krulesweatshirt
All Star
I'm a proud contributor of this list 
Pitchfork's top 50 albums 2017
- Thread starter Not Crodie
- Start date
straightcash
All Star
Its really hard to compare genres, it takes a totally different (subjective) state of mind to appreciate each. Death metal, dubstep and R&B are just so different. You can't objectively rank them in the SAME list. Just my opinion.
I also want to say that I don’t think Pitchfork is really that Knowledgable when it comes to R&B music as a whole.
most of the rnb albums on their list are ranked just as high on other magazines lists tbh
Last edited:
That’s not what I’m getting at.
Grand Conde
Superstar
That Kelela album is great btw.
They gravitate towards certain R&B artists. And come off as “hipster”. But I do respect their opinions on other genres of music.
They hire people based on what they know too. They have contributors who used to write for Vibe, Ebony and whatever. It’s not like a closed group of people who only have experience from Pitchfork.
Since they now a pretty solid budget I would even say that they are a lot broader than most magazines. Eg the source was a small group of men, same age and taste in music. Which is why non-new York sounding music was overlooked. But p4k appreciates everything from Jay to Kendrick to Lil Uzi to Skepta to Future or Mick Jenkins. They are just a lot harder on people with conservative styles, as one should be.
Last edited:
I feel like they’re are R&B artists out there doing their thing that they tend to ignore. But it’s becaus they don’t make Alternative-styled R&B.
see my last sentence in the post above. It’s not only RnB it’s all genres. If you make shyt that sounds shyt that has been, you better make it a lot better or maybe as good is their motive.
I’m not taking about all other genres. I’m talking about R AND B.
I never downplayed their knowledge of other genres (I actually look to them for their opinions in that regard). I feel they could talk about other artists in addition to the ones they like to talk about in terms of R&B.
Last edited:
I said that they don’t care too much for artists who aren’t innovative in any genre not only RnB, so why would they give RnB some special treatment. It’s originally an alternative (to radio) magazine, now a lot broader but they at least half heartedly tried to maintain one thing. Not really messing with people who don’t innovate sound but keep it safe and conservative. No matter if it’s Arcade Fire; a former favorite of theirs, Damon Albarns projects, Jay-z or anyone else.
I.e. it’s not just RnB that gets that treatment, that doesn’t mean that they don’t understand any genre they just don’t like conservatism. I have mans that are rock-heads who say that about rock, and mans who are “real hip hop” heads who say that about hip hop.
Last edited:
Just because someone isn’t “innovative” or what have you doesn’t mean that they aren’t making great music that shouldn’t be talked about. Good music is good music. It doesn’t matter what style it is. So I disagree with that completely.
So what do you think about cover bands?
Should someone who makes an identical cover to Illmatic get the same 10/10 from pitchfork?
In 90s hip hop, biting used to be the worst sin for a rapper. Mumble rap would’ve been more respectable back then, when having your own unique style and you kept on developing it was how you won cred. Look at the 90s rappers who didn’t evolve into something new, they all got left in the bushes for the new class. Somewhere along the line people started putting music into boxes like “real”.
You’re completely missing my point. Lol.
