Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
From the lovely Hypebot - got this pretty interesting (and mostly right imo) video.
the statement on its own I think is a basis for a strong argument
I used to run a music reviews site and one thing i always did was actually talk about the songs and why the music was interesting/boring. Seems alot of people are typing up the press release and adding that it sucks/its good after. Not DiS btw.
the internet definitely does.
the only time i really agreed with him was when he said that nowadays the review comes a month after anyone who's interested hears it, so it'll only ever be agreeing with existing opinions.
i think it's a good thing anyway. maybe not good for DiS, obviously not good for Plan B, but hella good for the consumer.
Sites like DiS are actually more important than ever now because they help to cut through the sea of two-bob critics and the deluge of records. Nobody's got time to listen to everything, so a bit of guidance and recommendations from people you trust can only be a good thing, right?
And does anybody really want one line album reviews?!
but we're in the minority, I guess. My friend--and apparently many people--believe in the 140 character review bullshit. My buddy thinks just telling the world xyz record is 7.4 is well and good and that folks will read his blog because they understand what great taste he has. Fuck me.
But then again, this music forum is pretty much just that. And I can't pull myself away from it. So there ya go....
...you could do a one line album review after listening to less than one song. I don't think it'd encourage pithy more laziness.
But there are plenty of us that do still care about "why"--good reviews are much more than "good but not great" pronouncements.
Maybe in a professional capacity, yes, but people aren't going to stop writing about music any more than they're going to stop writing about politics, economics or football.
a critics role in the past would be to guide people to purchase good music and telling them to avoid the rubbish thus saving them money. If everyone just downloads the album for free on streams it on Spotify then that Money Saving Expert role as it were will become reduntant. That's nothing to do with Twitter though. A social networking site that's had 6 months popularity isn't going to kill something as established as music journalism.
or haikus etc. It's way harder to write a short review than a long one imo.
I like him, it's people who are passionate, inquisitve and informed that will survive and 'Death of...'affairs. I wish he didn't bang on about making no money though, scary! (but true)
the importance of music reviews.....or, where they should shine.....is objectivity.......it's easy not to like somthing because you trod in a puddle as you hit play on your i-pod...much harder to try and get through your subjective response to then actually consider what the music is worth, what it is saying, how it is doing it....all that stuff.
he is right in that twitter and blogs provoke more personal responses. it's 'your' tweets...'your' blogs. you aren't writing on behalf on anyone else or as part of a wider community of people and so i guess that will always diminsh objectivity
my two things for music journalism just boil down to
a) push for objectivity
b) make it your goal for the reader to come away with a new perspective on the record that they have already listened to
and point b is where i disagree with him....he moans about reviews not being on the pulse...but music papers should capitalise on this and get proustian and slow everything the fuck down. make it your point to tell people something new about the record they have already heard...not something banal about the record they are yet to hear....becuase that not knowing will always give the reviewer the whip hand to say the most boring unanalytical tripe becuase for the reader..it is all unknown....there is no two way thing going on...the reader cannot counter or compare opinion.........the whole cycle of criticism is backwards......the reader should experience the thing in question and then go to the review for illumination and engagement....not read the review and then decide on whether they will buy into the experience.....it's all wrong.............and in that case......it makes it sound like i'm for leaks and blogs and downloads......but im not sure i am....i dunno. tricky stuff.
the day Stylus closed its doors. I think that's the exact moment when i stopped caring about new music
only the first half though, not the second. no site or magazine comes close to Stylus.
then DiS would have to close down and we'd have nowhere to congregate. It's a vicious circle.
Writing on Twitter isn't music journalism as any proper music journalist would understand it. It's no different to someone on here going "hey everyone, listen to Generic ATP-Style Band X!" - it gets something across with the minimum of fuss but you wouldn't call it outright convincing.
Christ, when Spotify launches in America it'll be like columnist Armageddon.
DiS will need to focus on making the community better.
If we didn't have such a loyal and active community I think we may have gone the way of Stylus. And if less of them had on ad-blockers, we'd probably be able to afford a second tech person to speed up the developments and pay some of our contributors too... I'm just sayin'
I only found out about this thru Twitter. It really is extraordinary technology when it comes to breaking news. Hell, if it's good enough for Blur, Obama and Slash, it's alright by me. As for reviewing, like someone once said on here: a lot of people look at the score, go to MySpace / Spotify and then make their decision. Do we always need a preamble ripped from the PR to bump up the word count?
good, well written reviews, definitely yes !!!
Personnally, reading this band is ace 9/10 isn't enough to make me go listen...
I thought 'Haha WTF how can music be reviewed?'
wasn't he the really good drummer in Parts & Labor??
and the point about lack of desire to be exposed to stuff, people only searching out stuff that applies to them being a problem is very true.
I think it creates conditions where it's very difficult for things are genuinely different and innovative to break through - if people are only searching for stuff that sounds a bit like their favourite bands all they're gonna hear is stuff that sounds a bit like like their favourite bands and the bands that are gonna get heard are the bands that sound like other bands.