i loved the PWRFL power record, but i read the pitchfork review, and then re-read it to see if i thought the reviewer actually listened to the record (which reads like he did listen to it), and i can respect the reviewer's opinion. he didn't like the record, but pointed out what he did like about it.
the pitchfork review was written WAAAAAAAY better than the tiny mix tapes review, where they gave kaz a 0/5 and panned the record all the way through, only glossing over the fact that kaz is a pretty brilliant guitarist (a point that should have taken the record to at least 1/5).
and, for a relatively obscure act, any pitchfork review is a good one, unless you're given the dreaded 0.0. a sub-6.0 review will only hurt your band if you're wilco, and by that point, you don't even need pitchfork for publicity anymore.
Reviews
douglas martin said on July 1, 2008:
i loved the PWRFL power record, but i read the pitchfork review, and then re-read it to see if i thought the reviewer actually listened to the record (which reads like he did listen to it), and i can respect the reviewer's opinion. he didn't like the record, but pointed out what he did like about it.
the pitchfork review was written WAAAAAAAY better than the tiny mix tapes review, where they gave kaz a 0/5 and panned the record all the way through, only glossing over the fact that kaz is a pretty brilliant guitarist (a point that should have taken the record to at least 1/5).
and, for a relatively obscure act, any pitchfork review is a good one, unless you're given the dreaded 0.0. a sub-6.0 review will only hurt your band if you're wilco, and by that point, you don't even need pitchfork for publicity anymore.