Pitchfork Review Generator: eldritch murmur of arachnophobic pre-drone
October 25, 2013 8:32 AM   Subscribe

"I could happily write about this beyond what the word count allows but in the interest of being concise it's a timorous call to arms of positively hands-in-the-air pre - club." Pitchfork Review Generator, mashup generator for aspiring music journalists. If you're looking to generate the cover art for these non-articles, the random album art generator linked in this MetaFilter thread is down, but there are at least three others currently online: 1, 2, 3.

Cover generator #1: doesn't actually merge the random band name and album title with the album cover image, so you'll need to take a screenshot to save the image
Cover generator #2: layers the text on the image, cycles random images and text easily/frequently, and provides a link to the original Flickr image
Cover generator #3: larger image than #2, provides its source code, but doesn't cycle as frequently (might actually be a dead app, as I'm seeing the same image and text combination that I saw last night)

Note: both #2 and 3 are built on the following rules:
  1. Get the band name from a random wikipedia article.
  2. Get the album title from the last 4 words of the last quote here.
  3. Get the 3rd random image with the tag "interesting" from Flickr.
The "hipster" option (alter image with a "vintage" filter, set text in Helvetica) is left up to you to apply (idea from Reddit)

For more generated music things, there's Pitchformula, music criticism as a creative tool
posted by filthy light thief (25 comments total) 9 users marked this as a favorite
 
More previous things: Random Word Stimulation; Wikipedia Names Your Band (applying the three steps for making a random cover); General Randomness; and Flickr has gone to the cats
posted by filthy light thief at 8:33 AM on October 25, 2013


Metafilter: If you were to put a gun to my head, I would probably describe it as...a steaming entity of not-without-my-jumper agit - rock.
posted by Lipstick Thespian at 8:49 AM on October 25, 2013


By using cover generator #2, I can now say my objectivist band Anything For Money will be putting out our new album, The Judgment Of Charity. Or at least, we will once our Kickstarter gets funded.
posted by fings at 8:58 AM on October 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


Apparently my band will be named 'List of Loveline Episodes.' The track listings practically write themselves.
posted by kaibutsu at 9:00 AM on October 25, 2013


So basically a higher-end Yuppie Pricks, fings?
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 9:00 AM on October 25, 2013


Apparently my band will be named 'List of Loveline Episodes.'

You guys were best in the Trenton days. Y'all sold out in the MTV era.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:10 AM on October 25, 2013


Aren't these Pitchfork parodies pretty much completely dated by now? I don't read many of their reviews beyond the first two of the day, but haven't they dropped the sophomoric navel-gazing crap at least since 2008 or so?

It's fun to poke at Pitchfork, but they're our best last defense against the kind of American music journalism that thought Bruce Springsteen's Wrecking Ball was the best album of 2012.
posted by Luminiferous Ether at 9:11 AM on October 25, 2013 [5 favorites]


As someone who actually reads Pitchfork reviews, they're usually very good. Kim Kelly and Grayson Currin are excellent writers and I enjoy their work.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:12 AM on October 25, 2013 [3 favorites]




It's fun to poke at Pitchfork, but they're our best last defense against the kind of American music journalism that thought Bruce Springsteen's Wrecking Ball was the best album of 2012.

Even worse they put Green Days Uno! at number 8.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:13 AM on October 25, 2013


"In certain kinds of writing, particularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal to come across long passages which are almost completely lacking in meaning."
-George Orwell
"Politics And The English Language"
posted by vibrotronica at 9:18 AM on October 25, 2013 [3 favorites]


It's fun to poke at Pitchfork, but they're our best last defense against the kind of American music journalism that thought Bruce Springsteen's Wrecking Ball was the best album of 2012.

It is easy for Pitchfork to trash work by artists over the age of 35. It seems hard for Pitchfork to be able to trash bad albums by today's artists. Which is to say, those in Pitchfork's demographic are simply more likely to sneer at the kind of music journalism done at Rolling Stone. Pitchfork's editors understand this and will direct staff writers to whip up hyphen-laden reviews to meet their readers' expectations.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 9:27 AM on October 25, 2013


"It is not just a triumphant simulacrum of our universal condition, it is...
a nebulous entity of ever-expanding euro - house."
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:34 AM on October 25, 2013


It is easy for Pitchfork to trash work by artists over the age of 35.

Bullshit. Two days ago they gave Motorhead a 7.6
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 9:34 AM on October 25, 2013 [2 favorites]


Pitchfork is kind of like gem hunting for me. I'm mostly finding a lot of crappy rocks, but when I find a nice shiny gem I'm really happy and it keeps me going back.

I've found some great artists through them, like:
-Wild Nothing
-Kendrick Lamar
-Toro y Moi
-Emeralds
-Godspeed You! Black Emperor

I've also found some really hard to listen to music through them - I won't mention them here, but needless to say the albums didn't really warrant above a 4 out of 10 in terms of listenability, new approaches or uniqueness of sound.
posted by glaucon at 9:37 AM on October 25, 2013


Blazecock Pileon: It is easy for Pitchfork to trash work by artists over the age of 35.

MisantropicPainforest: Bullshit. Two days ago they gave Motorhead a 7.6

They seem to have favorites amongst the Old Guard, and given such bands high marks with regularity. Especially silly are the 10.0 re-issues. It's so easy to praise greatness in retrospect, when there is general agreement on the influential nature of such albums. But really, there is no room for improvement on those albums?
posted by filthy light thief at 9:44 AM on October 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


I hate these generators because, invariably, the albums they generate sound like things I would listen to.
  1. Of Power and Control, by Pyrrolidine.
  2. Show For Your Effort, by Winans Steam Gun.
  3. Natural Order of Things, by Czyzewo.
I mean, come on! I wish I lived in a world where "Winans Steam Gun" was a band I could hear.
posted by sonic meat machine at 10:19 AM on October 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


The Old Guard includes Darkthrone and Carcass?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:34 AM on October 25, 2013


An ex-Pitchfork writer speaks out.

thanks for that link, I was introduced to the helpful new idiom "shit out of my dick with excitement".
posted by idiopath at 10:41 AM on October 25, 2013


Bullshit. Two days ago they gave Motorhead a 7.6

For the Pitchfork demo, it is cool to be someone who has read a positive Motörhead review (hey, thanks for the umlaut autocorrect, iOS!) and it is also cool to have read a trashing of Bruce Springsteen. A good number of readers will likely never listen to the work of either musician, but they will self-assimilate based on perceived tastes, i.e., Pitchfork sets up a virtuous cycle of what the reader is supposed to like, which in turn drives what readers read on Pitchfork. It's just not youthful to listen to Springsteen, but hey Lemmy drinks all day and collects Nazi gear, that's pretty fucking badass. Young consumers can subconsciously identify with that fantasy, helping your music company move product and your blog site drive ad hits. On the other hand, singing folk songs is for baby boomers who don't move as many units and read old-school, unprofitable print media. So Lemmy gets a good write-up, and Bruce does not.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:57 AM on October 25, 2013


They why does Darkthrone get a good write up.

Or for that matter, Black Sabbath.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:16 AM on October 25, 2013


Or maybe they just recognize that Wrecking Ball is not a very good album. I don't think they have an inherent anti-Olds bias. They certainly aren't anti-Bruce. (They gave the Darkness b-sides album a 9.5 and the Seeger Sessions an 8.5) I read Rolling Stone for years and it's a stretch to even call that Music Journalism. They're the ones doing what you're implying but in reverse - just because it's Bruce, or U2 or whathaveyou, it's automatically an incredible record.
posted by saul wright at 12:59 PM on October 25, 2013


They're the ones doing what you're implying but in reverse

Certainly, Pitchfork aren't the only ones playing their part in the mainstream music industry. They have a good connection with their demographic, as the others do with their respective readerships.

I did electronic music writing for a few years back in the early-nulls. I lost count how many times an artist, record label, promoter or software developer would email basically asking for a good review. After a while I saw this shit everywhere and now I can't unsee it, like changeover cues at the art house cinema: Video game reviewers corrupted by privileged access from publishers. Access to the US political scene leading to puff piece after puff piece. Etc. etc. etc. Journalism is largely a machine to turn eyeballs into dollars.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:16 PM on October 25, 2013


All criticisms of Pitchfork so far are pretty weak sauce for how bafflingly heavily targeted it is. They don't fuck with their customers, write webcomics about rape, or flagrantly sell ratings, they just... write reviews? for a certain demographic apparently? using compound words?

And now they're trapping the young folks into a bottomless loop of adverts via a hyper-specific winnowing between older musicians? Pitchfork is the devil.
posted by forgetful snow at 3:23 PM on October 25, 2013


They why does Darkthrone get a good write up.

Fenriz is pretty much the Lemmy of black metal.
posted by mediocre at 3:48 PM on October 25, 2013


« Older “It is good to see that NOEL EDMONDS has bounced...   |   The Stolen Ones Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments