No, Bright Eye's ****tiness made me not like Bright Eyes

Bright Eyes = American variation of the word "my"?

You americans and your crazy language... tch.

Nice try but no potatos.

[QUOTE=theredwonder]Bright Eyes = American variation of the word "my"?

You americans and your crazy language... tch.[/QUOTE]

What?

[QUOTE=no peros calentes]Too cool.[/quote]

It rocked. We even did the up 1/4-step modulation at the end with pitch shifters.

That would've been awesome. I wish I was in a band that could be bothered to do something.

[QUOTE=JonM]What?



It rocked. We even did the up 1/4-step modulation at the end with pitch shifters.[/QUOTE]

[I]Oh, sounds great.[/I]

I missed the answer last time I asked so:

Is that Dimitri Martin in your avatar NPC?

[url]http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/m/mars-volta/frances-the-mute.shtml[/url]

[QUOTE=Zmev][url]http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/m/mars-volta/frances-the-mute.shtml[/url][/QUOTE]

Seen it. Clearly the haters have made a powerful new ally.

But it's awfully hypocritical of Pitchfork to criticize self-indulgence of any kind when their reviews are nothing more than masturbation set to prose. The Mars Volta is going to keep making more bombastic albums, and eventually all other music critics are going to take notice and give them a little bit of credit. But will Pitchfork acquiesce, or will they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge anything that Omar and Cedric have done since 2002 as relevant? Tsk tsk.

PS: Zmev, you need to have an anti-TMV avatar. It will be funny to get yelled at by people who will inevitably sign up just to laud the album. I call them "Frances the Noobs."

[QUOTE=Zmev][url]http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/m/mars-volta/frances-the-mute.shtml[/url][/QUOTE]

So many run-on sentences...

Hmm..if only I could mix my anti-br and this anti-tmv you speak of.

Hell I could put X's through alot of artists i dislike, but i duno how to do that moving avatar thing.

[quote=pitchfork]The result is a homogeneous sh[size=2]i[/size]theap of stream-of-consciousness turgidity.[/quote]

Great use of the English language :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Zmev]Hell I could put X's through alot of artists i dislike, but i duno how to do that moving avatar thing.[/QUOTE]

Neither do I, and I always wanted to know.

Get a gif animator, you lazy bastards! :p

Pitchfork, what idiots...I'm not the hugest Volta fan and I haven't even heard Frances The Mute (I'll get around to ir one day), but the day when Cedric and Omar make something worth a score that low will be an odd day indeed. Pitchfork suck.

Actually, Pitchfork is single-handedly making more indie music accessible and (in some cases) profitable. Their influence is huge, and in most cases that influence is a good thing. They've trashed tons of albums I love, and it bugs me, but their value to independent music in general is obvious. That said, nobody who actually wants to buy Frances the Mute is going to have their minds changed by that review.

Maybe, but they're still idiots. Even if they are making indie popular, once it becomes popular, they'll deny that they like it because too many dumb ugly people listen to it.

If that were true, they'd shun artists like Radiohead and Bjork based on record sales alone. No, in general they praise things that deserve to be praised (and, to a lesser extent, trash things that actually suck).

[url]http://www.theantiher0.com/radioheadsucks.htm[/url]

Well I thought it was funny..

[QUOTE=Cobra_Loops]If that were true, they'd shun artists like Radiohead and Bjork based on record sales alone. No, in general they praise things that deserve to be praised (and, to a lesser extent, trash things that actually suck).[/QUOTE]

Not really. They have to keep up the image that they have a massively diverse taste, hence the fact that they have things like Beyonce and Nelly in their Top 10 singles of the 2000s. They can't be completely underground, or they'd look like a punk or black metal site or something, and everyone knows that those styles aren't intelligent. It all goes with the fact that they are positive that they are better than the rest of us. This argument could even work, some of the time, if it wasn't for the way in which their reviews are written...horribly.

All they ever seem to glorify on pitchfork is some mainsteam hip hop/r&b, electronica, and indie pop.

Correct me if im wrong.

[QUOTE=br3ad_man]Not really. They have to keep up the image that they have a massively diverse taste, hence the fact that they have things like Beyonce and Nelly in their Top 10 singles of the 2000s. They can't be completely underground, or they'd look like a punk or black metal site or something, and everyone knows that those styles aren't intelligent. It all goes with the fact that they are positive that they are better than the rest of us. This argument could even work, some of the time, if it wasn't for the way in which their reviews are written...horribly.[/QUOTE]

But you're acting like there's one Pitchfork collective brain and all the 20+ writers just sort of feed off it. I know for a fact that's not true; writers often put forth their opinions of albums that the "official" Pitchfork review completely disagrees with. As for the quality of the reviews, I find most media reviews to be unbearably written, and Pitchfork is far ahead of the game on that score. If you want to read crappy music reviews, head over to NME.

Maybe that's the case for some, even most reviews, but when it comes to things like lists and stuff, it's all the same. And they all write for the same website, their ways of thinking are bound to be similar, otherwise pitchfork wouldn't employ them.

[QUOTE=Zmev]All they ever seem to glorify on pitchfork is some mainsteam hip hop/r&b, electronica, and indie pop.

Correct me if im wrong.[/QUOTE]

*doesn't correct*

[QUOTE=Zmev]All they ever seem to glorify on pitchfork is some mainsteam hip hop/r&b, electronica, and indie pop.

Correct me if im wrong.[/QUOTE]
Plus all the latest indie trends. Freak-folk, or dance-punk, or whatever.

Although I think people get a bit too upset over pitchfork. I mean, that Frances the Mute review... it might seem harsh, but obviously the album won't appeal to everyone. I dig the album, but it's very easy to see why people would hate it (messy, pretentious, wanky).

And hey, they're not totally biased against TMV... they gave Tremulant a good review.

[QUOTE=Zmev]Hell I could put X's through alot of artists i dislike, but i duno how to do that moving avatar thing.[/QUOTE]

I'll do it for you next time you're on msn. That applies to anyone else who doesn't know how to do animated GIFs, i've got the week off so i'm bored.

[QUOTE=Tomahawk]And hey, they're not totally biased against TMV... they gave Tremulant a good review.[/QUOTE]

that was before their extreme "popularity." pitchfork doesnt like popular bands unless they make them popular in the first place.

Holy BALLS, Alt/Indie is slow this morning. Someone else liven this place up before I get back from classes.

/shakes fist

"I'm doing the lively dance, doing the lively dance. Lively lively lively. Doing the lively dance. Ooo yeaaah."

*does the lively dance* :cool:

buenas diaz :)

Hey hey. This is really strange; I have my Writing For Print News Media class right now, but no one's showed up for it yet.


:shifty:

because its a no school day :lol:

Maybe for [i]you[/i], Mr. No-Schooly McSchool.