who write for those publications.
There is literally nothing on earth that comes close to this
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
this: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/9371-pet-sounds-40th-anniversary/
then they precede to overrate beatles discog to oblivion
>>60858203
Yeah but he is literally close friends with so many people in the "indie" music and comedy scenes, it's not like he's hurting feelings by poking fun at ridiculous aspects of that culture. I see what you're saying though, I just don't see the problem with it I guess.
>>60858298
>Oh come on, it's just Pet Sounds.
D R O P P E D
R
O
P
P
E
D
>>60858300
Dubs confirms its not a problem, but it won't urk you until you're in a scene where you can't escape this sort of hypocrisy.
>>60858209
Sometimes websites will have good updates and a new sources, as well as a substantial and impressive archival base for artists, yet the actual reviews are pure shit. See: Resident Advisor.
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
not going to disagree or agree with the rating but the review is one of the biggest piles of shit I've ever read
>>60858265
came here to post this fucking obscenity
>>60858348
read the thread dumbass
>>60858337
at least they aren't sales departments or bought out like Fader
>>60858357
it just mentioned the review you faglord
It's not exactly pretentious but here's the worst Pitchfork review of all time. It even beats the Kid A one.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040810064854/www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/c/coltrane_john/live-at-the-village-vanguard.shtml
>droogs
I've always hated the Pitchfork reviews that try to be "experimental" by telling a story or writing a script instead of reviewing the album
Like this shit: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/1415-hey-boy-hey-girl-ep/
>>60858377
eat my ass
>>60858335
I just don't really see it as hypocrisy when you're self-aware about it, and in the couple podcast interviews I've heard with him, he seems like it. Like, you should be able to joke about and make fun of the culture you fall into, and be able to make fun of yourself. That's just not taking yourself too seriously, ya know? It becomes hypocrisy when you're like "this is bad, but it's not bad when I do it." Otherwise it's just making fun of something you're guilty of, which I don't think is that bad.
>>60858408
lewd
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
Terrible...just terrible
>>60858400
the fact that Ryan Schreiber wrote that piece of shit makes it even funnier
>"ctrl+f"
>no RYM
>>60858382
>my 4 droogs
>Peter, Georgio, Dim
>4
triggered
>>60857471
muhfuggin bix nood whitey ooga booga nigga black lives matter
>>60858451
not his worst piece of shit
it's not worse than this
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/727-vespertine/
reminder that much like /mu/tant radio - I have consistently suggested that /mu/tants band together to form an objective music publication of their own with no numerical ratings
Worst ever
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
Every time I read it I can't believe how bad it is
>>60857414
This is way too sarcastic to be pretentious.
>>60858478
that's not pretentious or cringey (by Pitchfork standards, at least)
you just disagree with it
>>60858479
the only reason fantano started using numbers was because morons needed a "rating" rather than just a straightforward review. i think it's a good idea too but people want ratings. which sucks because it reinforces this idea that everything falls into this scale of "good or bad" or whatever.
>>60858479
i like the idea but the truth is if /mu/ did that it would be even worse
>>60858508
fuck off retard
>>60858492
That's pretty bad, but this one is even worse: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
>>60858532
That;s not even the worst Brent DiCrescenzo review
Try this one on for size:
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
>>60858512
i think favourable or unfavourable would be enough to satisfy, or calculate the average rating from a selection of reviewers
>>60857471
holy fucking shit there's nothing deep about some nigger making weird noises
>>60858492
>>60858532
>>60858549
hella fuckin' epic memes >>>/b/ros XD
>>60858522
>no one is allowed to give my waifu a 7.2
>>60858451
But the author is Zach Hooker
>>60858566
I replied to the wrong post oops
>>60858564
Go to bed, Brent DiCrescenzo
>>60858565
shit in a hat you cocksucking faggot
>>60858413
Theres nothing "wrong" with it, but imo it just tends to come off as insufferable. IDK, I agree with some of the stuff he's said, but being self-aware doesn't necessarily negate the fact that he profits and benefits from this "ironic hipster" persona that he's cultivated - particularly because he DOES seem to benefit from it more than any of the peers he criticizes. So it's like, yeah, you know where you lie in regards to indie culture, but that doesn't make it any less annoying or "pretentious" when you pop up and write a super satirical article for Pitchfork or Stereogum or what have you. He has a totally different "disguise" going for him than the bands concerned with appearing authentic (when they aren't in reality), it's just cognizant of the zeitgeist and indie phenomenon (his actual personality is much more subdued).
>>60857471
>post-verbal
i'm going to kill myself
>>60858477
>>60858562
>>60858413
The hypocrisy is being pretentious about something because upset you're upset that it's so pretentious. Underground music is easy to poop on when you've so easily exploited loads of kids out of their money. I guess this is what has made them controversial. I agree with every word they've said (except Obama support lol), but they're just assholes about it.
>>60858628
Young Thug didn't even innovate it, Rodney Clark was doing it ten years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvkHIZg_954
>>60858628
dude you just don't "get" it young thug is a genius he doesn't need words to express his views of societal disintegration
>>60858624
This
>>60858668
is this image supposed to be racist because I do not condone racism you fucking nigger
>>60858607
top mad
>>60858717
no need to be a meanie, broseph, i was just posting a humorous image of a funny frog
>>60857799
>>60857854
>what is irony
>>60858758
oh sorry that is a very humorous frog
>>60858744
I'm not mad you fucking piece of shit give me your fucking address
>>60858076
fuck this made me lol. i fucking hate those places that do the "one batch a day and we're done, who knows how long it'll last it's a mystery! so exclusive!" bullshit.
>>60858243
Yeah, I seen Jon Whitney on fb, he seems to be a really nice guy.
>>60858802
I almost bought a watch that they only sell on the fifth of the month. They look really good but I'll bet that the movement is probably shit.
Fucking neo art trendy bullshit
>>60858624
I get this
>>60858672
I guess I just don't see a bunch of jokes as pretentious or being upset
>>60858492
lol I've never read this. holy shit is it bad.
those metaphors don't even make sense. a skeleton doesn't eat. pearls don't swim. and that's just the first paragraph.
>>60858265
>The experience and emotions tied to listening to Kid A are like witnessing the stillborn birth of a child while simultaneously having the opportunity to see her play in the afterlife on Imax.
holy shit
>>60858896
>>60858916
you think that's bad?
check this out
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
>>60858916
How in the fuck could anyone ever think that writing that down would be a good idea?
>>60858853
Do you see making two entire albums about a subject as being upset?
>>60858896
Uh, not to defend this piece of shit, but those "metaphors" don't work because they're just imagery, not metaphors. They're not intended to make sense in the way that you're implying.
>>60858265
Correct answer
>>60858492
This is just a run of the mill Pitchfork review.
>>60857544
>>60857544
>>60857544
Been know this but holy shit.
They don't excactly 'discover' artists or curate.. they're on the popularity disposition, or payola.
The Quietus, is a good source for read articles. FACT mag is really a good.
Tiny Mixtapes open space to the various portion of artists include the incomplete unknown ones.
Literally all the rest will follow this line - artist popularity~deal with recording labels / payola.
>>60859074
Yeah? How about this one?
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/6656-kid-a/
>>60859137
oh absolutely. a lot of the staff for The Fader makes up the staff for P4K. even people like Larry Fitzmauric who don't work for the fork anymore are working for Fader now.
they disguise themselves as a music publication when in reality it's all business and sales, nothing to do with music whatsoever.
