The internet ruined music (1 Viewer)

[GARYXKNIFEDX]

It took him an hour to say that?

 

[pete]

excess choice diminishes your enjoyment of the product.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Lili Marlene]

Relevant:

to privilege the deliriously artificial over the artificially genuine.

www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/magazine/the-pernicious-rise-of-poptimism.html

 

[Jerry Twig]

Relevant:
www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/magazine/the-pernicious-rise-of-poptimism.html

This presupposes that music journalism is somehow still, or ever was, relevant. (Still good though!)

 

[Lili Marlene]

This presupposes that music journalism is somehow still, or ever was, relevant. (Still good though!)

haha, true.

It's up to you to decide what is relevant to you but I am in favour of criticism, if a bit more ambivalent about "journalism".

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

Music criticism is suspect because the people that practice it are so in thrall to fashion and trends that it loses sight of what people actually enjoy.
And in a world where anyone can listen to whatever they want whenever they want to, we need music critics and tastemakers so much less.
The guy in the article compares music criticism to movie and food criticism, but we often need those guys - I can't watch any new-release film or eat in The Green House with a click.
Music criticism is more akin to those who write about fashion. It's for people who look at a dress with 80 buttons and 10 lapels on it but still need someone to tell them whether they like it or not.

 

[ann post]

music journalism has rarely been journalism. I mean if it was subject to the same scrutiny news is, it would be a lot different.

 

[hugh]

Music criticism should not be about telling you what you should like or not like, or about "tastemaking", it should be about enriching the experience of listening, opening up new avenues, making it more interesting and ( maybe?) fun. The fact that most of the time it totally fails to do that shouldn't doom it entirely as an enterprise. The fact that we can listen to anything anytime makes it more important to me, not less. I just wish that most of wasn't so shite.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Music criticism is suspect because the people that practice it are so in thrall to fashion and trends that it loses sight of what people actually enjoy.
And in a world where anyone can listen to whatever they want whenever they want to, we need music critics and tastemakers so much less.
The guy in the article compares music criticism to movie and food criticism, but we often need those guys - I can't watch any new-release film or eat in The Green House with a click.
Music criticism is more akin to those who write about fashion. It's for people who look at a dress with 80 buttons and 10 lapels on it but still need someone to tell them whether they like it or not.

Bad music criticism is all of that.

Good music criticism is not like that.

 

[Jerry Twig]

Music criticism should not be about telling you what you should like or not like, or about "tastemaking", it should be about enriching the experience of listening, opening up new avenues, making it more interesting and ( maybe?) fun. The fact that most of the time it totally fails to do that shouldn't doom it entirely as an enterprise. The fact that we can listen to anything anytime makes it more important to me, not less. I just wish that most of wasn't so shite.

That's all fine and dandy, and I do appreciate that, but what I have no real time for is 'criticising' criticism ala the NME and all that muckraking shite. I prefer fanzine culture, as in "I like this music and I love this record for this reason". Why waste your time telling people that you think they shouldn't like, when you could be writing about what you enjoy?

 

[ann post]

I prefer fanzine culture, as in "I like this music and I love this record for this reason".

yeah i agree with that. i love when someone feels compelled to write about something.

Sometimes reviews of things that are awful that actually say they are awful are fun though.

 

[washingcattle]

yeah i agree with that. i love when someone feels compelled to write about something.

Sometimes reviews of things that are awful that actually say they are awful are fun though.

By far the best thing to write about is something that's awful. t's way easier and more fun. Good things are harder because any praise you give whatever it is will have been said better by someone else and you feel to some extent like you're repeating the obvious rather than adding anything to what is already a one sided debate. Mediocre or flawed work is by far the most interesting thing to write about and therefore the most difficult. So Basically one day I will write a vey long essay about Monster by REM but a far shorter one riddled with swear words about Reveal and basically have nothing to say about Reckoning or Document.

 

[Jerry Twig]

Sometimes reviews of things that are awful that actually say they are awful are fun though.

Sure, ripping the piss is an art in itself. But in small doses.

 

[ann post]

really enjoyed this one

Meteor Choice Music Prize 2014

 

[Jerry Twig]

Will try to read later, but 'Whelan's lock-in circle jerk' is a good one for the Irish music scene!

 

[shidheat]

this write-up by simon reynolds seems appropriate:

Energy Flash

 

[Lili Marlene]

this write-up by simon reynolds seems appropriate:

Energy Flash

Seems a fair point for dance music.

not that I'd have a clue really though

 

[Lili Marlene]

For those who are following this whole thing, a rebuttal to the NYT piece and pitchfork talking about streaming:

The New York Times Doesn't Know Shit About "Poptimism" | NOISEY

Station to Station | Features | Pitchfork

 

[Lili Marlene]

“A higher diversity score should indicate a higher social status, which means that these listeners can have more expensive ads sold against them.”

jaysus