Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
"Long Distance Drunk" wrote:Heck, I’ve already met a girl who likes Guided by Voices, Built to Spill AND Sleater-Kinney.
My god, if she has all her limbs and isn’t mentally retarded it’s 98% of us guy’s dream gal.
I thought it was better to allude to the bands biggest hits then their best songs. Besides, I don’t think you would have gotten my sly "pennies" reference.
No, I’ll be in Detroit from the 14th-22nd. If I was there on the 26th I’d definitely go to the Motor City Bowl.
No, I’ll be in Detroit from the 14th-22nd. If I was there on the 26th I’d definitely go to the Motor City Bowl.
"evilmalcom" wrote:You’re just planning on publishing these things when I die, aren’t you.
What? No…
*shuts off printer making master copies*
No, Marshall is in the GMAC bowl in Alabama. The Motor City Bowl is Dec. 26th, and I’ll be back here then, unfortunately.
No, Marshall is in the GMAC bowl in Alabama. The Motor City Bowl is Dec. 26th, and I’ll be back here then, unfortunately.
Wait. The Marshall bowl is Dec. 18th in Detroit? I will seriously be at that if so.
I agree about it being about money. The problem is, like you said 4 teams, 2 conferences being unrepresented. 8 teams, involves using up so many bowl slots that bowls become nonexistant except for the playoffs.
Some have suggested a game AFTER the bowls for the top 2 ranked teams. This wouldn’t solve all problems but it’d be another checkoff.
Wait. The Marshall bowl is Dec. 18th in Detroit? I will seriously be at that if so.
I agree about it being about money. The problem is, like you said 4 teams, 2 conferences being unrepresented. 8 teams, involves using up so many bowl slots that bowls become nonexistant except for the playoffs.
Some have suggested a game AFTER the bowls for the top 2 ranked teams. This wouldn’t solve all problems but it’d be another checkoff.
"buckingham rabbit" wrote:Ha ha, you definitely proved that with your undying love for Billy Corgan and promotion of a concert that features the likes of Coldplay and the Vines.
I’m sure you thought you had a point there, but despite all your rage you’re still just a rat in a cage, meataphorically speaking. Perhaps when you finally get free of your small-minded restraints, you will put my in my place.
Funny you mention NYC Ghost & Flowers because that’s one of the exact reviews I was thinking of. I remember about 4 months ago when SY played 9:30 club there was a thread about them on here and Screaming Tree (I think that was who it was) said something about SY really dropping off after Daydream Nation and pretty much the consencious was that while the new SY has been mostly crap, we’d all still go see them. Basically, we didn’t have the balls to bash the indie legends.
PF plays off that inner indie guy in all of us. It says exactly what the mainstream indie opinion is (i.e. new SY sucks), but then states it with a bunch of hyperbole and acts like they had an original thought. To say the new SY was awesome (and base it on merits as opposed to name vlaue) would have been the courageous thing to do.
Now of course, they may very well have disliked the new SY honestly. It just seems overwhelmingly that it’s based on the opinions of some sort of consultian of indie fans. I can honeslty listen to you all discuss a new album and get exactly what Pitchfork was going to say substance-wise, but lacking in style. That’s why I said 5 FS’ers could write something just as good as Pitchfork – because it’s the same thing.
I don’t really have a problem with someone reading’s Kurt’s diary. All those things, psychologically, are written with a desire for someone to read them. The idea of a private diary is a subconcious impossibility.
I just find no interest in them personally.
"jasper" wrote:Seriously? Pitchfork deserves credit for their knowledge of good music, the passion they have for it, and most of all: for the fact that they are actually able to write about it decently.What knowledge of good music? That’s incredibly subjective. I think they do nothing but namedrop up-and-coming bands and bash anything that moves mainstream. Pitchfork accomplishes "long" reviews by following a simple format:
1) Start off with hyperbole filled analogy.
2) Preceed to talk about band’s history.
3) Write 2-3 sentences on each track.
4) Give final thoughts.That’s every review. The difference between pitchfork, and say, Rolling stone, is RS snips 1 and 3. I’m not saying they can’t write well, I’m saying they cannot write courageously. They have no independant thoughts whatsoever. All they’re doing is rehashing the hardcore-indie scene’s opinion of records. Not most of the time. Not 90% of the time. All the time.
