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...
I looked them up on YouTube some time ago and it sounds delicious. I can never get enough of this kind of music, 
.
