|
Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
08-31-2010, 10:27 AM | #4313 (permalink) |
Engorged Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,536
|
They have some good songs. But they are definitely a product of P4K hype.
__________________
last.fm | my collection on RYM | vinyl instagram @allthatyouseeandhear I'd love to see your signature/links too, but the huge and obnoxious ones have caused me to block all signatures. |
08-31-2010, 10:38 AM | #4314 (permalink) |
Basscadet
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 1,258
|
P4K hype killed a lot of good bands.
I only read it because I want to know what's up with my favourite bands. I'm also happy that they leaked new Panda Bear tracks. that's the only reason I read it. |
08-31-2010, 11:44 AM | #4320 (permalink) |
Music Addict
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A State of Denial
Posts: 357
|
To say Pitchfork hype killed good bands... I dunno. It implies that the quality of the music changes based on who likes it. I have a problem with that. Either they're good bands/songs or they're not.
I suppose perception of something can change based on who's talking about it, what they're saying, how much it's around, whatever. But that's perception--it's something after-the-fact and which every listener has their own control over. Blaming a 'zine or scene or whatever for that is just sort of... lazy, not to mention it opens the door for "social currency" and "myth of cool" arguments. I dunno. My unpopular opinion, I guess, is that Pitchfork is fine. They're a magazine tailored to a specific clientele and serve the needs of that clientele very well.
__________________
Like carnivores to carnal pleasures, so were we to desperate measures... |
|