Have you been enjoying Pitchfork's weekly classic reviews?

Have you been enjoying Pitchfork's weekly classic reviews?

Buhloone Mindstate is pretty good desu

no they piss me the fuck off, it's just blatant pandering to bolster their "cool" resume of having approved of all the Right Important albums. and their posthumous reviews after an artist dies are cheap and exploitative, yeah thanks for going back and giving a bunch of Bowie albums circa a 9.1 what a way to remember him

Shout out to De La for that because they deserve it, but nah.

P4K has a history of panning or being lukewarm on a record, and then flip-flopping on it years after it makes waves.

Whether it's genuine or not, it always feels contrived.

pitchfork think currents by tame impala is better than close to the edge by yes

De La Soul has more than 3 Feet High and Rising for good albums, you know. Or are you pointing out that pitchfork overrates minority artists because they have an agenda?

they also earnestly believe AM was worthy of an 8 score

how they purport to be the "most trusted voice in music" blows my mind.

It's why I'm starting my own publication with a unique platform that's about to change the way music is written about. You'll be hearing about it soon.

i enjoy reading what noz writes

pitchfork hardly overrates minority artists, they just don't know anything about hip hop and give everything between a 6.6 and a 7.8 unless they think it's gonna be a classic and then they give it a 9+ but that only happens if you're Kendrick or Kanye. they overrate radiohead and tame impala and anco and those are three of the whitest acts out there

>kevingatesislah.jpg

i genuinely think the kevin gates album is better than all of these albums. you can cherry pick all you like, but pitchfork overrates white artists all the time too, i just don't have a neat meme collage like you

they're right

The reviewer at pitchfork liked an album you thought was wack or not deserving of a good score. Omg what shit taste at pitchfork for pandering to the plebs instead of patricians like you.

Yea Pitchfork have essentially given up on relevancy right?

They'll never make another Arcade Fire again so they're just mining past albums that anyone with taste worth a shit already recognizes a classic and putting their P4K stamp of approval on it to trick the plebby high school indie kiddies that still take them seriously.

They're good.

Lots of teenagers ITT right now.

seriously like who is this shit for

"fucking wow pitchfork gave Fear of Music an 11.2 this changes everything"

"omg Closer only got an 8.6 will Ian Curtis' career ever recover"

Nothing beats when they decide that one in ten thousand jazz records is worthy of coverage.

Sure there's a history and community of jazz criticism that dates back nearly a century and countless people have dedicated their lives to academically critiquing jazz but shit man you just reviewed the new Best Coast album so I'm sure you're qualified, go for it. "A Love Supreme" reissue got a 10.0 BNM and a douchey Comp 101 write up "review" about how spiritual you feel when the music hits you? Great work! Pitchfork nails it again!

If they were just writeups or discussions I think they'd have potential value, but framing them as reviews and giving scores to classic albums comes across as pandering and an attempt to place Pitchfork on the "right side" of taste. Which is annoying.

lol what's the point of reviewing a classic and giving it a fucking rating

the idea of a "classic" is that its already gone through all the critical reception, fan reception and has endured over the years to the point where its now a bookend of the overall pop music canon

so what's your not perfect rating saying about it????
fucking nothing p4k, your ratings don't matter here

fucking kys en masse

lmao so true

i just hope no one takes their reviews of jazz albums seriously

at least they haven't branched into classical, although it would be fun to see if any of beethoven's symphonies broke a 9

I hope they move on from the obvious classics that anyone who reads Pitchfork would have already heard before. These can be a useful tool to highlight some lesser known gems from past decades.

Objectively wrong

Put user, PITCHFORK hasn't officially given it their "classic" seal of approval yet.

The annoying thing about this is that it makes sense to review classic albums like this in order to introduce, celebrate and contextualize note worthy album, especially now that reissues aren't a thing that any band or label can dignify with a release any more.

The rating thing spoils it though
it should be about writing only and SOMEHOW THEY STILL MANAGE TO FUCK IT UP

HOW

I'M WRITING TO PITCHFORK FOR A RESPONSE

You're the teenager. Pitchfork is trash for trendy idiots who don't know anything about music.