ITT: albums p4k would pan if they were released today but slapped a high score on because it was already recognized by actual musicians
Every Grace Jones album.
>>66474588
She/he whatever the fuck it is recognises as trans and makes dance music, its 2016, that would warrant atleast a 9.2. They gave a trans/feminist punk band an 8.5 and a full blown tranny a 9.0 this year alone. If you're sexually queer and a musician p4k is up your ass quicker than Mandingo
>>66474800
>>66474800
low effort
you disappointed me out there today, champ
>>66474380
>The Modern Lovers
>experimental
im crying
its a pretty good album, but a 10 is way too high
Well it wouldn't be anything special today because all the bands that ripped off it's sound would be more acclaimed.
>>66474380
This makes no sense. When reviewing older albums you have to take into account historical context. You can't remove an album from it's social/historical context like that. What might have been revolutionary in previous decades is outplayed nowadays.
The hard part about reviewing contemporary albums is trying to place them in a social/historical context without being able to see the full picture. That's how you end up with stuff like p4k's original Kid A review. I don't think anyone would write an overwhelmingly negative review of that album these days, but back then it was hard to place it in a broader musical/social context.
>>66475194
Yeah I'd give it a 9/10 max
It doesn't really deserve a 10 because it didn't really have any influence and is pretty conventional
Still I hold Loaded as an example of what pop rock should be but rarely is
>>66475262
>That's how you end up with stuff like p4k's original Kid A review. I don't think anyone would write an overwhelmingly negative review of that album these days, but back then it was hard to place it in a broader musical/social context.
Why is Kid A better with "context"? It's not like Kid A was just over everybody's heads, it was just a watered-down rock imitation of Warp records at the time. It's not really all that influential either.
>>66475392
They gave it a 10 and acted like it was the second coming of Christ, I think he's saying it would be rated lower
>>66474800
>>66475424
Ah ok
>>66475392
Yeah, I mean, it depends on what you think the purpose of reviews are. I personally prefer very personal, visceral, reviews. Where people react to how an album affects them personally. But sometimes it can be interesting to read a review where the author tries to place a piece of music in a broader context.
Kid A was just a random example. I don't think it's particularly deep either. It has certainly become part of the indie rock "canon" though. Maybe the Velvet Underground might be a better example.
>>66475451
>It has certainly become part of the indie rock "canon" though
This is the thing, many millions of people listened to Kid A, far more than have ever heard VU albums. It's hard to place its influence but I think it definitely had some kind of effect.
>>66475557
Yeah, I think it bils down to what you think reviews are for. People complain about p4k making political statements and not talking bout how the music sounds, but that's just a different kind of review. People hate on him here, but I think Christgau has some fantastic one line reviews.
