"Why On Earth Would Anyone Care What Men In Their 50s Listen To?"

Uh, because the founder of Pitchfork music likely has a richer perspective on music trends than a typical college kid?

I take Pitchfork's reviews with a grain of salt, but they're just one of many sources I use to find new music. Heaven forbid anyone find music that is not played on the radio!

Leave my Weather Report cds alone, and get the FARK off my lawn ya punks!

/cranky old man
//so far this is the oldest I've been

ok I listened to it, to see what they're pushing:

"Animal COllective" , "Anthony and the johnsons" and "The Pains of Being Pure At Heart"

is that what they're pushing ??? "The Pains of being pure at heart"???????????? Excuse me while this band name makes me retch my breakfast.

But as bad as that name was, it wasn't as bad as the "anthony and the Johnsons" music excerpt they had

/off to vomit a lung

Who the hell are those bands? And what the hell is 'lo-fi'?

Welp, Pitchfork just figured out how to triple their ad revenue.

Canadian Canuck: Who the hell are those bands? And what the hell is 'lo-fi'?



here you go


/finding new music on the internets is hard work...

FeedTheCollapse:
here you go


/finding new music on the internets is hard work...

That still didn't answer my question on what is 'lo-fi'?

/listens to about 10 bands

Canadian Canuck: That still didn't answer my question on what is 'lo-fi'?

It's a marketing gimmick that denotes the recording process that was used to tape the music. Bands like Sebadoh, Guided by Voices and Beat Happenings used to release an album a week made on boomboxes and cassette four tracks. The quality of the recording was considered to be part of the charm and a vital part of their aesthetic.

Like all things rock and roll, it became an excuse to categorize and sell more units.

Merriweather Post Pavilion is currently playing in my car. It's strange, which is to be expected from Animal Collective. I don't think it's a 9.6 as Pitchfork claims. They love them some AC. I need to give it a few more listens.

Love love love Pitchfork's super pretentious album reviews.

Pitchfork...they're still "hip," right?

Bob_Laublaw:
Uh, because the founder of Pitchfork music likely has a richer perspective on music trends than a typical college kid?

No. He doesn't.

If there's any semblance of music press still worth reading, it's WIRE, and only WIRE.

Nowadays the average blogger is more in tune than latte sippin' snobs like Pitchfork.

"Why On Earth Would Anyone Care What Men In Their 50s Listen To?"

Referring to Charles Gibson, or Ryan Schreiber? Charles Gibson is 65. Ryan Schreiber is under 35.

Which, if you average them out comes out to around 50.

SockMonkeyHolocaust: Canadian Canuck: That still didn't answer my question on what is 'lo-fi'?

It's a marketing gimmick that denotes the recording process that was used to tape the music. Bands like Sebadoh, Guided by Voices and Beat Happenings used to release an album a week made on boomboxes and cassette four tracks. The quality of the recording was considered to be part of the charm and a vital part of their aesthetic.



Like all things rock and roll, it became an excuse to categorize and sell more units.

Well put. And I find that some of those bands could have benefited from not releasing so many albums,and being maybe a little more discriminative of what they put out. Guided BY Voices are great, but sometimes i feel like some tracks should have been left on the floor for sounding like 20 other songs just like it

Canadian Canuck: Who the hell are those bands? And what the hell is 'lo-fi'?

Quote from Feist - "We tried to do as few overdubs as possible. We'd do what we'd call 'town hall,' which was everybody around one mic singing all at once. I wanted it to sound a bit like a congregation."

Article from April 2007 (new window)

Lo-fi is a step away from the musical equivalent of Photoshopping. I find it refreshing and it can be reproduced live. A lot of people here will just call it crap and add some snark to this comment as well ... Whatever.

Hate to tell you, Subby, but men in their 20s shouldn't talk. Rock is in a dreadful state, and the people getting the recording contracts are in their...yeah, their 20s

/25

What you listenin' to, brat? What favorite? What only? The Goggly Gogol? Johnny Zhivago? The Heaven Seventeen?

No Line on the Horizon FTW

barefoot in the head: Lo-fi is a step away from the musical equivalent of Photoshopping. I find it refreshing and it can be reproduced live.

eh, i don't care so much about whether or not a band can pull off the material live, I'm just more impressed that some bands can make music that just sounds much better than the 24-track^3 acts, yet only use an 8-track recorder.

FeedTheCollapse: eh, i don't care so much about whether or not a band can pull off the material live, I'm just more impressed that some bands can make music that just sounds much better than the 24-track^3 acts, yet only use an 8-track recorder.

Which pretty much sums up why classic reggae and dub music still sounds better than 99% of the bullshiat, over-produced, over-driven garbage that dominates music today.

You have to be 50 to rememeber the last time music was good.

Why do people get so worked up over music?

Listen to what you like.

Oh, and your favorite bands suck.

FeedTheCollapse: eh, i don't care so much about whether or not a band can pull off the material live, I'm just more impressed that some bands can make music that just sounds much better than the 24-track^3 acts, yet only use an 8-track recorder.

Well, a good song is a good song. I am a total hater, but Smells Like Teen Spirit would be an amazing song even if it was recorded in a potato chip bag.

Animal Collective's Merriweather Post Pavilion

This band gets a pass for naming their album after Merriweather Post Pavillion. I love that venue.

Bob_Laublaw: "Why On Earth Would Anyone Care What Men In Their 50s Listen To?"

Uh, because the founder of Pitchfork music likely thinks he has a richer perspective on music trends than a typical college kid?

Glitchwerks: Bob_Laublaw:
Uh, because the founder of Pitchfork music likely has a richer perspective on music trends than a typical college kid?

No. He doesn't.

If there's any semblance of music press still worth reading, it's WIRE, and only WIRE.

Nowadays the average blogger is more in tune than latte sippin' snobs like Pitchfork.

I've always had luck with Magnet and The Big Takeover.

Canadian Canuck: ...And what the hell is 'lo-fi'?

Think of the dashboard speaker in a 1964 Rambler.

Is it possible to have a Music-tab thread where everyone doesn't sound like a complete douche? Just wondering.

Except you, demanton. That was an awesome Kubrick ref.

I tried to read Pitchfork a few times, but then I saw that they have such a raging hard on for unsigned, lo-fi, unheard of bands and I wanted to punch the editor in face. After seeing that clip of the founder, I really want to punch him in the face not once, but twice

/av club is better anyway.

I for one am eagerly awaiting Umphrey's McGee's new album Mantis which I hope sounds like a 70s prog record or something equally awesome.

I'd like to see a return to recordings of reasonable to good fidelity, accepting the benefit of some overdubbing, but not reliant on it to the point that the records stops being about musicians playing off each other. I'm not a big fan of producer focused records where individual tracks are lifelessly, and crisply assembled on a computer.

Similarly, Lo-fi is OK for members of Pavement but otherwise seems so early 90s. It should stay an artifact of the time when indie bands could afford neither quality analog nor acceptable digital equipment.

Canadian Canuck: And what the hell is 'lo-fi'?

Never mind that.

There's a Pitchfork Presents the 100 Best Tracks of 2008 torrent out there.

I kept 12 tracks. It has a whole lotta suck. The 12 tacks are great though, so it was worth the look.

Dusk-You-n-Me: Merriweather Post Pavilion is currently playing in my car. It's strange, which is to be expected from Animal Collective. I don't think it's a 9.6 as Pitchfork claims. They love them some AC. I need to give it a few more listens.

MPP definitely grows on you. It took me about 4-5 listens to really get into it.

Music reviewers, and the magazines they populate, are utterly pointless.

Make up your own mind about what good music is. Go out and experiment on your own. At the end of the day, your own ears are the only ones that count, so you can't possibly be wrong.

/holds true for most, if not all other art forms.

kab: Music reviewers, and the magazines they populate, are utterly pointless.

Make up your own mind about what good music is. Go out and experiment on your own. At the end of the day, your own ears are the only ones that count, so you can't possibly be wrong.

/holds true for most, if not all other art forms.



Reviews don't tell me what to listen to, but they do give me ideas of what music to seek out.

kab: Make up your own mind about what good music is. Go out and experiment on your own. At the end of the day, your own ears are the only ones that count, so you can't possibly be wrong.

/holds true for most, if not all other art forms.

To some end this is true, but not everyone has the time and resources to go out and experiment. Couple that with the fact that there's a million times more music out there than ever before and you have an ocean of possibilities that most people are intimidated by.

Music journalism used to be a guide for intrepid explorers, but now it's just a chartered tour for major label profiteering.

There's not necessarily a problem with that for some people, but marketable music stars on a major get far more face time than other more deserving artists who might not want to be photoshopped on their album cover with their tits out.

I might be more appreciate of Pitchfork if they weren't tossing out the same bullshiat as Rolling Stone or Spin while pretending they're not. That they do so while being absolutely pretentiousness the whole time makes me want to vomit.

Just sayin'.

I need to proofread more.

Glitchwerks: I need to proofread more.

Perhaps, but the point conveys. Para.#2 is QFT-worthy.

InmanRoshi: You have to be 50 to rememeber the last time music was good.


you're doing it wrong

Glitchwerks: WIRE

Finds it amusing that this is from the Wire's web site:

On The Cover: The Wire's review of the year's best music, including our Top 50 Records of the Year. Plus Animal Collective's Invisible Jukebox, Emeralds, Peverelist, Voice Crack on film, Hugo Wilcken on Joy Division and more.

Those latte sippin' snobs giving Wire a reach-around?

pitchfork often strike a sympathetic chord in me
though i don't always agree

a reviewer whose tastes you appreciate
is a good way to find new music.

lou stathis was dead cool;
lester bangs a bit self-absorbed but entertaining


bit of a musicologist myself
and i approve of the territory pitchfork try to cover



http://myspace.com/daveyunderground

bgflores:
Those latte sippin' snobs giving Wire a reach-around?

Go check out Pitchfork's top 100 and get back to me when it's anywhere near WIRE's level. If you consider Lil' Wayne in the top 100, that is.

Glitchwerks: If you consider Lil' Wayne in the top 100, that is.

this is why I take Pitchfork's reviews with a grain of salt. But for anyone biatching about indie rags liking the same bands, indie isn't immune from trends itself.

/Pitchfork gets a pass for recommending Serena-Maneesh.

FeedTheCollapse:
this is why I take Pitchfork's reviews with a grain of salt. But for anyone biatching about indie rags liking the same bands, indie isn't immune from trends itself.

/Pitchfork gets a pass for recommending Serena-Maneesh.

Take one artist from that list from WIRE. Peverelist. He's got one mention on Pitchfork, a side note rather.

He's been one of the best artists this year and gets tons of press elsewhere. I realize how difficult it is to be a comprehensive music review site, but sometimes it's like they aren't even trying to do anything more than manage reviews by "independent" artists who are distributed by a major label.

I also realize he's probably not everybody's cup of tea either, but he's done a lot more than to just be a footnote!

Maybe they stick to rock based music, but some of the stuff they've said in the past about other genres has really pissed me off as just being elitist pricks.

Way to show your retard subbie.

Glitchwerks: Maybe they stick to rock based music, but some of the stuff they've said in the past about other genres has really pissed me off as just being elitist pricks.


I will say that Pitchfork sticks to largely stereotypical indie bands, but they do follow outside of that genre. My biggest problem is that they seem to canonize otherwise good bands into saintdom(See: Deerhunter), but they'll probably be the first to knock them if they make a slight misstep.

Glitchwerks: Bob_Laublaw:
Uh, because the founder of Pitchfork music likely has a richer perspective on music trends than a typical college kid?

No. He doesn't.

If there's any semblance of music press still worth reading, it's WIRE, and only WIRE.

Nowadays the average blogger is more in tune than latte sippin' snobs like Pitchfork.

A pretentious hipster calling others pretentious hipsters. Wow.

I used to respect you Glitchwerks. I saw you as someone on fark who actually knew something about music. Now I see that you're just another whiny "my tastes are superior" music snob.

Glitchwerks: bgflores:
Those latte sippin' snobs giving Wire a reach-around?

Go check out Pitchfork's top 100 and get back to me when it's anywhere near WIRE's level. If you consider Lil' Wayne in the top 100, that is.

ContrarianIndieTwat says "what"? Have you watched High Fidelity a million times too many?

Exactly who the fark are you? Where have I seen your opinions published? Lil' Wayne, and TI, and most of the contemporary rap/hip-hop genre may not be my cup of tea, but they speak to someone, someone whose experience I likely can't grok growing up as a white, middle class suburbanite. I applaud the fact that Pitchfork goes beyond the "We sold 700 copies of our record but we maintain our fiercely independent artistic integrity" set to include a continuum of music in their Top 100 list.

G.C.C.C.:
A pretentious hipster calling others pretentious hipsters. Wow.

I used to respect you Glitchwerks. I saw you as someone on fark who actually knew something about music. Now I see that you're just another whiny "my tastes are superior" music snob.

Ha, okay. I've seen other people go through this discussion numerous times, so I'm not going to go down that route. I know what I like, and I stick to it. My tastes aren't superior to anyone else's, but they are my own that I've spent decades diggin' in crates to discover. I'm not trying to be hip, but yeah, I'm definitely calling Pitchfork out as a bunch of pretentious snobby assholes.

They've dissed entire genres of music I personally love as "faceless garbage." I sum up the rest of my feelings in others posts in this thread, so I'm going to leave it at that.

bgflores:
Exactly who the fark are you? Where have I seen your opinions published? Lil' Wayne, and TI, and most of the contemporary rap/hip-hop genre may not be my cup of tea, but they speak to someone, someone whose experience I likely can't grok growing up as a white, middle class suburbanite. I applaud the fact that Pitchfork goes beyond the "We sold 700 copies of our record but we maintain our fiercely independent artistic integrity" set to include a continuum of music in their Top 100 list.

Then we will have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to give Pitchfork a pat on the back because they think Lil' Wayne is great nor do I think it provides them with any integrity at all. I dare say it pretty much destroys their credibility, but that's my opinion.