Pitchforkmedia.com

I am interested in how many sg members check out the site. It has grown in content and has drastically improved its layouts a lot in the past couple of years. Who browses the news, articles and reviews they post?

i dont always agree with the reviews, but usually theyre pretty decent. decent news, though not enough of it, and they have some pretty rad interviews. im not digging the new layout that much.

I am a compulsive Pitchfork reader, I check the site just about every day. If you are neurotic about indie music, as I am, it's nice to know that there are others out there like you, and that these people have put together website devoted to said neurosis. The reviews are quality, if a little too pretentious for thier own good at times. What annoys me the most is when reviewers go to lenths to start out with some sort of gimmick or hook and just have to work it in whenever possible, even if the connection to the music is weak or nonexistent. Still, you can't beat Pitchfork when it comes to well informed reviews of obscure music. You get the feeling that, unlike in the mainstream press, these people live and breathe indie music, and are fully aweare that indie = independent = grassroots and real. They maintain a refreshing degree of skepticism when it comes to the corporate media hype machine. Even if they are snotty smary-pantses. Gotta luv em.

thumbs up

pitchfork rotates sg banners, don't they?

That site is so far up it's own arse it's a wonder they can actually hear any music.

i looooooove pitchfork, i read it pretty much every morning. i don't even listen to half of the shit they review, most of it just isn't interesting to me, but i love reading good writing about music, and they're about the best i've found on the web. i've read so many music reviews that consist of "x band sounds like y band mixed with z band, if they were playing in blah blah blah style. if you like y and z, you'll like x." pitchfork's writers are funny and fresh even when they're handed huge steaming piles of shit. and when they really love an album, it shows... their review of the slanted and enchanted reissue made me want to love that album, even though i've owned it for years and it never really grabbed me. their passion for music is infectious and inspiring.

and their letters section is hilarious.

I see it about once or twice a week. deffinately the best music news site.

When refering to a band I usually use their reviews. A lot people will say they are wrong but I totally disagree. They're album reviews are usually the most honest unbiased appoarch you can turn to. Also, alot people like shitty music so they have a problem because they tell you its shitty. I spend all my time and money on music so I hold my opinion very highly and I'd say I agree with them 90% of the time.

Right now, I can only recall two albums that got reviews I disapproved with. The Vines got a great review and lets face it that album blew hard. Death Cab For Cutie's photoalbum got like a 6.5 but I think it deserved atleast an 7.5 to an 8.

The new rainer maria is pretty damn terrible though I don't know what they gave.

I can't stand pitchfork.

Besides hearing about music and news and such from my radio station, I think one of the best places for good and "obscure" music that would humble the people at pitchfork is Aquarius Records. It's a records store in SF, and probably one of the best in the world, and they review music every week (Friday to be exact), and you can sign up for them to email you reviews of new records every Friday. And they review more records in a week than pitchfork does. And you can listen to samples of songs!

i love em...even when i disagree i think they are funny and way better than 99% all the other crap out there

So far I haven't found anything better for indie music reviews. Since I rarely see any of my indie-loving friends nowadays it's the only real source I've got, although sometimes I hear about some good stuff on this board.

I'm still never going to forgive them for some reviews. (the Strokes got a 9.1! That'sway too much credit.)

as lame as this may sound to you too cool for life folks, i like the strokes. the album is solid. it is catchy and artistic even if you dont think it is credible. i can enjoy it and that goes a long way. 9.1 may be high but it is not far off. they usually do pretty well on album reviews, even if they keep losing staff.

i'm always 50/50 on pitchfork. I have been reading it for a long time, and a couple good friends of mine used to write for them. Basically, I use it to see what music is coming out, or what new stuff has just come out, but their review are pretty bad. you can expect good reviews (as in, quality reviews) of most of the super indie stuff.. but the closer to mainstream the band is, the more bias their review is going to be.

as they've grown, they've gotten more writers (therefore, more people to potentially dissagree with) so naturally i don't trust them absolutely, but overall its a good place to check out to help keep up on things.

i give it a thumbs up.

oh, and their subheadlngs for the news blurbs are usually good for a chuckle. hehe

pitchfork isn't biased against the mainstream. they voted interpol's album as their album of the year and gave the strokes and the white stripes high ratings. and they routinely pan boring underground shit. they're heavy handed and often flat out wrong, but it's hard to see how you could really say they're biased...

Yeah, I agree sometimes they are dead wrong but i don't think its too often. Like others have mentioned they give too high of ratings to some mainstream acts and occasionally too low on the the underground. The Strokes album was alittle over-rated although I think it deserved a 8.0. The Vines album was highly over-rated. They gave it like a 9 too. I think it deserved a good 3.0.

The only act from the underground(or atleast when the albums came out) that was under-rated I can think of is old bright eyes. They were giving poor conner like 3s and 4s.

However, I'm sure there are more but I have read tons of them and I can't think of any off my head.

They gave the isis album a great review in which in fully deserved. That album is wonderful.

It may have been a bit overboard to call the site bias, but I do think that there are certain folk doing reviews that have a bias attitude. Then again, it could just be chalked up to opinion and taste; which would be why they have more than one writer.

That, or I'm just bias when it comes to music, which makes my view of everything else jaded

hehe, i know the feeling

I read it every day (what else am I gonna do at work?), and, while sometimes an album's review doesn't reflect its rating (or vice versa), the tone of their news section is priceless.

I read them all the time. It's one of the few music sites that reviews all the obscure electronica I listen to. I find myself agreeing with their critics a lot of the time, too.

i really like the site...one of the few semi-specialized media places that many people enjoy...thumbs up

HA! i had already replied to this thread...but i was stoned. so i forgot. read my opinion twice damnit.