Post albums that deserve a 10 on "jokefork's" website

Post albums that deserve a 10 on "jokefork's" website.

deserves like a 4. it's badly mixed

Faust - s/t but probably not it's badly mixed

I love that album but there's no way its a 10

>it may be god-tier in all other respects but the mixing gets to me
Reconsider Suicide

How the fuck Nirvana's stuff gets 10's and Vitalogy didn't is beyond me.

Because people think nirvana is good and they hopped on the bandwagon of bad music.

If Vedder offed himself after Vitalogy, do you think they would have given their first three albums perfect scores?

tool

...

The actual proper score for that album should be a third of Pitchfork's

That's obviously how they work at pitchfork.

Nirvana is better than Pearl Jam, and i was a big fan of them back then, and did not listen to nirvana at all.

I know the thing is to hate nirvana couse should be only a phase for pre-teens but in reality they were almost the only worthy 'grunge' band

...

Is not bait tho. Nirvana had some pretty good albums, dont you think so?

The point I am making is that if Nirvana can get 10's for Nevermind and In Utero, then Vitalogy should have a 10 as well. All of the ten core songs on it (Last Exit, Spin the Black Circle, etc.) were amazing and the other stuff was experimental and unique. Bugs is weird as fuck, but it and Stupid Mop channeled Capt Beefheart weirdness.

It is an all around amazing album and should have a 10.

kek

i dont see why this isn't a 10

>SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS SSS

With The Beatles is in the 8. something rating, yet Please, Please Me is a 9... I don't think I can take them seriously.

...

this would have made perfect sense as a 10 desu

both deserve less than 5

Why don't people understand that different people write different reviews, so why would all of them be based on the same taste?

Definitely deserved a 8-10 score.

...

...

underrated

...

because that's not the case - the articles are written by one varying person but the score is the average of all voters at the site. that voter pool changes but the turnover isn't high enough to justify stuff like this.

How are the reviews/reviewers chosen?

No doubt about it.

damn..

/thread

All kids in here go home
Shows over

BTFO, desiigner on Suicide watch

i believe it works like this:
they have a lot of people working at pitchfork, so they all listen to an album and then post their opinions about it and what they'd rate it on a pitchfork staff message board online, then they average the score out and have a writer who picked a score around that averaged score write the review.

pitchfork isn't big on bands that start as indie rock in their early days and then go alt rock as time progresses, but i didn't think they'd go this far.