From Pitchfork
The combined forces of Rolling Stone, Pitchfork, Spin, Paper, Filter, Creem, Skuzz, Whack-a-doo, and Modern Bride come through to bring the ruckus and remind you that another year of your life has come to an end.
How do they do this? By presenting their opinion to what you should have already been listening to. The trick is, you have to keep an almost-religious dedication to these sites to even hear that some of these records came out.
This isn't a bad thing. Lists are a good way to inspire conversation amongst people and get people who wouldn't normally be interested to check out new music. (Case in point: The carpet-bombing that "Return to Cookie Mountain" got introduced me to Tv on the Radio)
It can be very hard to admit that yes, you didn't hear about that new band before anyone else did. But it's also kind of liberating to get your own discovery experience with the band.
Also: Be aware of what list you're looking at. As a rule, the lists tend to cater to the audience of the magazine. Let's look at 2006 as an example.
- Rolling Stone tries to be that kid that wants to please everyone, so you see a wide amount of stuff.
- Spin is like your older sister. They've worked in the real world, so they're accessible to Joe Schmoes, but they're still cooler than you.
- Then there's the cabal of Pitchfork. I don't subscribe to the whole "it's for hipsters!" thing most do, as they acknowledge other genres of music better than most other publications. They're definitely the A/V club though, as they tend to skew bearded white male, have parties in basements, and listen to gangsta rap ironically.
The thing to take from these lists-lists in general, really-is that they should be looked at as a resource, not a marching order. If you don't particularly listen to a certain genre, this is your chance to sample it. I know I do.
(As an added bonus, here's a link to a fan-voted list of the 101 best music vids of the decade. The top 50 are SPOT. ON.)
No Comments
Leave a Comment?
What your comment will look like:
said: