![]() ![]() Many of which (stand the test of time) can be found here on Collapse Board and other music websites and forums, even some independent magazines. ![]() Granted, there are some amazing reviews and music writing going around. ![]() However, it’s far too often I find myself sitting on the net reading music websites or laying on my bedroom floor with Blonde on Blonde spinnin’ at 33rpm, flicking through magazines reading these reviews, thinking that the connection between listener and musician is being lost by some 100 word synopsis that should only be welcomed in music if each record were some 12 page children’s picture book and it was the description blurb on the back, under the ugly picture of the old, boring and plain looking author. On one side, I understand the why it is important to have up-to-the-minute reviews and thoughts of all the latest albums by critics who spend their entire day listening to new music with only half an ear – sometimes society is just too stupid to make up their own minds so they rely on those with (assumingly) more credibility and somewhat of an idea of what “the right thing to be listening to” is to inform them on what record they should spend their spare $18 a week on. But first, you must understand how I currently see music journalism eventually becoming no different than a re-printed press release. Here is where I feel a majority of modern day music journalism sucks, especially where I share mixed thoughts, and why I feel it is my responsibility to do those editors a favour and retract all the negative Simple Math reviews that were posted in haste on their website/magazine, through reviewing the album myself, with hindsight and a number of listens in mind. These people wish their editors weren’t so far up their arse on deadlines that they had some more time to, you know, actually criticise or pass an opinion on the music (not the band) instead of pumping out thoughtless, passionless, half-arsed 250 word reviews, all so their thoughts can be heard before an album is released to the public (or very soon after the albums release). These people wish they had hindsight (I would hope). Especially the douche at Pitchfork who wrote, “Manchester Orchestra simply plod instead of groove” about the American four piece alternative rock band, and that one guy at PASTE Magazine who said that absolutely nothing they do is original, stating, “the Atlanta quintet are plagiarising their way through rock history, lifting from Bright Eyes’ hyper-literate folk one minute and Nirvana’s tuneful alt-grunge the next” in his review about their new album, Simple Math. Hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn’t it? It’s something that we music writers don’t have the luxury of living with although it’s something I’m sure every critic would love to have. I often wonder whether music critics look back at their work and and think, “Did I really say that? I must have been on crack. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |