JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

It's hilariously bad. Did Annie tell the band to just steal her sound and style?

that's sad

I think Annie's ex Carrie just fell for that sound and tried dragging Corin and Janet along for the ride, and they said yes, at least initially, because Brownstein is the famous one with clout.

Janet jumping ship obviously went against the plan but I can't blame her considering she wasn't allowed to do much on the album. Corin only being given 4 of the 11 tracks to sing lead on is mindboggingly stupid considering she's 5 times the singer Carrie is.

it's gonna get 7.7-8.0 because they know they can't pan a sleater-kinney album but they're not on sub pop anymore and st. vincent just posted some red scare-tier shit on her instagram

>and st. vincent just posted some red scare-tier shit on her instagram
Wow, you weren't kidding, lol. Posting that doesn't quite match with everything I know about S-K's politics either. Is this some 4D defense/cope strategy for her BFF Carrie for when the negative reviews start come piling in?

Remember when Clickhole had an article with an obviously fake St. Vincent quote and Annie got INCREDIBLY PISSED about it on twitter? She's lowkey kinda fucking dumb and no one has noticed

>try to pass Red as a classic
>didn't even review it when it came out

Is this them admitting they are clueless?

Sleater-Kinney have been out for a while user

oh good is this the start of the swift revisionism to pretend that the media hasn't fucking ripped on her for her whole career

It's ok for lefty trash rags to show support for Swift now since she cucked to the dems

Fantano. Both are cancerous but I see more zoomers aping Fantano than p4k.

>vogue releases an article featuring Taylor full of the usual ORANGE MAN BAD shit
>p4k reviews Taylor's catalog and gives her revisionist high scores, even though they never reviewed her albums on launch
>conveniently this happens just before Taylor is about to release a new album
>(((coincidentally))) both vogue and p4k are owned by conde nast

I mean this shit is so blatant it's pathetic. Only the most brainwashed of normie NPCs fall for this shit.

Attached: KE1jgqU.png (769x902, 857K)

>p4k the once absolute bastion of independent music journalism is now just another corporate fuck puppet

Why does this always happen lads? Why can't anyone keep their indie cred?

>too bad
Lmao nah, fuck them.

Indie music doesn't pay the bills.

Attached: 1506028842834.jpg (245x206, 10K)

reminder that they literally didn't even bother to review Anna von Hausswolf's Dead Magic last year

fantano wins

i remember having a vivid ass dream about them actually reviewing it, and they gave it an 8. but when i checked it was never there. weird shit

You missed one important thing, apparently the vogue article had some big feminist point about p4k not reviewing her albums but reviewing a cover. I'll bet that was the whole argument for them not reviewing Swift's albums being 'problematic'.

based
anti-white soiboys stay seething

>89610519
At least they got her best album right? I wouldn't have even known they did this if I didn't check this board though.
There's nothing inherently wrong or controversial about Vogue and p4k covering Taylor Swift when she has an album coming out. The press usually focuses on people when they're, well, doing things. It's blatant because it's supposed to be blatant, this is just how things work. The scores are inflated even for p4k's standards, sure, but pop fans don't need p4k to tell them Taylor Swift is good and indie fans in 2019 won't listen to p4k tell them Taylor Swift is good. This has nothing to do with trying to push her or sell anything, it's just p4k knowing they don't really have a defined audience anymore and doing something to try and stay relevant. And it worked, because we're talking about them.
Because the industry is always changing. And when it does, the old guard realizes that they're useless and decides that cashing out is better than fading out. Would you rather be poor and irrelevant or rich and irrelevant?

Attached: just_go_ahead_and.gif (250x188, 732K)

liberalism

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Her new album is coming out this week, obviously they'd want publicity. Still, lol.

a corporate like p4k cant trash or roast a dyke band, its bad for image.
even if its total shit. just like they can't trash trannycore

This but unironically

I agree. She Is dumb and not just a weird autistic genius like Byrne as she wants to belive

They really don't give a fuck anymore

Attached: MGMT.png (404x487, 401K)

>reason #1 : They are going to put Red into their top 100 albums of the decade, guaranteed.

>Reason 2 : They are hyping up her new album massively. Possibly even giving her a BNM 8.5+

>Reason 3 and most importantly, money money money

if that's winning then I want to lose

Or, It’s a fucking pitchfork, the three arrows face downward

Attached: 24ECCDC8-F36F-4439-9D4A-CCEB84F0B662.jpg (937x928, 41K)

He is revolting. Pitchfork is just wrong.

Oh I get it fuck me

I was actually thinking the opposite of #2. They’re gassing up her old albums to make their review for her new one look worse in comparison lol

That Vogue writer called them out for never reviewing any of her music until Ryan Adams did his ~*~srs~*~ (and bad) cover album of 1989. It’s pretty transparent that they are reacting to that, especially in last bid for music culture relevance.

That Fantano prick really took their whole following. Don’t know why anyone cares him either though. I can’t bare to watch his videos, his voice is too ugly anyways.

delusion, even in the 90s Pitchfork was contrarianism hipster clickbait

Shark fully jumped

didnt they shit on you need to calm down though

They were also called out in a Vogue article for reviewing Ryan Adam's cover of 1989 but never reviweing Taylor's original version.

ITT: people who have never listened to Red

cringe

Are they gonna pretend that she is actually a good artist like they do with all those shitty rappers?

Cope

if you think Taylor is bad, you should jump off of a cliff into a dumpster that is on fire

>Red=CTTE
Yeah because that totally makes sense

Attached: 2DE56C30-4A10-4B77-97D2-648617229042.jpg (516x726, 109K)

it's a literal pitchfork, you fucking retard.

What is that image from?

>once absolute bastion of independent music journalism

Attached: 342677.png (266x363, 258K)

The is nothing compared to how they had 2 front page pieces on Claro clearly written by her PR team in a year but ok.

seethe

>it's real
what the fuck where they thinking

Condenastfork needs more clicks

Pitchfork is worse
However I still dislike fantano

Of course they were gonna give a satanic country singer high scores. It's kind of their bag.

Red: 9.8
1989: 9.0
speak now: 9.5
Fearless 9.5

fuck pitchfork

Pitchfork is worse but Fantano has a far worse following

she's pointing at us...

I always liked Fantano but his latest uploads that focus on controversial music stuff, the dj khaled thing etc have taken him down a notch for me. I've actually noticed it with multiple youtubers I used to keep up with. Some guys I would watch everyday have started doing new content and changing formats, I realized it's because they have put themselves in a position where they HAVE to do YouTube as a job and therefore they HAVE to keep up with younger crowds because inevitably their audience will grow away from watching YouTube constantly and will no longer give them the views they're used to. YouTube is still so new I'm interested to see what happens to these kinds of guys another decade from now, if their content has completely altered or they just stop altogether due to losing relevance.

TAYLOR SWIFT PITCHFORK APPROVES

LOOKS LIKE THE HATERS GONNA HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE

Attached: 410E88B9-66D0-4E6D-9377-A1C749CF239B.jpg (1125x1280, 542K)

Reminder that Pitchfork has never reviewed a Type O Negative album to avoid giving them press

Reputation: 10
S/t: 7.5

Attached: D5164C47-72B7-49CA-86A3-0414F7483D44.jpg (477x477, 29K)

Why,?

I don't think Type O Negative have even released a new album since Pitchfork started.

Uncool macho mysoginistic and metal. Pitchfork, even 15 years ago, were an indie place, Type O Negative was like the complete opposite of them.
I dont think it was an active boycott, more like they were completely uninterested in them

This is absolutely nothing compared to their war with MIA.

Peter Steele is too good for Pitchfork

Pitchfork exists since like 1998. Type O Negative released 3 albums after Pitchfork's debut
The reviews of Brent Dicrescenzo around the year 2000 were hilarious

>The experience and emotions tied to listening to Kid A are like witnessing the stillborn birth of a child while simultaneously having the opportunity to see her play in the afterlife on Imax.

Attached: laughing.webm (1280x720, 2.75M)

>it's real

Attached: 453426.jpg (634x906, 126K)

Cringe shit

KC's Red is bretty gud

This is some Voight-Kampff shit

>While browsing social media you happen upon a music review of the newest indie rock record. It contains the line, "The experience and emotions tied to listening to Kid A are like witnessing the stillborn birth of a child while simultaneously having the opportunity to see her play in the afterlife on Imax." How do you react, user?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 82K)

How's Stereogum?

Pitchfork reviews of older albums are worthless, they always inflate the scores. They've been doing that for a long, long time. They still have some credibility in my book when it comes to reviewing newer albums. Their last 10 was 9 years ago and their last 9.5 was 6 years ago.

Kek

Marginally better. Still with some woke stuff here and there

cringe

Taylor Swift is a legitimately amazing artist. If you're incel enough to think otherwise and just subconsciously go "Airhead blonde make pop music bout boys lol that's not death grips" then you really need to get yourself checked out and realise decent music when you hear it. She's an incredible talent, and one that can't be undermined simply because of her immense fame.

say what you want about fantano but he wouldn't pull pathetic shit like this

Go back to neopets.com you zoomer

Why hasn't Scaruffi rated her albums?

why did they keep him on for so long?
if theres an old pitchfork review that pisses you off it was probably by him

>It's easier to hate a person than a faceless corporation
Fantano bad, Pitchfork bad, are you fucking retarded?

God fucking damn look how low they fall, they didn't even review her in 2013 to look tough and alternative in front of kanye west fags. What surprises me the most is that she's not even as big as Britney Spears for fucks sake, I don't think she even gets in the "timeless pop culture icon". Here in Latin america you barely hear her shitty songs on the radio or being talked about in the kids/teenager circuit. She had a little run and that's all.

I like all these albums, but christ those are some inflated scores. Red is also an objective step down from Speak Now, the amount of filler alone makes me shocked that anyone would consider it her best.

P4k also hasn’t said a word about the AOTY (or about Drab Majesty at all, at any point)

Attached: BB292A4B-95AB-4878-90AC-F15E112E0C07.jpg (1200x1200, 453K)

....yeah, I know that. It's a slight transformation of the symbol.
Oh, come on, you're telling me a lefty music rag wouldn't slightly transform a lefty revolutionary symbol in order to dog whistle and be subversive? Is that really such a crazy idea? "Dude let's just flip it around to it looks like a pitchfork and then we'll call ourselves Pitchfork the filthy capitalis will never know!" I'm not staying that's for sure what happened but it's also not out of the question.

What exactly is amazing about Taylor Swift that sets her apart from other pop stars? I’ve heard plenty of her music and sure, she isn’t quite as faceless sounding as many pop stars today but she’s not doing anything beyond competent.

Who'd your rather have standing next to you at the Drab Majesty show, cute goth girls or trend-chasing P4K dweebs?

Taylor swift the rich attractive white girl is soooo oppressed

dumb fucking idiot all these mainstream pop stars have a literal army of writers and producers making their music

they're just a pretty face to put on the finished product

Everyone in the media hate her or ignored her because they thought she was a closeted republican supporter. Now that she has come out in support of the dems suddenly the entire media loves her and her albums are classics.

Give me a fucking break

p4k is a way more massive sellout

i don't think so, sweetie

>pitchfork yelling at white males.jpg

ST VINCENT PLAYS 4D CHESS??!?

This, she traded all her Republican fans for a Hillary Clinton style shill campaign from increasingly irrelevant media outlets. She seems to be very insecure and obsessive about her public image and I think all the backlash in recent years got under her skin to the point where she craved positive press at all costs even if it cost her money in the long run.

Like it or not, it's exactly what happened

Blame Conde Nast. They also own Vogue and Taylor is on their September issue.

based. all of those albums has a lot of great songs

Geeze, whats so good about RED? .....

you need to go back

they're all reviewed by different people, so I wouldnt take the differences in scores to heart
go back to where, you fuckhead? your mother's anus?

back to re*dit

quality in any artform is nieche, if you want to make money you have to appeal to the plebs.

ok retard

I'll just leave this here.

Attached: pitchforkcoil.png (665x326, 146K)

Attached: pitchforkviolator.png (670x323, 151K)

Fantano because I used to actually like him

In terms of at least what I think is amazing about her is that she is completely unlike any other pop star, her songs are so pure of heart regardless of what sonic landscape they land into, be it country ballad or dubstep pop catchy banger, the moral in every track has always centred around isolation, heartbreak, love, loneliness and am I good enough under any of these circumstances. Artists like her do not become as famous as her without any remarkable talent, it's her passion for her craft that has set her apart from any other top 40 artist and is what still has her relevant in pop culture today and she has constantly progressed stylistically, artistically and thematically in each record.

It is far easier to believe that, because that is an urban myth surrounding pop music with only few and far between exceptions and if you do believe that of someone of Taylor Swifts caliber, to be able to have such an impact and to have stayed relevant for nearly a decade with every album, you're the idiot in this situation my friend.

>It's real

WTF

If more than 80% of an artists album covers are their face or body they are almost always trash,

what the fuck does this even mean, is my post the one you were supposed to reply to?

fantano has given positive reviews of pop music before, but he wouldn't retrospectively try and look woke by reviewing a bunch of teenage pop albums to make a multi-millionaire white girl who has been famous for over a decade happy

this. Why not let the music speak for itself?

do pitchfork readers not realize the reputation the website has had since...forever? i first found out about them in like 2004 browsing gaia online cause a lot of people were making fun of them

That can be said for any music release with some sort of album/single art. It portrays a certain image, and there's many artists that use it as a tactic to attract autists such as

yeah but I find the body and face to be a distraction, and women use sexiness to sell music rather than the music itself. Taylor is pretty hot for example

They gave Pet Sounds a 7.5.

Attached: 7L6LWIF.png (475x257, 53K)

And Taylor Swift gets a 9?! The website is busted.

Just found it Iaying around, I guess

Attached: 1566138854064.jpg (1600x756, 333K)