Pitchfork tranches

Health insurance rip off lying FDA big bankers buying
Fake computer crashes dining
Cloning while they're multiplying
Fashion shoots with Beck and Hanson
Courtney Love, and Marilyn Manson
You're all fakes
Run to your mansions
Come around
We'll kick your ass in

Postby gold and glass » Sat May 12, 2018 6:42 pm

fuck you and your corporation
User avatar
gold and glass
ok
 
Posts: 21499
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:14 pm
Location: york, pa

Postby loaf angel » Sat May 12, 2018 6:43 pm

"forecast"

christ
goldsoundz wrote:i'd bang that moron
User avatar
loaf angel
 
Posts: 29751
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:28 pm
Location: Jerklyn

Postby sympathy » Sun May 13, 2018 1:27 pm

Forkcast
User avatar
sympathy
ok
 
Posts: 2798
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:23 am

Postby joymonger » Sun May 13, 2018 10:52 pm

Zurich wrote:the thing that bothered me most about that p4k ruining people article is that for the most part, they took down such major label, soft targets like Jet or even formerly indie/bands with cred like Sonic Youth who were doing a major label release. I seem to recall that being a pretty common pattern. bands that got panned either had a fanbase and were going major or were bands who didn't really have a p4k fanbase, period. the safest shit.

thats why i always thought the travis morrison review was brutal and bad and that tanking him so hard was a real knife in the back. like give it a 4 or whatever. everyone would get "it's bad" and that's fine. it was a guy trying to find his way out of a band that was much better than the sum of its parts and having to realize that in front of everyone, because there was no precedent to use bandcamp or really test the waters. it just seemed like an exceptionally brutal and petty moment when the "indie rock scene" was still relatively small and there was nothing to be gained from taking Travis down a peg (or completely crumbling him as this clearly did).

i guess that kind of shit was when it was clear (to a much younger me) they were a business and not really a zine

i like this post.
User avatar
joymonger
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 8:25 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA

Postby cool party » Mon May 14, 2018 4:21 am

joymonger wrote:
Zurich wrote:the thing that bothered me most about that p4k ruining people article is that for the most part, they took down such major label, soft targets like Jet or even formerly indie/bands with cred like Sonic Youth who were doing a major label release. I seem to recall that being a pretty common pattern. bands that got panned either had a fanbase and were going major or were bands who didn't really have a p4k fanbase, period. the safest shit.

thats why i always thought the travis morrison review was brutal and bad and that tanking him so hard was a real knife in the back. like give it a 4 or whatever. everyone would get "it's bad" and that's fine. it was a guy trying to find his way out of a band that was much better than the sum of its parts and having to realize that in front of everyone, because there was no precedent to use bandcamp or really test the waters. it just seemed like an exceptionally brutal and petty moment when the "indie rock scene" was still relatively small and there was nothing to be gained from taking Travis down a peg (or completely crumbling him as this clearly did).

i guess that kind of shit was when it was clear (to a much younger me) they were a business and not really a zine

i like this post.


as someone who has had friends experience similar situations, i have a lot of empathy for this post.

however, although p4k had a lot of readers at the time of that review, it had nowhere near the influence and readership it does now. from what i recall reading the site/responses to it at the time, that review was one of the first times that a wider audience started recognizing p4k's influence as a thing. i'm not sure that p4k itself knew at the time the impact that that review would have.

i can't get behind proscribing critical treatments of things just because they aren't as popular as other things. it's true that p4k BNMs can do a lot to make music careers. but nowadays, for the most part, a bad or lukewarm review wouldn't stop people who genuinely enjoy your music from going to a show or downloading your stuff from bandcamp. most musicians i know would be desperate to get "tranched" if the alternative was being ignored. there are plenty of artists who have released a bunch of albums reviewed in the 6.0-7.5 range (and probably lower than that, too) who are still prolific, playing shows, etc.

i agree that it's unfortunate for morrison that it happened for him at a time when p4k seemingly had this monolithic power in indie music. but as a musician in late capitalism i sort of take it as a given that being afforded the opportunity to make a living from music is a rare privilege that is impossibly difficult to make a reality. so i wouldn't concern myself too much with a profit-driven entity that any discerning reader knows has a bunch of conflicting interests and motives.
cool party
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:38 pm

Postby Zurich » Mon May 14, 2018 10:41 am

cool party wrote:
however, although p4k had a lot of readers at the time of that review, it had nowhere near the influence and readership it does now. from what i recall reading the site/responses to it at the time, that review was one of the first times that a wider audience started recognizing p4k's influence as a thing. i'm not sure that p4k itself knew at the time the impact that that review would have.

i can't get behind proscribing critical treatments of things just because they aren't as popular as other things. it's true that p4k BNMs can do a lot to make music careers. but nowadays, for the most part, a bad or lukewarm review wouldn't stop people who genuinely enjoy your music from going to a show or downloading your stuff from bandcamp. most musicians i know would be desperate to get "tranched" if the alternative was being ignored. there are plenty of artists who have released a bunch of albums reviewed in the 6.0-7.5 range (and probably lower than that, too) who are still prolific, playing shows, etc.

i agree that it's unfortunate for morrison that it happened for him at a time when p4k seemingly had this monolithic power in indie music.


I'm confused by your response tho. you start by saying p4k didn't have the influence/readership they do now then say middling p4k reviews don't stop people from going to shows or downloading stuff from bandcamp and end referring back to a time when p4k had a monolithic power in music.

it sounds like you're agreeing with me that it meant more and was more powerful back in the day because there weren't as many outlets to discover/try music for free, like bandcamp. also, pitchfork was speaking to a much smaller audience with probably a higher share of voice.

by no means do I think anyone should get a fair pass critically. i'm just arguing that the review itself and the 0.0 were a bit over the top/petty. it felt even a bit out of step with how they were writing by 2004.

i would also argue p4k's influence really "arrived" a couple years prior with the reviews of source tags and codes and, if that's a stretch, then definitely with you forgot it in people.
User avatar
Zurich
 
Posts: 8139
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:27 pm
Location: new york shitty

Postby bluelips » Mon May 14, 2018 11:48 am

wasn't that travis pan in response to his atrocious pro-war politics at the time? i remember some interview he did justifying the iraq war
bluelips
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:30 am

Postby transitive » Mon May 14, 2018 11:54 am

bluelips wrote:wasn't that travis pan in response to his atrocious pro-war politics at the time? i remember some interview he did justifying the iraq war


It was in response to Travis being perceived as having slighted Pitchfork (specifically Brent D.) in some way shape or form, and considering how celebrated The D-Plan were on the site, it came as an unexpected heel turn.

Never, ever, heard Travis (or any other DC-based musician from that time) espouse anything close to pro-war politics. Doing so in that scene is tantamount to scarlet lettering yourself.
User avatar
transitive
 
Posts: 11479
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:42 pm

Postby bluelips » Mon May 14, 2018 11:56 am

i don't know how i would find it now but i definitely remember reading an interview with him that circulated on another board and being surprised by his weird logic in support of the war
bluelips
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:30 am

Postby terminus » Mon May 14, 2018 11:57 am

Image
User avatar
terminus
 
Posts: 5120
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 6:55 pm
Location: hobojohnsonMGMT@gmail.com

Postby transitive » Mon May 14, 2018 12:01 pm



9/11 really fucked with a lot of people's heads.
User avatar
transitive
 
Posts: 11479
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:42 pm

Postby bluelips » Mon May 14, 2018 12:02 pm

i guess it wasn't an interview, thanks for finding that! i see he even mentions a beef with pitchforkmedia.com within that
bluelips
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:30 am

Postby cool party » Mon May 14, 2018 12:18 pm

Zurich wrote:
cool party wrote:
however, although p4k had a lot of readers at the time of that review, it had nowhere near the influence and readership it does now. from what i recall reading the site/responses to it at the time, that review was one of the first times that a wider audience started recognizing p4k's influence as a thing. i'm not sure that p4k itself knew at the time the impact that that review would have.

i can't get behind proscribing critical treatments of things just because they aren't as popular as other things. it's true that p4k BNMs can do a lot to make music careers. but nowadays, for the most part, a bad or lukewarm review wouldn't stop people who genuinely enjoy your music from going to a show or downloading your stuff from bandcamp. most musicians i know would be desperate to get "tranched" if the alternative was being ignored. there are plenty of artists who have released a bunch of albums reviewed in the 6.0-7.5 range (and probably lower than that, too) who are still prolific, playing shows, etc.

i agree that it's unfortunate for morrison that it happened for him at a time when p4k seemingly had this monolithic power in indie music.


I'm confused by your response tho. you start by saying p4k didn't have the influence/readership they do now then say middling p4k reviews don't stop people from going to shows or downloading stuff from bandcamp and end referring back to a time when p4k had a monolithic power in music.

it sounds like you're agreeing with me that it meant more and was more powerful back in the day because there weren't as many outlets to discover/try music for free, like bandcamp. also, pitchfork was speaking to a much smaller audience with probably a higher share of voice.

by no means do I think anyone should get a fair pass critically. i'm just arguing that the review itself and the 0.0 were a bit over the top/petty. it felt even a bit out of step with how they were writing by 2004.

i would also argue p4k's influence really "arrived" a couple years prior with the reviews of source tags and codes and, if that's a stretch, then definitely with you forgot it in people.


sorry, you're right that i was unclear. my main point was that i would completely believe that the Travistan reviewer had no idea that that review would have the impact that it did, because Pitchfork was not as popular then as it is now. but at the same time, i agree with you/the Slate piece that because music distribution is so much more diffuse and decentralized now, p4k's influence has lessened.

i'm not going to criticize how a musician feels about a review, but i do think that there are many musicians who would've received that review and laughed it off (especially if they already had the luxury of a cult following) and kept on making music. liz phair, who is cited in the Slate piece, went on to have the most commercially successful part of her career. sonic youth went on to a string of three albums that were all critically lauded. i'm not a big follower of travis' so i defer to you if you are, but it does seem like part of what happened to his career had to do with him not producing as much music/promoting it in the years after that.
cool party
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:38 pm

Postby Eyeball Kid » Mon May 14, 2018 12:20 pm

I think it's very debatable that Pitchfork has more influence now than it did in the mid-aughts.
User avatar
Eyeball Kid
 
Posts: 21793
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:17 pm

Postby cool party » Mon May 14, 2018 12:24 pm

zurich rightly pointed out my lack of clarity

i think it's a semantic question, because if you are talking about how seriously p4k's audience takes its opinions to the point that they would listen or not listen to something, i agree that the mid aughts may have been a high-water mark

however, it's undoubtable that pitchfork's reach into the mainstream is bigger now, and that if you ask anyone working at one of the bigger indie labels they will say that BNMs are still coveted as they are can be a huge factor in making a project profitable for both a label and musician
cool party
 
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:38 pm

Postby antoine » Wed May 16, 2018 1:24 am

Cohen review of the new kozelek album is pretty on point, surprisingly.
User avatar
antoine
 
Posts: 51287
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:32 pm

Postby Drinky » Wed May 16, 2018 6:29 am

Yeah, I was just reading that and kind of enjoying it!

the challenge lies in discerning the incremental differences between one dispatch of songs about sandwiches and Scarface and boxing and another.
User avatar
Drinky
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:59 am

Postby ripersnifle » Tue May 22, 2018 8:07 am

Some Nice Tranches this morning
steakspoon wrote:sorry if sounds corny fellas but i'll always remember where i was when i heard my first big star song..the internet.
Totally wrote:also to the really creepily obsessed kid frothing NON-US SPORTS GEAR IS A COMPLEXITY-SIGNALING DEVICE FOR AGEING HIPSTER ACOLYTES WHO DOWNLOAD MOANA: I have a lot of friends (and an apartment) in Geelong. Get a fuckin life man.
User avatar
ripersnifle
 
Posts: 13219
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:07 pm
Location: carnival 2000

Postby freezinseason » Tue May 22, 2018 8:14 am

transitive wrote:
bluelips wrote:wasn't that travis pan in response to his atrocious pro-war politics at the time? i remember some interview he did justifying the iraq war

Never, ever, heard Travis (or any other DC-based musician from that time) espouse anything close to pro-war politics. Doing so in that scene is tantamount to scarlet lettering yourself.


lol yea im sure being pro-war in dc is a real strain
User avatar
freezinseason
 
Posts: 3086
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:48 am

Postby Eyeball Kid » Tue May 22, 2018 8:16 am

Either this is a targeted ad* or I underestimated the demographic for artisanal bacon

Image

*If it is, I have no idea what brought this on, but maybe my netbook knows me better than I do
User avatar
Eyeball Kid
 
Posts: 21793
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:17 pm

Postby r m » Tue May 22, 2018 8:31 am

Zurich wrote:soft targets like Jet or even formerly indie/bands with cred like Sonic Youth who were doing a major label release.


Not to quibble over a minor point in an old post, but in SY's case, they had been on a major for half their career when they got their 0.0. There was plenty of bad faith behind that review -- Brent basically admitted as much a few years back -- but label never had anything to do with it.
User avatar
r m
 
Posts: 11065
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:40 pm

Postby springheeljack » Tue May 22, 2018 9:13 am

i think every R Kelly news item and article should mention Pitchfork invited him to headline in 2013.
springheeljack
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:01 pm

Postby domesticwhite » Tue May 22, 2018 9:27 am

i got a huge Aveeno ad when i logged on with Jennifer Aniston

glad Ryley got some recognition on that record because it rules
User avatar
domesticwhite
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 12:34 pm
Location: chicago, il

Postby ripersnifle » Tue May 22, 2018 10:18 am

springheeljack wrote:i think every R Kelly news item and article should mention Pitchfork invited him to headline in 2013.
yes
steakspoon wrote:sorry if sounds corny fellas but i'll always remember where i was when i heard my first big star song..the internet.
Totally wrote:also to the really creepily obsessed kid frothing NON-US SPORTS GEAR IS A COMPLEXITY-SIGNALING DEVICE FOR AGEING HIPSTER ACOLYTES WHO DOWNLOAD MOANA: I have a lot of friends (and an apartment) in Geelong. Get a fuckin life man.
User avatar
ripersnifle
 
Posts: 13219
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:07 pm
Location: carnival 2000

Postby endless dave » Tue May 22, 2018 1:54 pm

springheeljack wrote:i think every R Kelly news item and article should mention Pitchfork invited him to headline in 2013.


I think a lot of grousing about Pitchfork is dumb and overly cynical but this is something I will never, ever give up and it still bothers me. just everything about it. how the festival team and Schreiber refused to basically give any response to the Voice or anyone in light of the new reporting, the one, maybe two times they gave something on record basically being an annoyed shrug at being asked about it. (side note: I also get confused by Hopper going to go work for Pitchfork not even a year later.) and I especially hate they they finally acknowledge the fact five years later couched in a press release about the festival where they very clearly took the step because they had the announcement about a RAINN partnership to balance it out. and one that felt the need to include the qualifier:

While Kelly has not been charged with any crime since his 2008 acquittal on charges of child pornography, and denies all allegations,


that they couldn't get anyone involved with the actual booking, or anyone at all, to actually be quoted or held accountable was just so gross to me. it was a painfully cynical PR angle to take and they should have been called out for it a lot more than they did (which was none). and now today there is this:

https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/the-struggle-to-silence-r-kelly/

so I like Hogan a lot, he's easily their best reporter (honestly one of one or two people on staff who actually do the work of reporting), but the entire piece is teed off by talking about R. Kelly's history being brought back up in 2013 by Hopper and DeRogatis, which back then was explicitly because of him headlining the festival that year. feels odd to only briefly mention that fact about him performing (without stating the facts tying them together) 10 paragraphs in, simply by quoting the PR statement.
Last edited by endless dave on Tue May 22, 2018 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
endless dave
 
Posts: 4311
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:25 pm

Postby bongo » Tue May 22, 2018 3:45 pm

i think there should actually be more grousing over pitchfork. the journalism is horrendous 90% of the time, the business ethics are nonexistent, and they have contributed perhaps most of all to the twin nadirs of musical criticism and the gross nature of the industry at present
yeaaaaaaaaaaaa american nostalgia love it suburban living civilized families this could be my life
User avatar
bongo
man in hammock
 
Posts: 68773
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:32 pm
Location: Malaise (Live Acoustic)

Postby bongo » Tue May 22, 2018 3:46 pm

but then again perhaps i’m be-

yeaaaaaaaaaaaa american nostalgia love it suburban living civilized families this could be my life
User avatar
bongo
man in hammock
 
Posts: 68773
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:32 pm
Location: Malaise (Live Acoustic)

Postby black mamba » Tue May 22, 2018 4:56 pm

endless dave wrote:
springheeljack wrote:i think every R Kelly news item and article should mention Pitchfork invited him to headline in 2013.


I think a lot of grousing about Pitchfork is dumb and overly cynical but this is something I will never, ever give up and it still bothers me. just everything about it. how the festival team and Schreiber refused to basically give any response to the Voice or anyone in light of the new reporting, the one, maybe two times they gave something on record basically being an annoyed shrug at being asked about it. (side note: I also get confused by Hopper going to go work for Pitchfork not even a year later.) and I especially hate they they finally acknowledge the fact five years later couched in a press release about the festival where they very clearly took the step because they had the announcement about a RAINN partnership to balance it out. and one that felt the need to include the qualifier:

While Kelly has not been charged with any crime since his 2008 acquittal on charges of child pornography, and denies all allegations,


that they couldn't get anyone involved with the actual booking, or anyone at all, to actually be quoted or held accountable was just so gross to me. it was a painfully cynical PR angle to take and they should have been called out for it a lot more than they did (which was none). and now today there is this:

https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/the-struggle-to-silence-r-kelly/

so I like Hogan a lot, he's easily their best reporter (honestly one of one or two people on staff who actually do the work of reporting), but the entire piece is teed off by talking about R. Kelly's history being brought back up in 2013 by Hopper and DeRogatis, which back then was explicitly because of him headlining the festival that year. feels odd to only briefly mention that fact about him performing (without stating the facts tying them together) 10 paragraphs in, simply by quoting the PR statement.


they also had hilarious merch about how r kelly likes to have sex iirc
Image
User avatar
black mamba
ok
 
Posts: 12746
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: my fat fabulous life

Postby black mamba » Tue May 22, 2018 5:06 pm

cool party wrote:
Zurich wrote:
cool party wrote:
however, although p4k had a lot of readers at the time of that review, it had nowhere near the influence and readership it does now. from what i recall reading the site/responses to it at the time, that review was one of the first times that a wider audience started recognizing p4k's influence as a thing. i'm not sure that p4k itself knew at the time the impact that that review would have.

i can't get behind proscribing critical treatments of things just because they aren't as popular as other things. it's true that p4k BNMs can do a lot to make music careers. but nowadays, for the most part, a bad or lukewarm review wouldn't stop people who genuinely enjoy your music from going to a show or downloading your stuff from bandcamp. most musicians i know would be desperate to get "tranched" if the alternative was being ignored. there are plenty of artists who have released a bunch of albums reviewed in the 6.0-7.5 range (and probably lower than that, too) who are still prolific, playing shows, etc.

i agree that it's unfortunate for morrison that it happened for him at a time when p4k seemingly had this monolithic power in indie music.


I'm confused by your response tho. you start by saying p4k didn't have the influence/readership they do now then say middling p4k reviews don't stop people from going to shows or downloading stuff from bandcamp and end referring back to a time when p4k had a monolithic power in music.

it sounds like you're agreeing with me that it meant more and was more powerful back in the day because there weren't as many outlets to discover/try music for free, like bandcamp. also, pitchfork was speaking to a much smaller audience with probably a higher share of voice.

by no means do I think anyone should get a fair pass critically. i'm just arguing that the review itself and the 0.0 were a bit over the top/petty. it felt even a bit out of step with how they were writing by 2004.

i would also argue p4k's influence really "arrived" a couple years prior with the reviews of source tags and codes and, if that's a stretch, then definitely with you forgot it in people.


sorry, you're right that i was unclear. my main point was that i would completely believe that the Travistan reviewer had no idea that that review would have the impact that it did, because Pitchfork was not as popular then as it is now. but at the same time, i agree with you/the Slate piece that because music distribution is so much more diffuse and decentralized now, p4k's influence has lessened.

i'm not going to criticize how a musician feels about a review, but i do think that there are many musicians who would've received that review and laughed it off (especially if they already had the luxury of a cult following) and kept on making music. liz phair, who is cited in the Slate piece, went on to have the most commercially successful part of her career. sonic youth went on to a string of three albums that were all critically lauded. i'm not a big follower of travis' so i defer to you if you are, but it does seem like part of what happened to his career had to do with him not producing as much music/promoting it in the years after that.


liz phair and sonic youth existed well before while pitchfork basically made the dismemberment plan (for lack of a better way of putting it.)
Image
User avatar
black mamba
ok
 
Posts: 12746
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: my fat fabulous life

Postby bongo » Wed May 23, 2018 9:31 am

jesus

Beginning in the mid 1990s, Anthony Child—as the DJ and electronic musician Surgeon—pioneered a strand of techno as brutalist as the concrete architecture of his native Birmingham, turning out hammering, remorseless rhythms that drew their power from the grease and grit of industrial music. Much of modern techno—from the Berghain sound to the noise-laced experiments of Prurient and Broken English Club—owes something to Surgeon’s influence. But Child himself remains idiosyncratic, averse to pigeonholes. A few years ago, for instance, you might have found him strafing arenas full of Lady Gaga superfans with coruscating modular electronics, joined by Gaga’s DJ Lady Starlight.

In that clip from the Lady Gaga concert, Child is sporting a Coil T-shirt; just like John Balance and Peter Christopherson’s industrial project, there’s the sense that Child isn’t interested in noise as mere provocation, but as a path to enlightenment.
yeaaaaaaaaaaaa american nostalgia love it suburban living civilized families this could be my life
User avatar
bongo
man in hammock
 
Posts: 68773
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 10:32 pm
Location: Malaise (Live Acoustic)

PreviousNext

Return to Don't. Let. Go. You’ve got the music in you.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: baleen, Bartatua, buriedinspace, DasLofGang, deer, endless dave, Franco, gambra, gazedo, Google Adsense [Bot], Grendel, hazel, i won a contest, jack, jewels, jon, KALM, kid_chameleon, mascotte, Milk, mondays, MonkeyTennis, Mr Squishy, mystery meat, Naphil, odilon redon, Parnelio, Paul, Phil, pink snake, pocket shepherd, Sad Panda, seafoam, slime, terminus, ThePettyDemon, trouble, VHGisdead