Pitchfork Reviews "Magna Carta....Holy Grail"

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Nobody's review/rating of the album means a gotdamn thing because the joint hasn't even been out a week yet. These sites are rushing out these "reviews" for the hits, there's no need to take them seriously. There's no way that anybody has fully digested the album in the 3-4 days that's it's been out. I'm catching new shyt with every listen. Too many critics, not enough fans.

Thats a fair point, but then again its a pretty obvious point that these reviews are done w/a limited amount of time with the music. I am pretty sure there is music you heard once and never wanted to listen to again and I am pretty sure there is music you heard once and decided you would throw in the rotation. So the idea that an opinion formed on a piece of music isn't valid until the music is x years old is silly.

Plus even with that, there is music that has been out for years that you still argue with people about. The only qualifier for what makes an opinion valid or invalid to you is whether or not it reflects positively on Jay-Z

 

[WEKetchum]

You obviously never read pitchfork reviews if you think this is good.
Instead of talking about flow, wordplay, cohesiveness, delivery on the emcee part and the samples, drums, different producers contribution and on and on.. The shyt Jay-zs fans care about when it comes to Jay-z. He has half a paragraph about art. Who gives a fukk about his opinion on art or Jay-zs opinion for that matter.

The only music he touched was the content he didn't like and the content he liked. And he had 2 words about the production of 4 songs. And also that he referenced a lot of people (def worthy a mention)


What this review tells me is that Jay-z likes to do business, that he's not got any deeper with his subject of matter than he's ever been, jay is winning, we still cant relate to him 17 albums later, the music is average.

Which answers none of my questions regarding if I'm going to buy a hiphop album or not.

It's the equivalent of talking about an RnB album and not taking about the singing (which half of the time is the only thing a singer does on an album).

I read Pitchfork all the time, but thanks for the assumption

Half a paragraph about art? He had two sentences - and one was quoting lyrics from the song

I feel you on the wordplay/flow part. I thought the review did a fine job of describing the music and giving it big picture context

Difference of opinion I guess

 

[Gravity]

Thats a fair point, but then again its a pretty obvious point that these reviews are done w/a limited amount of time with the music. I am pretty sure there is music you heard once and never wanted to listen to again and I am pretty sure there is music you heard once and decided you would throw in the rotation. So the idea that an opinion formed on a piece of music isn't valid until the music is x years old is silly.

Plus even with that, there is music that has been out for years that you still argue with people about. The only qualifier for what makes an opinion valid or invalid to you is whether or not it reflects positively on Jay-Z

I thought that I was finally reading a quality post from you until you decided to show your panty line in the last sentence. I clearly said that no reviews or ratings concerning the album good or bad, mean shyt. The ratings that I was referring to were the ones in the magna carta ratings thread that was stickied. Those ratings were actually pretty good. You keep trying, but you keep failing.

Personal opinions and objective reviews are 2 different things. Sure, you could listen to a song or album once, decide it's trash and never listen to it again. Don't write a review about the song or album though. Again, the album has been out 3-4 days. Some of these reviews were written a day or 2 after. Again, this is about hits/attention. No way could these people writing these reviews have taken the time to fully digest and get a full appreciation for the album in that time span.

Just to be clear, I don't give a damn about critics and never have. The album and the reception that it's getting speaks for itself.

 

[WEKetchum]

Personal opinions and objective reviews are 2 different things. Sure, you could listen to a song or album once, decide it's trash and never listen to it again. Don't write a review about the song or album though. Again, the album has been out 3-4 days. Some of these reviews were written a day or 2 after. Again, this is about hits/attention. No way could these people writing these reviews have taken the time to fully digest and get a full appreciation for the album in that time span.

How long do you think an album needs to be sat with for a review? Is it a matter of days? Is it a matter of listens?

 

[Da King]

So the score is low and review is trash

Score is high and they are a credible source



It all makes sense

 

[THE 101]

More CAC hipster ether

http://www.factmag.com/2013/07/09/jay-z-magna-carta-holy-grail/