The sacred cows
craner
Beast of Burden
And Massive Attack, they're even worse. And Roni Size. I can't think of much that's come out of Bristol that is 1. any good and 2. hasn't been critically lionised. Apart from, maybe, the wonderful and indelible 'She's Beyond Good and Evil' by the Pop Group. And, uh, Tricky's 'Aftermath'. And some early Roni Size things, 'Music Box', maybe. Ah, apart from that, it's slim pickings! Bristol 'scene', indeed.
Representing the women in the rock canon: Joni Mitchell, Patti Smith and more recently PJ Harvey. Don't think rock critics are allowed to say a bad word about any of them, are they?
I'd add Prince in with Bowie, in that they have both always tended towards pretty patchy albums that taken in isolation are nothing to rave about (well, except for their uniformly-agreed-upon best albums, Low and Sign 'O' The Times respectively
) ... the kind of artist where some kind of personalised "best of" really is the best approach... but, yes, every time something is released it's heralded as a return to form of some sort.
I think I like music by all these artists... in fact, I like maybe 90% of the artists mentioned in the thread so far... but I hope that's not the point.
I'd add Prince in with Bowie, in that they have both always tended towards pretty patchy albums that taken in isolation are nothing to rave about (well, except for their uniformly-agreed-upon best albums, Low and Sign 'O' The Times respectively
) ... the kind of artist where some kind of personalised "best of" really is the best approach... but, yes, every time something is released it's heralded as a return to form of some sort.I think I like music by all these artists... in fact, I like maybe 90% of the artists mentioned in the thread so far... but I hope that's not the point.
Last edited:
I've spoken to music reviewers who've said straight up to me that when they get something they don't know about they look online now and read some other people's reviews to get a feel for how it's being received.
Still, I think it's more often just about time constraints and regurgitating info from press packs... with demands on time, editorial limits on word counts etc. and little return for writing something particularly novel, I reckon it's very understandable that people just grab what they've been given and run with it.
Classic example for me was a label PR guy putting who mastered one of my CDs in the press pack going out to reviewers. That info showed up in at least 75% of reviews of the album. Consider how often reviewers would ordinarily comment on the mastering. How many people outside engineering circles even know what mastering is?
Last edited:
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
I think that it would be better to review music this way:
1) pick a mark through a random process eg. one of execrable/weak/average/good/scintillating by throwing a die/spinning a spinner/eating a sandwich etc
2) write unironically, attempting to justify the mark
The reader then guages the strength of the music by assessing the plausibility of the reviewer's judgment.
It would interfere with the cribbing cycle and force journos to think more originally.
Yes you're right, it isn't the point. I'd consider myself a bit of Fall fan but that makes their sacred cow status amongst journos all the more annoying
Benny Bunter
Well-known member
Joy Division.
Corpsey
bandz ahoy
http://www.somethingawful.com/d/your-band-sucks/indies-sacred-cows.php
Funnily enough I don't think I've ever read anything derisory about Girls Aloud in the music press (of course I could just be thinking of the Observer Music Monthly here), which is strange to me because I think they're fucking awful.
Funnily enough I don't think I've ever read anything derisory about Girls Aloud in the music press (of course I could just be thinking of the Observer Music Monthly here), which is strange to me because I think they're fucking awful.
Benny Bunter
Well-known member
Aye, them and The Sugababes seem to be immune to criticism for some reason. Its just shite isn't it?
Slothrop
Tight but Polite
I think a lot of these people only seem to get positive press because noone who doesn't like them bothers to write about them. I mean, a new White Stripes album (say) is a bit of a media event anyway, and people are going to review it and some of them may not like it. Whereas I can't imagine many mainstream editors getting worried that they haven't covered the new fall album and people will think they're out of touch...
