Give me a single example of a time this man has been wrong

give me a single example of a time this man has been wrong

Other urls found in this thread:

scaruffi.com/music.html
scaruffi.com/vol1/moondog.html
scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Kraftwerk-Trans Europe Express: 6.5/10

>Chumbawamba- Tubthumper: 7/10

>Slipknot 7/10

>In Rainbows 5/10

everything Death Grips above a 5 is way too high

the beach boys and beatles ratings should be lower

this desu
should be a 4

>
>Automatic for the People 5/10

He is still right 90% of the times.

scaruffi.com/music.html

Has Shitruffi ever made music?

So should the rating of your mom.

I love Moondog and it seems Scaruffi does too but

scaruffi.com/vol1/moondog.html
>His works encompass everything that was known and a lot of what was still unknown. He virtually invented every single genre of rock, electronic and world music.

I can't even fathom what he was thinking here. Moondog was hugely influential in Western Microtonal/Third Stream/Minimalism and classical music in general, but that he "created rock, electronic and world music" doesn't even make an iota of sense

>Appetite For Destruction - 8/10

the keyword here is "virtually"

Everything about Bowie

Him rating Little Creatures and True Stories higher than every other post SABAF Talking Heads albums.

>Everything about Bowie
too high? I agree

His actual reviews don't always make sense but his scores are accurate

when was he right lmao

I think what he meant by that is that Moondog discovered elements that would contribute to those genres (maybe without knowledge of him, and him without knowledge of them).

>The more recordings surfaced, the less relevant the band seemed to be. Most of their music was disposable, an inept imitation of the Velvet Underground occasionally decaying into childish mayhem.

Guess the band.

Literally nothing wrong with this

Also him rating the Modern Dance so high

he's not wrong about this

He's as wrong as one can be about that.

could be mistranslated, but that's all I could think of other than him just being straight up wrong/misinformed

>the keyword here is "virtually"
but it's not even close. What exactly do you mean by this? Moondog didn't start making music until the 50s and electronic and "world" music existed far before then. And saying "Moondog virtually invented rock" is just delusional.

But all of those genres existed far before Moondog began making music at all.

LDR lmao

>Fred durst one of the best rock singers in history

he's not wrong though
lrd is the dumbest rip-off in the history of music ever

>Operation Ivy- Energy: 6.5

this isn't an example of him being wrong per se, but it shows just how biased he is and why you should take his reviews as seriously as an onion article

>Jonny Greenwood's Bodysong (Capitol, 2004) is an ambitious and difficult ethnic-jazz-ambient instrumental soundtrack. Each piece stands on its own as a manual of avantgarde rock production, and the whole, while perhaps a bit too austere, feels awe-inspiring.
-wait, he's associated with radiohead...-
>6/10

Yeah you're right tubthumper deserves at least a 7.5

>they ripped off noisy music in the late 60's

Did you even read what you wrote down?

they ripped off tvu
isnt that fucking obvious

Sounds literally nothing like tvu. tvu didn't even come close to the noise lrd were making on their guitars.

>The critic is the real artist

that's literally not true
the whole lrd thing is just ripping wl/wh with different levels of distortion

>Madvillainy-7/10

His views toward improvised music are absolutely retarded, considering he seems to think he understands jazz

I agree with everything except the fact that he didnt give Down Colorful Hill a 10

scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html

...

Nice photoshop

you literally don't even understand Scaruffi, 6/10 means good to him, he says in his criteria that you should literally buy 6/10 albums if you are a fan of the artist.

very accurate

Nah man watch antonioni films.

Industrial working class anxiety is the shit

>6/10 means good to him, he says in his criteria that you should literally buy 6/10 albums if you are a fan of the artist.
And then he takes a massive shit on Beatles/Radiohead/Bowie and still gives them 7 and 7.5. I don't understand him at all, there's always a huge difference between his ratings and his actual written review, sometimes he'll say an artist is an overrated piece of shit who didn't do anything worthy in their whole career and give some albums a 7, and sometimes he'll praise someone for making something truly exceptional and phenomenal and give it a 6.

>Gas - Narkopop: 2/10

>Kid A 6,5/10
I think it deserves 7 or 7,5.

>Piper at the Gates of Dawn
8.5
According to Scaruffi, Piper is better than everything that came after it in Pink Floyd's discography.
>Meddle
6.5
>Dark Side of the moon
6.5
>Wish You Were Here
7
>Animals
6
>The Wall
6.5

>6