My computer has been downloading 24/7, recently

mookeywrench

musicismylife78 wrote:

guess this is where i differ from most on this board. our other music section is so bland.
thats far from cookie cutter or basic or cliched lists of albums. This list includes most if not all of my favorites of 2011.

:?: You're calling this board's taste bland, but your music choices are just a copy/paste of Pitchfork's flavor of the month. :?:

cowboypjfan

Here's a link to several top ten lists from this year: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com ... IXuq8qM%3D

Lifted

crazypjfan wrote:

Here's a link to several top ten lists from this year: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com ... IXuq8qM%3D

clearly i haven't been keeping up to date with new music this year. those lists include more albums/artists i've never heard of than any year i can think of in recent history. haha. foot in mouth.

musicismylife78

mookeywrench wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

guess this is where i differ from most on this board. our other music section is so bland.
thats far from cookie cutter or basic or cliched lists of albums. This list includes most if not all of my favorites of 2011.

:?: You're calling this board's taste bland, but your music choices are just a copy/paste of Pitchfork's flavor of the month. :?:

9 times out of 10 if pitchfork recommends something, i end up liking it. i trust their taste. And you clearly havent listened to or seen their list this year. i spent much of yesterday diatribing that pitchforks list was extremly diverse. I dont think diverse equals bland, so im not really following your point. bland to me is sticking to one type of music, and sticking to that only. A list that includes bon iver, shabazz palaces, m83, wild flag, drake, toro y moi, colin stetson, SBTRKT, Liturgy, etc... that runs that gamut from indie folk to 80's synth rock, to riot grrl supergroups, avantegarde jazz, to hipster metal to electronic. that aint bland friend. Its funny people talk about pitchfork having a flavor of the month or a style they like. They may have a style they like, but those who take time to actually read the list, can learn they like alot of things, and its varied. how is avantegarde jazz and riot grrl supergrounps and 80's synth a typical or bland choice? this board has only talked about a few of these bands. You ever see a SBTRKT thread? Wild flag? Shabazz Palaces?

mookeywrench

musicismylife78 wrote:

mookeywrench wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

guess this is where i differ from most on this board. our other music section is so bland.
thats far from cookie cutter or basic or cliched lists of albums. This list includes most if not all of my favorites of 2011.

:?: You're calling this board's taste bland, but your music choices are just a copy/paste of Pitchfork's flavor of the month. :?:

9 times out of 10 if pitchfork recommends something, i end up liking it. how is avantegarde jazz and riot grrl supergrounps and 80's synth a typical or bland choice?

Because lemmings have more personality.

musicismylife78

:?: You're calling this board's taste bland, but your music choices are just a copy/paste of Pitchfork's flavor of the month. :?:[/quote]


9 times out of 10 if pitchfork recommends something, i end up liking it. how is avantegarde jazz and riot grrl supergrounps and 80's synth a typical or bland choice?[/quote]

Because lemmings have more personality.[/qu

Have i ever said anything youve ever agreed with. Personally when i picture you, i picture your avatar. A grumpy old man. You have anything better to do than to find my posts and respond to them? Get a life

mookeywrench

Well someone's gotta call it like they see it. And why such a personal knock on Jack Elam?

Lifted

i forgot to even mention that my morning jacket did not make the pitchfork top 50 this year. talk about drinking the haterade.

Lifted

Personally when i picture you, i picture your avatar. A grumpy old man. You have anything better to do than to find my posts and respond to them? Get a life

haha. i've thought the same thing a few times. i have to be honest, i didn't know who Jack Elam was. i'm glad mookey revealed that to us. i just got the lowdown on wiki. was never much of a western fan....(love the movie tombstone though)....so maybe that's why.

MSnider44

Fucked Up "David Comes To Life" is ridiculously good. Listening to the whole album as I write this.

12345AGNST1

The more I go on pitchfork the more I realize the people behind it are just a bunch of hipster snobs. I like quite a bit of indie music, but they go far and out of their way to promote mostly dull and boring indie music. Some of their recommendations are good, but most arent. I've found better indie music in other places.

musicismylife78

12345AGNST1 wrote:

The more I go on pitchfork the more I realize the people behind it are just a bunch of hipster snobs. I like quite a bit of indie music, but they go far and out of their way to promote mostly dull and boring indie music. Some of their recommendations are good, but most arent. I've found better indie music in other places.

to each their own. i'd say the opposite. and i think youve got to respect them as theyve set the agenda and the tone for whats new and hip in indie rock for years. Any publication or site that promotes and hypes bon iver, flying lotus, the weeknd, frank ocean, james blake etc... is a good thing

and further, the whole "promoting dull and boring" indie music thing is a tired cliche. Im not sure what dull and boring even means in terms of music, as its so different from person to person. to one person it might be singer songwriter music, to the next it might be hip hop, or rock, or any number of things. dull and boring to you or me, might be beaitiful and lush and intense to another person.

how anyone could consider the weeknd, frank ocean, SBTRKT, Flying lotus, and the like boring is something i dont quite understand

Lifted

12345AGNST1 wrote:

The more I go on pitchfork the more I realize the people behind it are just a bunch of hipster snobs. I like quite a bit of indie music, but they go far and out of their way to promote mostly dull and boring indie music. Some of their recommendations are good, but most arent. I've found better indie music in other places.

interesting... NOT! :roll:

Of The Aggie

musicismylife78 wrote:

to each their own. i'd say the opposite. and i think youve got to respect them as theyve set the agenda and the tone for whats new and hip in indie rock for years. Any publication or site that promotes and hypes bon iver, flying lotus, the weeknd, frank ocean, james blake etc... is a good thing

and further, the whole "promoting dull and boring" indie music thing is a tired cliche. Im not sure what dull and boring even means in terms of music, as its so different from person to person. to one person it might be singer songwriter music, to the next it might be hip hop, or rock, or any number of things. dull and boring to you or me, might be beaitiful and lush and intense to another person.

how anyone could consider the weeknd, frank ocean, SBTRKT, Flying lotus, and the like boring is something i dont quite understand

Do you own stock in Pitchfork or make royalties off every indie rock song played?

I've never seen anyone defend a site or a genre of music more than you do with Pitchfork and indie rock. I really, really liked grunge back in the 90s, but I dont think I ever defended it to anyone in quite the manner you defend indie rock on this site. I think you're going to have to face the facts that some people haven't found it to be a life-changing experience and are just not into it, and no matter how much you promote it, they're not going to wake up one morning and "see the light" and make Pitchfork their homepage.

I know that as soon as I see something posted on this site about indie rock or Pitchfork, you're going to be there in 5 minutes flat to offer your opinion; hence the 20 or so posts you have in this thread alone.

musicismylife78

i have accepted that some people dont like it, and ive also said, my musical tastes are very eclectic. im a fan of everything from usher and justin timberlake and adele to mastodon, tool, to bon iver to damien rice to hendrix etc...

And yeah, not everyone liked grunge in the 90's either.
i disagree with you. i may not be an evangelical indie rock fan, or a successful one, but ive heard about a ton of bands via pitchfork and a million other blogs, and via friends, tv shows, magazines, etc... I dont think its out of the question someone, you, or me or someone else could recommend a band and people check them out. whether they like the music thats another story. This whole thread started because someone, another board member was checking out the pitchfork list and downloading music they hadnt heard before, several other people chimed in they were doing the same, downloading some albums that made the list. Im sure the Rolling Stone and Spin and NME magazine lists all prompted similar reactions from people. My life has been changed via suggestions or recommendations of bands to check out, from pitchfork yes, but from any number of magazines and websites and friends, and even from interviews with various bands about music that influenced them. Im not alone in that reguard, many people find out about music this way.

we all do this in many ways. Movies are another big one, a friend tells you about an amazing movie they saw and you check it out based on your friends enthusiastic response. Or a family member says you need to read this book that relates to your life situation, or you read a good review of a book from Amazon.

its all related.

My whole point was the hatred for pitchfork is largely unrelated to any issue or topic they bring up. If you took the time to read my previous posts over the years, you'd know ive publicly admitted pitchforks faults and problems. But im also aware of a myriad of issues and problems with many other lists and sites and magazines.

The issue brought up in this thread multiple times was people crying that an album didnt make the list and therefore pitchfork was phony and a bunch of hacks. My response was that many sources published best of lists this year. and many omitted the same albums people were moaning about pitchfork dismissing. Im sort of an all opportunity, alls equal basher in that reguard. lets get some consistency. Lets bash the OTHER sites that dismissed those albums and level the same slurs against them as well (my morning jacket, The Antlers, wilco all were snubbed by a variety of outlets this year, pitchfork wasnt the only one to leave them out in the cold).

i think for me, the bash pitchfork meme is old and tired. and many people just do it because its in or cool. Theres only one Portlandia and they do a great job of lampooning hipster culture.

musicismylife78

i'd say my main problem though is the sort of blanket "pitchfork is hipster/indie" line thrown around here and elsewhere. I think probably thats what Cornell was getting at in PJ20 when he referenced that really none of the grunge bands sounded anything alike, but were all considered grunge. Indie rock is the same thing. Its often, on this forum, and others said that pitchfork peddles in hyping indie rock bands that sound the same. I just think its a naive thing to say and it proves you dont read the site or listen to the music they promote. The weeknd and Bon Iver were among the most hyped this year, and they sound nothing alike. As were St Vincent and Girls. Again they sound nothing alike. I understand not everyones going to love Bon Iver, or St Vincent, but the sheer amount of music they recommend seems to me theres going to be something for everyone. Whether you like pop music, house, rock, hip hop, punk, every genre is covered. thats not sticking to one genre.

Of The Aggie

musicismylife78 wrote:

i disagree with you. i may not be an evangelical indie rock fan, or a successful one, but ive heard about a ton of bands via pitchfork and a million other blogs, and via friends, tv shows, magazines, etc... I dont think its out of the question someone, you, or me or someone else could recommend a band and people check them out. whether they like the music thats another story.

I'm glad that you use Pitchfork and other places to find new music and I've mentioned before that I've found out new bands/songs from word of mouth or this forum too, but I stand by my statements about your defense of indie rock being very over-the-top.

I'm not on this board all day and have only been an active contributor for a couple of years and I don't think I've ever really mentioned much about my taste for indie rock either, so I'm looking at this from a distance, but this is my observation of you from the little I'm on here. You seem to take it personally when someone disses indie rock, and I find that interesting. I've come to regard you as the indie rock guy/gal and whenever a post says anything about it, like i said, you'll be there in no time flat to defend your religion.

You say you have a problem with Pitchfork being labeled as a snobby hipster website by a lot of people, well I say to that most people also label Fox News as being slanted to the right. Do you think there might be a shred of truth to that! And if Pitchfork is hipster and trendy and that's what you like, then admit it and move on just like the republicans who make up most of Fox News' audience.

musicismylife78

Of The Aggie wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

i disagree with you. i may not be an evangelical indie rock fan, or a successful one, but ive heard about a ton of bands via pitchfork and a million other blogs, and via friends, tv shows, magazines, etc... I dont think its out of the question someone, you, or me or someone else could recommend a band and people check them out. whether they like the music thats another story.

I'm glad that you use Pitchfork and other places to find new music and I've mentioned before that I've found out new bands/songs from word of mouth or this forum too, but I stand by my statements about your defense of indie rock being very over-the-top.

I'm not on this board all day and have only been an active contributor for a couple of years and I don't think I've ever really mentioned much about my taste for indie rock either, so I'm looking at this from a distance, but this is my observation of you from the little I'm on here. You seem to take it personally when someone disses indie rock, and I find that interesting. I've come to regard you as the indie rock guy/gal and whenever a post says anything about it, like i said, you'll be there in no time flat to defend your religion.

You say you have a problem with Pitchfork being labeled as a snobby hipster website by a lot of people, well I say to that most people also label Fox News as being slanted to the right. Do you think there might be a shred of truth to that! And if Pitchfork is hipster and trendy and that's what you like, then admit it and move on just like the republicans who make up most of Fox News' audience.

sure there is some truth to it, im not a fox viewer and am a left wing commie so im not a fan of fox news.

but as far as pitchfork, yeah they are the go to indie website, they are pretty much THE website you go to if you want to find out whats hip and cool and new and trendy. and the audience they cater to is generally indie rock. but thats also only half the story. they dont just cover the bon ivers and bright eyes and decemberists of the world, although those bands are covered, they also focus on, and recommend stuff like Burial, who is dubstep, they recommend hip hop they've been really into Currency and ASAP Rocky in that genre, they recommend sort of off the wall spaced out and drugged out pure hip hop beats in the form of Clams Casino. They've been on a serious r and b kick with The weeknd, frank ocean and the dream. And they like metal with Wolves in the Throne Room. They loved the new Kate Bush cd, which is singer songwriter/art rock territoryThats a pretty good cross section of music. Certainly you are free to listen to those bands or not listen. Or listen to them and dislike them. But to say pitchfork caters in hyping a specific sound or scene or genre is ludicrous. I dont thing Wolves in the Throne Room and Kate Bush are in the same scene or genre, do you? They sound NOTHING alike. Any website or source that is that diversified in the stuff they cover and promote is a good thing. And to tell people that you only get boring indie rock music via pitchfork (whatever that means) is disingenuous and false at best. Plus the lack of knowledge about other magazines and sources lists omitting the same records that caused people to bash pitchfork in this thread is naive. I love debating lists. Year end lists are a passion of mine. But i think we all do ourselves a disservice in terms of blatant blanket statements about sources and magazines. Yes pitchfork may have left off some albums you loved. I hear ya, but that doesnt mean pitchfork has some sort of agenda to shut out mainstream/specific types of music, which is evidenced by many other sources omitting said albums as well.

I take it personally because music isnt a joke to me. Art isnt a joke to me. Its all very important.

Lifted

*

Lifted

but as far as pitchfork, yeah they are the go to indie website, they are pretty much THE website you go to if you want to find out whats hip and cool and new and trendy.

you know what, i'll be the first to admit that you actually make some very valid points. and i'm also a 'left wing commie' (or at least that's what my conservative friends call me) so good on you for that ...but i think statements like this is where you lose people. it just comes off as dis-ingenuous, and makes you seem like a self-professed poser. no one likes a poser. you may or may not be one, but that's how people perceive you. or so i think?

also, it seems like you like EVERYTHING that pitchfork recommends. it's almost like you don't have a taste of your own, and simply reiterate what pitchfork says. is there anything that pitchfork has praised in the past few years that you don't like? i get the impression that if they did drool over an album that you didn't like, you'd probably be sitting there for weeks with your headphones on trying to "figure it out"...anyway, you're free to do what you want, listen to what you want, and say what you want. just trying to provide some perspective of why you may rub people the wrong way. the truth is, pitchfork does cover a broad scope of genre and styles, but they also, in my opinion, ignore and even sometimes trash a lot of the greatest artists in those genres who are making great music, simply because, as you say, they are not or are no longer new and trendy.