FOT Forum
FOT Community => General Discussion => Topic started by: yesno on August 25, 2008, 09:04:58 PM
-
I think that this could be the consolidated location for making fun of of Shovel.com, to save Stupornaut some time.
I don't know of any music publication or critic that isn't worthy of bashing. If you want to get your rage on, go check out Robert Christgau's take on "All Things Must Pass." (I think the hip music critics were already writing the story of what music is and isn't cool from the 1970s, in the 1970s, and weren't going to let the facts get in the way.)
That said, the Shovel empire is hated, like America, for just being too freaking awesome. No one can handle it. It is weird, though, how centralized how much of the internet ends up, despite its vaunted democratizing properties. Pitchf-- I mean shovel is the Drudgereport of indie music reviews. Still, since I'm not as cool as Rodney from Book Barn, I sometimes rely on it to find out about what the kinds have been listening to. Even when I totally hate the bands it hypes, which is at least 1/2 the time, I prefer mine to be an informed hatred.
-
I just listened to All Things Must Pass start to finish for the first time. The music sounds like what I imagine it would have sounded like had Paul McCartney fronted The Band.
-
I just listened to All Things Must Pass start to finish for the first time. The music sounds like what I imagine it would have sounded like had Paul McCartney fronted The Band.
Now that's funny.
-
Someone on punknews.org made a comment that I agree with, at least as it pertains to my subjective taste in music- their positive reviews are usually pretty accurate, but their negative reviews are often way off base.
-
You've heard this before, but...
Insult to injury: in their reportage of "The World is in the Turlet" the reviewer singled out my contribution as lame, made a reference to The Decemberists (my least fave band ever) and to top it off the dude who reviewed it has THE SAME LAST NAME AS ME. Traitor!!
-
You've heard this before, but...
Insult to injury: in their reportage of "The World is in the Turlet" the reviewer singled out my contribution as lame, made a reference to The Decemberists (my least fave band ever) and to top it off the dude who reviewed it has THE SAME LAST NAME AS ME. Traitor!!
I say all FOT should rise up and protest this guy. Down with Jim Junk 2.0 at shovel.com!
-
they reviewed two of my favourite albums of the year today!
Dan le Sac got 0.2 and Laura Marling 6.8
Apparently, I like rubbish music.
EDIT: Now I've had time to cool off... I guess that such a negative review is good for DLS - considering they're largely unknown in the U.S. they'll probably get a lot more attention with this, than if they had got a 6.4 or something. I am just protective of things I like (http://areyougenehackman.blogspot.com/2008/05/hip-hop-is-art.html).
-
I haven't heard the DLS but a review that low usually means that the reviewer disagrees with the very idea of the album instead of just not liking it.
-
Dan le Sac vs Scroobius Pip "The Beat that my Heart Skipped"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESvYRR1Fyug
-
I listened to their two singles and then read the review. They definitely disagree with the idea of the group. I agree with the writer in that I also can't be bothered with meta-music (though I don't know how much of the group is meta. 1/2 of the songs I've heard). The guy takes it a bit far with 0.2 though.
-
The guy takes it a bit far with 0.2 though.
I've listened to the whole album. "Too far" in this case means it's more like a 1.1.
I also think that Ian (like myself) is completely unable to get past the obnoxiousness of a self-righteous British guy going "let's hear some proper creative hip-hop, not this pop rubbish". We get that enough from every American indie/aging East Coast legend rapper ever, and most of them don't rap like a character from Nathan Barley.
-
Also:
Laura Marling 6.8
In traditional terms this is like 3 1/2 stars out of five. It could be worse; you could really love the new Verve album.
-
What's the deal with the Black Kids "review?" That album totally blows, but I don't know what the little reference is to.
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/51246-black-kids-partie-traumatic
(ps: Don't make us start dredging up such things as Save Ferris getting a 9.5 but Pet Sounds a 7.5 (I know, ancient history) and seeing if you'll defend them!)
-
We get that enough from every American indie/aging East Coast legend rapper ever, and most of them don't rap like a character from Nathan Barley.
Ha! So right.
(Sorry, Samir.)
-
Dan le Sac is garbage.
-
What a le Sac of crap.
-
What's with the decimal system? What's the difference between a 6.8 and a 6.7 or a 6.9?
-
What's with the decimal system? What's the difference between a 6.8 and a 6.7 or a 6.9?
I honestly am not sure. I usually just wing it. I used to think it'd work just by assigning each song on an album a 0-10 rating and then averaging that out, but I decided against that method when one of the first things I reviewed was a box set with something like 200 songs on it.
-
What's the deal with the Black Kids "review?" That album totally blows, but I don't know what the little reference is to.
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/51246-black-kids-partie-traumatic
They were the ones who really hyped that band based on one song. That ticked off a lot of people who already thought that Pitchfork was too self absorbed in their reviews.
-
To my ears
that Black Kids song
=
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/TheCureWish.jpg)
-
Two things I miss about Pitchfork and one thing I wish they'd have:
1: Singles reviews. They were one of the only sites that had them.
2: The best new music section used to let you see all of the albums not just the last four.
3: Wish they had the review score next to the album on the front page.
-
To my ears
that Black Kids song
=
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/TheCureWish.jpg)
SERIOUSLY.
-
It's probably not fair since they're probably just sending music critics out to interview, but everyone I've watched has been pretty awkward. It's like they send out the artists biggest fan and they don't know how to act around them. They still turn out to be ok interviews but they're kind of hard to watch.
-
It's probably not fair since they're probably just sending music critics out to interview, but everyone I've watched has been pretty awkward. It's like they send out the artists biggest fan and they don't know how to act around them. They still turn out to be ok interviews but they're kind of hard to watch.
Was this prompted by the Jay Reatard interview? Because yeah, that was awkward.
-
Maybe they should send out M.C. Steinberg.
-
It's probably not fair since they're probably just sending music critics out to interview, but everyone I've watched has been pretty awkward. It's like they send out the artists biggest fan and they don't know how to act around them. They still turn out to be ok interviews but they're kind of hard to watch.
Was this prompted by the Jay Reatard interview? Because yeah, that was awkward.
You got me. There have been a few others I felt the same way about and I haven't watched many.