Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Shame about that new one though eh?
I want a new release to get a 10.0
Having listened to it once, I'm less enamoured of it than I was by the other CD I got in the deal, Gaslight Anthem's American Slang.
Get The '59 Sound.
After the first couple of listens, AS isn't in the same league. I'm hoping it might be a grower though.
It's not as good as The '59 Sound of course, but it's still a top record. Diamond Church Street Choir is up there with some of the best things they've done I think.
they're hella fun to listen to but then you realise that all the hatched Springsteen/Dylan references have given you a blocked artery and your heart has basically seized up.
I'm never quite sure whether re-issues are supposed to be rated on how good the re-issue package is (quality of bonus material, remastered original tracks, presentation, etc) or just how good the original album in question is. Surely the former over the latter?
Some take the latter (both kinds have been on Pitchfork reissue reviews in the past) - and some give separate marks for the main stuff and the extras. I guess in the end it's more reason to read the content of a review rather than just seeing the score.
it's annoying. just because it's the same band a (nearly) 15yr old reissue and a new release don't belong together in a review ffs.
It's cowardly frankly, absolute bullshit is Pinkerton a perfect 10, and there's no way it would have been upon release either, so I don't know how some revisionist history and an inadequate bonus material collection (and as for bonus material generally, who cares?) really gets you there (see also: plenty of other good records glorified by this nonsense).
And I dont think it is wrong to rate something differently to at the time, it reflects the long term appeal and reputation an album has earnt over the years. It seems hard to imagine now but around '00 pinkerton was hugely respected seminal album and there comeback was highly anticipated. Its been my favourite album for well over a decade and I know many people who feel the same
Ok, I don't see where that leaves room for all the albums which are better, but anyway, that's beside the point. You might rate it a 10, but I guess the comparison is with other ratings on Pitchfork (in this case). For example, I think that something like four or five records have been rated 9.2 this year (and no higher). Which would seem to imply that Pinkerton is better (and by some margin) than any other record released this year, which is obviously complete rubbish.
"I dont think it is wrong to rate something differently to at the time, it reflects the long term appeal and reputation an album has earnt over the years."
I don't really see why there's a presumption of historical ascent, and no amount of 'long-term appeal' turns this merely decent album into a perfect 10. Also, if Pinkerton's 7/10 becomes 10/10 simply with the passing of time, does that mean that say a 6/10 album like Smashing Pumpkin's 'Adore'* is now a 9/10? Because, na.
* This is a shit example but I seem to be missing the spot in my brain where I recall albums from the mid-late 90s.
it is not a presumption of historical ascent, its pretty much fact it was panned at the time (rolling stone worst album of the year and then rolling stone's one of the best albums of all time, not that I care about rolling stone) probably because it wasnt what people expected, the fun effortless pop of their debut, but it was a massive grower.
and yes i'd say pinkerton is better than any album released this year, i'd have thought saying it is my favourite album in over a decade covered that, and the person who is reviewing it obviously thinks it is worth a ten and I think they understand how rating things work and how some numbers are higher than others and allocated as they see fit. Just seems to boil down to you don't think it is worth a ten, which is fair enough, but for me even if I wasnt a fan id recognise that it is an album that has gained a large cult following over the years so a reviewer giving it ten wouldnt surprise me.
Well fair enough then. I can't imagine the mindset that can think that Pinkerton is better than all music released in 2010, but obviously you're entitled to if you like. I still don't think it's internally coherent for Pitchfork, as I'm pretty certain they wouldn't say that it was better than every album this year, so I don't understand what their deal is with reissues (they give almost all reissues massively high scores, including stupid amounts of 10.0s), it's like they're on a different scale to be honest. Or rather it just feels utterly tokenistic, like "Here's our canon, another album that lasted 10 years while still being well appreciated, it must be perfect" - so my point about historical ascent still stands, given that almost none of these reissues would have been rated that high to begin with, and it doesn't seem to occur that records get high ratings and then are downgraded later when reissued (EXCEPT when they choose to focus on the bonus material, which is inconsistently applied). Again, it's just cowardice really, for a critic site to basically not have the balls to call something properly special until they've cleared it with the sands of time.
More like a 6 or 7. Probably 6.3 or something.
I didn't know that fact about it actually being voted 3rd worst album of the year by Rolling Stone, not the no.1 worst. And DJ Spooky was above (/below?) it in the top 2! Some people just don't deserve ears.
but it's never a 10.0 album, no.
Quite like 'Maladroit' too.
Haven't bothered with anything since.
1 weezer thread, 1 radiohead thread, 1 saint_cronin thread, 1 "is this the best XXX of the 90s" thread per 10 days, no two of which are to be on the front page at any one time. I think that's pretty generous.
Disintegration, Pinkerton, The Stone Roses, Ladies & Gentlemen We Are Floating In Space, On Fire, Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere and After The Gold Rush, Paul's Boutique, The Bends, Reckoning and Histoire de Melody Nelson all have got perfect scores in less than the past two years. Bona Drag got 9.8 as well.
As others have said, how many of these would get 10.0s if they were new releases? Putting aside how influential most of these are, and that some like Gainsbourg and Neil Young are from a different time and place altogether, it's unlikely any of them would. They'd all hit at roughly the 8.6 - 9.3 level.
If Pitchfork is still running in 10-20 years, will we see records like For Emma, Forever Ago or Nouns or Sung Tongs or Silent Shout getting near perfect scores?
Deserve one, everything else I agree with you on
Deserve one (out of ten)
I'd agree ;-)
A fair few of those you mention do deserve 10s
I'd put Pinkerton at like 9.6 or something and a few others around the 8.5-9.0 mark but Pitchfork certainly wouldn't be handing out straight 10s to all of those on release today is all I'm saying.
ONE MAN'S 10.0 IS ANOTHER'S 4.3.
For fuck's sake.
"I'd put Pinkerton at like 9.6 or something". hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
"I'd put.." = opinion, no? Nothing wrong with that. We're talking in p4k terms here, so he gave it a p4k style score.
Half of Pinkerton's charm is in its flaws, it's great because it isn't a perfect record... if that makes sense.
<3 Feisty little fella.
FYI everyone, several troll posts have been deleted.
but the Blue Album certainly would be.
made into a 10 by Only in Dreams
Wasn't too great from what i remember, and they managed to get the bassline wrong :(
Merriweather Post Pavilion (unfortunately)
every album the go! team will release (and have released)
because you don't know until you've lived with an album for years how good it is.
The perfect blend of catchy guitar pop and rocking nerdy angst. Well done P-fork!
but i don't think it's really up to much. much prefer the blue album.