Pitchfork Review OverSteps

  On 3/23/2010 at 6:07 PM, six said:

  On 3/23/2010 at 6:04 PM, encey said:

Simmm down now.

  On 3/24/2010 at 2:20 AM, karmakramer said:

  On 3/24/2010 at 1:22 AM, TwiddleBot said:

  On 3/23/2010 at 11:08 PM, karmakramer said:

I interned at their video site, pitchfork.tv, and basically they give good reviews based on the idea (especially if its a debut album or something) of making them a "pitchfork" band... they are basically like a label in the sense that they filter content based on trends and then every year they make a shit ton of money asking these "pitchfork bands" to come to their "pitchfork festival" ... their reviews are meaningless

 

well that explains why they penalize just about anything that is the slightest bit adventurous, off the wall or risk-taking

 

so they take a page from the major industry then.. let's throw a giant gala to advertise our artists every year under the guise of an awards ceremony

 

now that they get about 500,000 hits a day, all they need to do is keep appeasing their crowd.... once their crowd starts to find their recommendations unsettling or challenging, they will lose readers

Interestingly, I discussed with a music store owner about the influence of Pitchfork on his business' sales. He told me that a few years ago, whenever an album was well received by Pitchfork, he absolutely had to order a bunch of copies because many customers would obviously purchase them eventually. Nowadays, it does not work that way anymore because those customers don't trust that website as faithfully as before. Your experience with Pitchfork (as a spy in the enemy's territory) makes me hate them a little bit more.

pitchfork

-

we're still waiting awep.

you know what i mean

  On 3/22/2010 at 11:20 AM, Obel said:

I'm getting sick of this fucking shit. What is it with these lazy reviews these days where they just describe the sounds they heard? As if someone will read the words "grandiose synths" and decide to buy the album.

 

All I could gauge from that four paragraph piece of shit is that the album is sort of different and nicer sounding than previous efforts... Well fucking done Patrick Sisson! You've summed up on a page what a blogger could sum up in a sentence then tacked a number at the bottom as if you ever actually justified the score. Not that the score bothers me of course, but where did he actually criticize the album? 7.2? Why? Were there too many clattering and colliding rhythms, or not enough? Was there TOO MUCH reverb on see on see?

 

I know that reviews are just a subjective opinion of course, but there is literally no opinion here. It's not even that hard to criticize music if you've actually listened to the album and formed an opinion, but judging by the fact that he says theres twenty seconds of silence at the beginning of r ess implies he's whacked it on in the background instead of giving it a proper listen on headphones (which I think is the best way to hear AE). I hope he's not paid to review because he fucking sucks.

 

 

Patrick Sisson's Oversteps Review

Pitchfork Media

 

1.3

I'd like to agree with the above post of genius.

Re-reading that review is a headache.

Oversteps is a bunch of sounds that happen. Here's a number.

As far as i know here in Croatia heavy punishments of pitchfork's reviewers are NOT illegal. We we could all get together and gather some money for trip for all of them to come over here and then BANG!!!! "

-

The moment I completely lost respect for Bitchfock was during a Spiritualized review--probably for Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating In Space--where the reviewer misconstrued the phrase "cop shoot chop" as having something to do with police shooting each other (as opposed to actually being three verbs: a junky's mantra).

It's a very minor misstep, I suppose.

But it was the confidence with which the reviewer misused the phrase that suggested that perhaps these blokes have no clue what's up or down but still have strong, well-articulated opinions nonetheless.

that's pitchfork...review album? no, I'll just name drop shit I know nothing about.

my review of this thread: gay

gAy +

gays are pretty cool though i guess

-

good critic, ?? ? ? ? haha haha haha haha ?EEEEEEEEEEE? E????????E E?EEE?E good critic, no?

what do you think about deleting "Known (1)" from Oversteps? Has anybody done this?

known1 is the best track on the album

  On 11/8/2012 at 12:00 AM, vamos scorcho said:

what do you think about deleting "Known (1)" from Oversteps? Has anybody done this?

  On 11/8/2012 at 12:12 AM, oscillik said:

known1 is the best track on the album

That's why it's a good idea. If you do that, you don't need Oversteps anymore

Oh come on. It's a great piece but it totally throws off off the vibe of the album. It's the only impediment I've ever had to listening through the album. Whenever it comes on everything grinds to a halt. It goes on like a minute too long. It would be good on EP7 or something but this album works better as a monolithic ambient release, not a series of unrelated tracks. Also a search revealed that I'm not the only person with that idea.

just scratch out that sector of the cd if it makes you happy, im always doing this

  On 11/7/2012 at 11:35 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 11/7/2012 at 3:27 PM, theSun said:

gays are pretty cool though i guess

 

this photo is actually the worst

  On 11/8/2012 at 12:21 AM, sweepstakes said:

  On 11/8/2012 at 12:00 AM, vamos scorcho said:

what do you think about deleting "Known (1)" from Oversteps? Has anybody done this?

  On 11/8/2012 at 12:12 AM, oscillik said:

known1 is the best track on the album

That's why it's a good idea. If you do that, you don't need Oversteps anymore

  On 11/8/2012 at 4:01 PM, theSun said:

just scratch out that sector of the cd if it makes you happy, im always doing this

lol