ITT: Times Pitchfork were very wrong

...

Other urls found in this thread:

pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5804-pretty-hate-machine/
pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/14890-pretty-hate-machine/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

mbdtf 10
tame impala getting a 9
solange getting best album
any sufjan album getting a 9

I can't think of a single time where they were right

>mbdtf
>not a 10

Tame Impala should have 10's, I agree.

its a 7. pretty poor considering he spent 3m

...

anything from this picture

Isn't that most times?

pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5804-pretty-hate-machine/

pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/14890-pretty-hate-machine/

nice chart, mind if I save it ?

never listened to it, is it good?
i like their 2000 album tho

a fucking 2.0

>Laughing Stock
No way, everything else, sure

Now this chart would explain why so many of these albums are spammed all over Sup Forums - everyone's actually a pitchfork drone... *sigh*

>imbailin Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating in Space and Laughing Stock aren't 10/10

>muh space rock

nice meme genre

never forget

Yes, it's not as easy to listen to in my opinion. It's a pretty slow and depressing album (until the end), but after repeated listens, it becomes one of their top 3 best albums

not even remotely close to an argument

But LaGWAFiS is symphonic rock, not space rock.

Most of those didn't even get good scores
demon days was a 6.9
exmilitary a 7.5
de-loused a 4.9

>reading pitchfork and taking any of their 'just-out-of-college-esque' ramblings seriously.

most of those albums were released when pitchfok didnt even exist

>needing an online media outlet to tell me what i should like, and how it categorises me in terms of my personality

but they gave demon days and at the drive in mediocre scores and they hate the mars volta you fucking moron

and the rest of the albums????

U a hater

u a pleb

too many canon/prestige picks and not enough actual pitchfork buzz core to be a good chart

Their latest offense

accurate score tbqh.

>inb4 butthurt fantano fan

I hope you think blonde was supposed to be #1

now this is just lazy

Agree, every album of GY!BE should have gotten a 0

fucking kek

>I just gave my nigga head

I listened to it last night. It wasn't good. It wasn't bad. Just generic hip hop with very little musical value.

You must be crazy

You do realize if it's better to be a fantano drone than a pitchfork drone right (even though I'm not either and I just think he gave that score to be a tastemaker)

drone mentality right here ladies and gentlemen
god forbid we think for ourselves and form our own opinions on things.

Did you even read my reply?

lel. that's from the Sup Forumscore chart right?

well done

watch it fuccboi

This is literally the worst thing I have ever read.

>Pitchfork will never be this great again

What's the synthesis?

...

There's a time and place for everything, but not now

it's their best album

I personally think that these sorts of posts are made in order to get readers to prowl through Pitchfork looking for shitty posts, thereby generating page views.

Pitchfork doesn't care about being "right" about albums, only about creating buzz. Hence low scores on popular albums, and high scores on several pretty terrible ones.

They consider themselves the curators of cool and people believe it because they want something like that to exist. But it doesn't.

Rolling Stone pulled the same shit in the 60's, if you want examples look up the RYM page with the worst Rolling Stone album reviews of all time.

>hurr durr everything ever is a capitalist scheme

Pitchfork is more influential than Rolling Stone was or is though, not really comparable

So terrible. Pitchfork has been pulling this bullshit with hiphop for years

Niggas on the moon

People Who Can Eat People hasn't even been reviewed by Pitchfork

this can't be real

Score should be lower

90% of their 8.0+ ratings of the last 5 years or so.

neither has f# a# infinity or Richard D James, probably a lot more too, so that chart is a total lie

Lmao. That's insane.

Word, should be much higher

>*sigh*

I agree tho. Fantano really overhyped this shit.

should be lower

thugger > gay niggas

it sadly is. should've been a fucking 2 at the most

Thugger is a gay nigga tho

Giving Born To Die (best pop album of last 5 years) a 5.5

No matter how many times people make this thread they fail to understand that the score and review is based off 1 person.

In for-profit industries, like music journalism, yes.

Neither Pitchfork, nor Rolling Stone *should* be influential. Neither publication actually addresses the music.

When they do, it's usually to describe it emotionally, rather than to discuss the different musical techniques on the album or single being discussed.

Both also tend to bite into tabloid narratives of the band or artist being discussed.

Both publications ignore vast swaths of musical output, anything deemed 'uncool' by modern standards is shafted in favor of "trendier" music (which the industry itself pushes to be trendy). This is done regardless of merit, and to the detriment of artists that aren't "cool" enough to get Pitchfork reviews.

A great example of how music journalism works can be found in the promotion of the latest Portugal. The Man record. They sent the album out to a few youtubers and allowed them to say whatever they want about it. The result? Free advertising for your new record, even if it is unfavorable coverage. You get buzz, and in the age of the internet, that's potentially worth money.