The writers of the 'Fork are a bunch of elitist music snobs, but we secretly love it. So here's just a fun little game, if anyone is interested in playing. Simply, for upcoming releases we each take a shot at guessing the rating that Pitchfork will award.
Scoring: 3 points for an exact guess, and 1 point to the AM'er who guesses the closest. The winner then chooses the next album. I'll routinely post a running tally of the score. Yeah?
So, who knows their Pitchfork ratings?
ALBUM #1: The Decemberists - THE HAZARDS OF LOVE
(Deadline for guesses is 48 hours from the timestamp of this post, or when the review is posted... whichever comes first.)
I don't particularly like the Decemberists, in fact, I've gotten rid of both albums that I've ever owned of theirs. That said, I know Pitchfork loves 'em (even though I'm not entirely sure where they stand on indie ambition in the form of a storytelling concept record). Plus, it's received decent reviews so far (which is probably irrelevant; like Pitchfork cares less what other publications ratings are!)
That's funny Bill, but also true. For whatever reason, they seem to follow up high ratings with low-to-average ones. Damn... now I'm beginning to rethink my 8.4. haha
I'm liking the turnout so far! It'd be nice to see a few more guys on board though.
Yeah I'm guessing a lower rating than their last few albums because of the reason Bill said. The next album will have to be unusually great to warrant anything above an 8.3.
Sorry I thought it came out March 26th not May 26th so I figured it would be reviewed next week. I haven't even listened to it yet but judging from all they hype it seems to be getting, I'm guessing it will get a high rating from Pitchfork.
I'm not a fan of Pitchfork, but I do think a lot of the ones that get great ratings from them are great albums, so I take a look at their 'best new music' section every so often.
Just, they give unfairly low ratings to any album that doesn't fit their mold. They're like the other side of the 'Rolling Stone' coin. Anything Pitchfork gives an unfairly high rating to, Rolling Stone will give an unfairly low rating to, and vice versa.
Peter Bjorn & John. I don’t know much of their stuff, but they don’t strike me as a band that has a 9.0+ album in them. But, they’re also too fashionable to justify Pitchfork giving them anything under a 5.0. I’ll hedge my bets with a 6.2 (meaning, we’re probably not going to see this one on many year-end best-ofs.)
Yeah Yeah Yeahs. I’m leery of the red herrings: they hail from indie-mecca NYC, the record’s only 10 songs deep (an LP length that critics seem to like), the sleeve is wonderfully clever. Then there’s the title -- “It’s Blitz!” – which just screams to be put on year-end lists. All the tell-tale signs of a classic are there, but this one could go any way. Either Pitchfork’s going to see through the façade and go for shock value with a low number (which they’re not above doing), or, since they haven’t yet awarded any previous YYYs album a crazy high rating, they could put some serious points on the board. But they’ll only do this if the album’s a real barnburner – something adventurous enough to warrant it. Or, they could just give it a nice average rating and send it on its way. I'll go with that -- "Blitz" is probably somewhere between paint-by-numbers YYYs and amazing, so I expect an appopriate rating of 7.5.
Yeah Yeah Yeahs are in that group of bands like the White Stripes that Pitchfork sees as Judases for having any amount of mainstream success.
I'm listening to the Decemberists album now. I can't decide how I feel about it. *All the positive and negative reviews are all right. It has a lot of great music on it, but it's also poorly paced with a lot of strangely out of place guest vocals and guitar riffs.
can someone help me out? up to maybe even five years ago, the pitchfork writers had a little guide on the side explaining their ratings system. 10 was "essential" 9.7-9.9 was "excellent" or something like that...finding out what these were would make their ratings less arbitrary for me AND help me geek out and think about how I would maybe rank something according to that system. Does anyone have a copy of this they can post?
Papa Roach would be funny but I'm not sure they will rate it, so my call is on The Thermals new album (Now We Can See).
(Grizzli Bear was a very good call too but I don't know when it will be released)
I quite liked their previous album with some good songs and a marvelous one (A Pillar of Salt) but seemed quite limited, many of the songs were almost the same riffs played with different speed.
Thermals - 7.4
PB&J - I am really disappointed with the single and PF gave it a fairly lukewarm review, so if the single is any indication, I would say they’ll give it a 6.3.
M.L. scores the second perfect guess of this competition with a dead-on balls accurate 7.8. Good stuff! Three points comin' your way. And collectively, this is the closest we've been yet, despite a few of us (yours truly included) taking shots in the dark.
I'll go with 7.0 for Lady Sovereign. She's got a cover of The Cure - Close To Me on the album that sounds pretty intriguing. Other that that I don't know much about it.
I pick The Rakes - Klang
Clearly less good than Capture/Release. I think it is better than Ten New Messages but I don't think Pitchfork will like it much. 5.4
A 5.6 for Lady Sovereign. If there's two things that Pitchfork doesn't look highly upon, it's auto-tune and albums that are all over the place. A quick read of the Wikipedia article hints that this one's guilty of both.
For The Rakes, I doubt Pitchfork will be able to get past the atrocious song titles: "The Loneliness of the Outdoor Smoker", "Woes of the Working Woman", and especially, ""Bitchin' in the Kitchin'". They'll probably give the album a 5.2 on that alone.
M.L. scores a single point for a another win, and our collective deviation of 2.7 is the furthest we've been yet. It seems the latest offering from Ms. Sovereign is a lot worse than what we thought it would be.
M.L -- kindly choose another album, good sir. And since Pitchfork (strangely) still hasn't reviewed The Rakes - "Klang", I'm going to throw out a second album for everyone's consideration: Mars Volta - "Octahedron", due for release in five days. My knowledge of this band is about as deep as a kiddie pool, but this album seems like a good choice for this game.
Hopefully everyone is still on board after that extended absence! And any newcomers that want to join in are definitely welcome to!