they gave this an 8.7 right? rekt. it would get a 6.3 today

white indie folk

P4k would dickride Dylan
They would shit on the Beatles, saying they prefer Zappa and The Velvet Underground.

The Beach Boys wouldn't even be reviewed.

All of Coltrane's records would be 8.7+.

Miles' fusion period would be received like Animal Collective's work.

Hard to say since music today would look a lot different without these albums

>>64342319
Pitchfork isnt elitist anymore m8

>>64342319
>They would shit on the Beatles, saying they prefer Zappa and The Velvet Underground.
I thought Pitchfork liked what's popular moreso than underground now?

>>64342270
they haven't rated it

It would get a 2.7

The review would contain 8 poorly- written paragraphs on sexist, racist, offensive music, why it's bad, while slandering them, and maybe one or two sentences on their music.

6.2

>>64342189
>>64343873
>>64343918
Pitchfork would pan these albums because they were made by white people

>>64343944
Yes, that's why ITAOTS got a 10, because it's totally not the whitest album in existence.

10/10 BNM AOTY GOAT

I'd give 9/ A E S T H E T I C...

>>64342301
he's not white, he's jewish

>>64343979
p4k only transitioned into tumblr white guilt over the last 4 or so years.

when they got around to re-reviewing itoats they were still in their indie days.