Nah, sorry, pitchfork don't know shit about music, maybe a few of their CONTRIBUTORS will write about good bands like Gaji or Limited Express (Has Gone?), but collectively.. I mean, this is a site that gave Source Tags and Codes a 10 and NYC Ghosts and Flowers a 0... that alone proves something to me.

you know, i'm not a huge fan of nycg&f, but i gotta agree with atsonicpark. those cats know jack about music.

you all talk as if music is objective. the whole entertainment of lists is the ourage because, as of my afformentioned fact proves, you'll never agree with it. I don't really buy much recent music and have no real interest in keeping up with the times because nobody knows what is shit or good, it's rare that I really love something and history is a better litmus test normally. It just makes people think they're cool... There will be another list next year - but hey! At least it wasnt nearly as corney looking as the rolling stones list.

totally agree, i like 3 out of the top 10 records, and only one of the wud be near the top 10 (animal collective)

Of course making lists is ridiculous and no one will ever totally agree with them -- but Pitchfork made a completely safe, predictable list that everyone saw coming from a while away.

Pitchfork is some kind of "voice" in indie rock, for whatever reason, and they have lots of power and say over what sells -- how daring would it have been for them to talk about Experimental Dental School or Cerberus Shoal or (((microwaves))) or Mong Hang or something sometimes? You know, REAL music that is good and unique -- not the dicksucking sub-mainstream bullshit they constantly cover. I've noticed that almost every really good album pitchfork reviews gets somewhere in the 7 range... you know, the bands that don't pay Pitchfork for ad space. You ever notice how the bands who do pay (Les Savy Fav and Bloc Party for lack of better examples currently) for ads on their site get the best scores?

I love lists, I completely agreed with many picks from Rock N Rolla magazine, for example, and I agreed with many of Pauly's picks. But pitchfork's list is fucking AWFUL.

Doesn't mean much to me.

they have 'power' because they update their site constantly and get news instantly...so they have traffic... and they got me into AC... i still hardly read them, i just do it mostly to see where they put people on these lists, and if it affects the musicians' popularity in any way... markets are fascinating to me. also, I agree with their #1. last year was the Knife [which sucked], but this year they got it right.

you people praise pitchfork as if it were a deity
fuck that.

yeah, what a shock, their choices. hipster bullshit.

and val: vision swim, i liked it better when it was called phaedra.

probably it's just me but strawberry jam is like 3 amazing songs with a ton of filler.

what are the 3 amazing songs?

ill agree in that its less of a cohesive album than Feels, but the high points might make up for that.

No, it's not just you. The first half of strawberry jam sucks.

I think Battles is an excellent choice, though.

peacebone, for reverend green and cuckoo cuckoo.

and that point you make, well, it's just that there were records that have more than three songs as high points with almost no filler, so that kinda pushes it down.

yeah i agree...except that there's at least 5 high points on SJ...actually 6... actually i like all the songs...though i could see if some people didnt like #1, or UM, or WW.... Chores, Fireworks, and Derek are my 3 fave tracks though.

You're right, but compared to French music magazines like Rock'n'folk and Les inrockuptibles I think pitchfork is finally not that bad :D

Its phrases like this that wind me up about this website, but it is good for news.

What I'll never understand is why some of you folks make such a big fuss about what pitchfork write.

to be fair to my good self i havent read any of their reviews in full for a while, but i dipped into the list and started reading their entry for the new Wu Tang Clan album and that little phrase turned up, which is why i dont bother. its not what they like, its just how they write.

Pretty impressed that "King Khan and His Shrines- What Is?!" made it to #33.

I don't have too strong an opinion on Pitchfork either way. It's just a music website...

Stated perfectly...you have to wonder, do they just have weak taste in music or is it a conscious decisison to be mediocre?

I bet they eat a lot of hot pockets.