Fleet Foxes - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Just the Bang and the Clatter
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-14-2008, 03:29 PM   #16
LMP
Blue Crack Supplier
 
LMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 37,609
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Will you be getting drunk if you hate it?
__________________

__________________
LMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 03:32 PM   #17
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,004
Local Time: 04:00 PM
You and your friends should totally get drunk BEFORE you listen to it.
__________________

__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 03:48 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
GirlsAloudFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 25,287
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMacPhisto View Post
Will you be getting drunk if you hate it?
Yes.

And doing a quick Google image search on this band, they look like a bunch of stuck-up, half-witted, scruffy looking nerf herders.

Who you callin scruffy lookin?
__________________
GirlsAloudFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 03:57 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 24,914
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Pitchfork is a waste of web space.
__________________
mikal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 06:34 PM   #20
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,808
Local Time: 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikal View Post
Pitchfork is a waste of web space.
True. But they were actually correct about this one. It happens once every couple of years.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 06:38 PM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,004
Local Time: 04:00 PM
Say what you want about the P-Fucks, but I've been introduced to a hell of a lot of good music because of them, and so have a lot of other people. There's a lot of indie bands who owe their success to the damned site.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 07:35 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
If you shout...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,377
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
Say what you want about the P-Fucks, but I've been introduced to a hell of a lot of good music because of them, and so have a lot of other people. There's a lot of indie bands who owe their success to the damned site.
Exactly. And it's not like they hate all which is not mainstream (see U2, about whom there is nothing in the same universe as that which we try to define as indie). There's nothing wrong with Pitchfork unless you don't actually read it, and think that their site average of, like, 7 for every album is somehow too low. They like nearly everything, love some stuff real good, are moot on a few things, and justifiably/perhaps unjustifiably hate a few records. Just like everybody, every site, and every magazine.

I keep reading MMJ fans ranting and raving about how biased and hateful Pitchfork is (which gave Z a great rating, by the way) because--gasp!--they gave the new, awful record a 4.7. Oh, no! A 4.7???? That's a whole .3 points less than average!!!!! The world must be ending! I'm not coming after anybody in this thread about this (I've read it on other boards, not here), but I think it's worth pointing out. There is simply no basis to the ultra-rabid hatred of Pitchfork on the basis of "hating everything" or being too elitist. For fuck's sake, they've even been generous to U2, when U2 has deserved some generosity. Enjoying the music of U2, by default, means that you're not elitist; you're quite populist!

You're right, Laz. Like literally any well-maintained music site, Pitchfork is wonderful for discovering new music--there's no need to confuse, as most under-read people do, "I often disagree with Pitchfork's taste" or "This one time, Pitchfork gave a lukewarm or negative review to a record by a band which I like" with "Pitchfork hates absolutely everything and is nothing more than a bunch of hipster, know-it-all elitists."

In case you didn't know, everybody, Weezer and Jet kind of do actually suck (to me, anyway...and to everybody I know). And amazing bands like Wrens owe every last shred of their success to the spot-on recommendations of the Pitchfork staff. They are also very much responsible for the acceptance of hip-hop within the indie continuum at large, which is huge. I don't love Pitchfork, but neither do I hate it. I accept it as what it is--a flawed, but indispensable, part of the apparatus of modern music criticism. It has only the same flaws that every other reviewer or collection of reviewers has (Rolling Stone, StylusMagazine [R.I.P.], NME, etc.), as well as the same positives...maybe even a few extras, because it covers a lot more territory than can a tradition magazine, like Rolling Stone. Bah.

Sorry about that, everyone. Just, let's get some perspective, that's all I'm saying. I'm done with ranting. I'm gonna go and listen to this record again and try to hear what I've thus far been incapable of hearing...
__________________
If you shout... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 08:02 PM   #23
Blue Crack Supplier
 
lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 38,004
Local Time: 04:00 PM
What IYS said.

And as much as they make fun of Bono and U2, which is like every time the band's name comes up, it still amazes me that HTDAAB received a 6.9. I mean, think about that. Several points higher than MMJ, a band they actually like a lot.

Also compare that Bomb rating to recent albums by a band they have much more respect for, R.E.M. Accelerate only managed a 6.7, while Reveal and Around the Sun pulled a 5.0 and 5.2, respectively.
__________________
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 10:31 PM   #24
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,808
Local Time: 04:00 PM
I really liked Stylus.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 11:41 PM   #25
LMP
Blue Crack Supplier
 
LMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 37,609
Local Time: 06:00 PM
I've gone and read reviews on Pitchfork before out of curiosity, but I don't like the site, nor do I like most reviews of music. Their reviews of Radiohead albums are as laughable as poor/lukewarm reviews, including the 0.0 for The Flaming Lips' Zaireeka. It's true they've introduced people to new music, that's awesome, it should be what mags/sites like that do. I get most of my music either from here or various blogs and torrents, not from sites like those. It's cool if you like them, not knocking anyone from that, but I find them absurd - Rolling Stone, NME, Spin, all of them.

I also don't like, as I've stated before, the fucking decimal rating system. Maybe that's just me, I don't know.
__________________
LMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 11:41 PM   #26
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Slo
Posts: 47
Local Time: 12:00 AM
Rationalize all you want. Pitchfork sucks. And with any luck they'll be going away soon.

Good riddance.

Smarmy douchebags who don't give a rats ass about music.

Get paying jobs.
__________________
veber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2008, 11:43 PM   #27
The Male
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 65,808
Local Time: 04:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMacPhisto View Post
including the 0.0 for The Flaming Lips' Zaireeka.
YES. They shouldn't have written that review if they were simply too lazy to be bothered.
__________________


Now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2008, 12:33 AM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
If you shout...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 5,377
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by veber View Post
Smarmy douchebags who don't give a rats ass about music.
That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. I'm sorry, but it is. They clearly care about music. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing what they are (writing dozens upon dozens of reviews, month after month) without pay. Absurd. Sigh.

I'd forgotten that Zaireeka review, though. It's only anecdotal evidence, of course (ie, one review out of thousands doesn't mean the whole site is worthless), but it's a good call. Jesus, what an awful review that was...
__________________
If you shout... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2008, 12:42 AM   #29
LMP
Blue Crack Supplier
 
LMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 37,609
Local Time: 06:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by If you shout... View Post
I'd forgotten that Zaireeka review, though. It's only anecdotal evidence, of course (ie, one review out of thousands doesn't mean the whole site is worthless), but it's a good call. Jesus, what an awful review that was...
Right, I'm not gonna stereotype the site based on that one piece of shit review, but it does sort of prove my point against all kinds of review sites.
__________________
LMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2008, 01:20 AM   #30
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Slo
Posts: 47
Local Time: 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by If you shout... View Post
That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. I'm sorry, but it is. They clearly care about music. Otherwise they wouldn't be doing what they are (writing dozens upon dozens of reviews, month after month) without pay. Absurd. Sigh.

I'd forgotten that Zaireeka review, though. It's only anecdotal evidence, of course (ie, one review out of thousands doesn't mean the whole site is worthless), but it's a good call. Jesus, what an awful review that was...
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. They clearly don't give a rats ass about music. That's why they write what they write. It's all practice for telling off the girlfriends they'll never have. Their reviews are all an effort to out do one another in the "shit on" factor.

They don't even listen to half the shit they review. They just write the insults to write the insults.

Pitchfork are jerk-offs who like writing about music personalities for free.
__________________

__________________
veber is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
fleet foxes

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com