Originally posted by muschi:are you still here?
dont any musicians friggin play their instruments anymore?!
Demolish Nissan Pavilion...the Coldplay thread.
i dont see anybody else here. you talkin ta me?
you know, ever since I left the Coldplay show at 10 PM and saw the miles of cars still waiting to get in, I've thought long & hard about this one
as horrible as that was, did the 25,000 people that bought tickets not know what they were getting into when they bought the tickets, or were they all from out of town?
as horrible as that was, did the 25,000 people that bought tickets not know what they were getting into when they bought the tickets, or were they all from out of town?
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:Part of why this happens is that there are many more albums released than movies, so for a reviews to be written about all of them would be time consuming. Since personal music tastes tend to more specific, why would a reviewer want to listen to and write about something they aren't going to like and give a bad review. CMJ New Music Monthly was asked once why their reviews were mainly postive, and the answer was why review something we hate. Any number of outlets could trash the numerous self recorded and released records they get swamped with.
Music criticism has become too polite. just look at metacritic. All those albums, and only one (Alanis Morrisette) has a negative rating. Look at the film and DVD ratings and you see plenty of red.
And most outlets tend to specialize in "critisism" of a specific genre, be it indie rock, alt-country, emo, commercial rock, etc so reviews tend to be more positive and cheerleading. Bigger sites serve more as filters for it's readership.
Maybe some more point/counterpoint reviews are in order, or just let econo review stuff he'll trash anything :D
Concerts are more likely to be trashed than a record…
Originally posted by Seth Hurwitz:If you're not a regular to a place like Nissan (and I don't know anyone who is, except perhaps my friends who hit Jimmy Buffett every year, and they get there at like 2:00 p.m.), how could anyone know to expect a 3 hour drive from the District or Arlington?
as horrible as that was, did the 25,000 people that bought tickets not know what they were getting into when they bought the tickets, or were they all from out of town?
Someone already made the point – next time go to Philly! I've never been to Nissan since my 2.5 hour trek out for Pearl Jam a couple years ago. As mentioned, I'll go for the reunited Smiths or Replacements. That's it.
Part of why this happens is that there are many more albums released than movies, so for a reviews to be written about all of them would be time consuming. Since personal music tastes tend to more specific, why would a reviewer want to listen to and write about something they aren't going to like and give a bad review. CMJ New Music Monthly was asked once why their reviews were mainly postive, and the answer was why review something we hate. Any number of outlets could trash the numerous self recorded and released records they get swamped with.Sure, but Metacritic has some minimum number (6?) of reviews that an album must get from a list of recognized publications, so its not just random favorites of particular writers.
There are over 100 albums listed on the site, meaning that out of 100 albums reviewed by six or more publications, less than 1% of them are rated "below average." That just doesn't jive with reality.
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:I hear what you're saying, K, but god knows there are as many (if not more) crap indie albums than great indie albums. Even within a genre, shouldn't there be more variance? It is one thing I like about Pitchfork – they're not afraid to trash an album.
And most outlets tend to specialize in "critisism" of a specific genre, be it indie rock, alt-country, emo, commercial rock, etc so reviews tend to be more positive and cheerleading. Bigger sites serve more as filters for it's readership.
Coming from the south, getting to Nissan is never that bad, no matter how late I try and get there. I go up 234 (I think) and take a left on wellington, and there's never, ever any traffic until that point, and from there it's only 20 minutes even if packed.
I always seem to luck out leaving as well. I think it only took me 20-30 minutes to get out of the parking lot to leave after Coldplay, and I didn't run out afterwards or anything (and again, going down 234 instead of 66 means there's virtually no one else around).
I always seem to luck out leaving as well. I think it only took me 20-30 minutes to get out of the parking lot to leave after Coldplay, and I didn't run out afterwards or anything (and again, going down 234 instead of 66 means there's virtually no one else around).
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:
Originally posted by [username edited by p.c. moderator]:
Originally posted by jesse:Yeah, seven songs is always much better then those seven songs plus ten more. ;)
Coldplay set @ hfstival > coldplay set friday night
Originally posted by Bags:The one thing I find most amusing about Pitchfork is they'll often be just nasty to a record, calling the band/singer washed up and not have anything good to say, then they'll give it a 5 or 6. 5 or 6!?! Isn't that above average according to their rating scale?
It is one thing I like about Pitchfork – they're not afraid to trash an album.
most music reviews tend to find something to recommend about an album, and it's usually for fans of a particular style of music to findout about a record. which is why most of the records on metacritic fall in the green zone. there obviously records that receive critical acclaim or trashing as the case maybe.
the metacritic film section is much like rottentomatoes in that it uses a specific list of publications and reviewers, whereas there is no such list for the music reviews.
the metacritic film section is much like rottentomatoes in that it uses a specific list of publications and reviewers, whereas there is no such list for the music reviews.
Originally posted by [username edited by p.c. moderator]:i thought it worked more like a grading scale. like a 7.0 is a c-
Originally posted by Bags:The one thing I find most amusing about Pitchfork is they'll often be just nasty to a record, calling the band/singer washed up and not have anything good to say, then they'll give it a 5 or 6. 5 or 6!?! Isn't that above average according to their rating scale?
It is one thing I like about Pitchfork – they're not afraid to trash an album.
Originally posted by kosmo vinyl:Q: Which critics and publications are included in your calculations?
the metacritic film section is much like rottentomatoes in that it uses a specific list of publications and reviewers, whereas there is no such list for the music reviews.
A: See the lists below. Several times each year, we will reevaluate our publication lists and may make additions and/or deletions.
Music:
All Music Guide
Almost Cool
Alternative Press*
Amazon.com
Austin Chronicle
Billboard
Blender*
cokemachineglow
Delusions of Adequacy
Dot Music
Drawer B
Drowned In Sound
Dusted Magazine
E! Online
Entertainment Weekly
Filter*
Flak Magazine
The Guardian
Junkmedia
Los Angeles Times
Lost At Sea
Magnet*
Mojo*
musicOMH.com
New Musical Express
New York Magazine
New York Times
neumu
No Ripcord
The Onion (A.V. Club)
Paste Magazine
Pitchfork
Planet*
Playlouder
Pop Matters
Prefix Magazine
Q Magazine*
Resonance*
Rolling Stone
ShakingThrough.net
Slant Magazine
Spin*
Splendid
Stylus Magazine
Tiny Mix Tapes
Trouser Press
Uncut*
Under The Radar*
Urb*
Vibe*
Village Voice
The Wire*
http://www.metacritic.com/about/scoring.shtml
I'm kind of surprised that a band like Travis never made it to where Coldplay is. If Coldplay can do this well in the States, then it's a bit of a puzzlement to me that Travis (who write better songs, are way more fun and funny, and cuter too) never found that audience that would take them to bigger venues and more album sales. They have more charisma and aren't as much of a downer. Of course, that last record of theirs was utter crap, but they had some decent songs early on, especially "Good Feeling" which is a great record.
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:Not unless they changed it. They used to have a box detailing it, and I remember distinctly "5.0 - Average."
i thought it worked more like a grading scale. like a 7.0 is a c-
yeah that box is gone
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:Which I didn't realize until I went to check the exact words when you asked. Perhaps they've changed their review scale?
yeah that box is gone
point taken… but the music reviews aren't broken out like the movie reviews are…
maybe what we need is a metametacritic.com site, so that go through the scores and toss out anomolies.
i.e. there are only two reviews above 90 forDCFC, toss them and the score dips below 60.
also a weighting system could be assigned to each review, based on whether on not publication has reviewed that artist before.
maybe what we need is a metametacritic.com site, so that go through the scores and toss out anomolies.
i.e. there are only two reviews above 90 forDCFC, toss them and the score dips below 60.
also a weighting system could be assigned to each review, based on whether on not publication has reviewed that artist before.
Originally posted by [username edited by p.c. moderator]:i don't know. i don't really pay attention to the little scale thing (if its like a 10 or a 0 or something maybe), but i went to check too. was always kind of an assumption on my part
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:Which I didn't realize until I went to check the exact words when you asked. Perhaps they've changed their review scale?
yeah that box is gone
Originally posted by [username edited by p.c. moderator]:ratings key
Originally posted by god's shoeshine:Which I didn't realize until I went to check the exact words when you asked. Perhaps they've changed their review scale?
yeah that box is gone
10.0: A reissue from the late '70s / early '80s that no one could get away with dissing you for owning (even if they WERE sick of it 4 years ago)
9.5-9.9: Flaming Lips, White Stripes and Radiohead – ALL JAMMING TOGETHER!
9.0-9.4: You must post your love for this record on EVERY message board on earth
8.5-8.9: Inspirational, maybe even to the point of motivating you to move out of your parents' basement
8.0-8.4: Worth leaving your dorm room to buy (remember to bring sunglasses, natural feels way different than fluorescent)
7.5-7.9: Try to review a record of this caliber without saying 'hipster' or 'tousled hair', I dare you
7.0-7.4: Worth downloading (Reminder: finish term paper on the effects of file sharing on the music industry)
6.0-6.9: Maybe we should put together a book of all our reviews because they're way too hard to find on our website. Paper is the new internet!
5.0-5.9: Burn a copy from the radio station where your lab partner works
4.0-4.9: Something we liked last year, but SO isn't this year
3.0-3.9: A Sub Pop release from the mid to late '90s (BURNED!)
2.0-2.9: Tribute album
1.0-1.9: I got kicked out of a band that sounded like this
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible but for some reason we're still reviewing it