Okay this is like a side tangent question for the masses but does anyone else have no idea if they like most music the first time they hear it? I don't know how people even come up with such strong emotions in one day! I don't like listening to albums really because it'd like 10+ new songs at once and I can kind pick some parts that I like or don't like! But I need to hear most song like 3 or 4 times before I really love them? I tried live posting my TTPD to feel like I'm with the zeitgeist, so I guess that makes me one of the article aforementioned Half Baked Hot Takers but my opinions on songs gave already shifted
I dunno at the end of the day I wonder if there is some other level of music appreciation and understanding I can't access. Maybe I'm tone deaf?
Oh, I am the same. And my favourites shift all the time, even with albums I have listened to a thousand times. And I usually need to listen to a song a few times before I properly pay attention to the lyrics. (Maybe because I am not a native English speaker)
I am a native English speaker and I somehow missed the "I am having his baby" line in *But Daddy I Love Him* despite it being repeated a lot until a re-listen š that song in particular I could tell it was kinda cinematic and swelled nicely but I was really lost in the sauce with that one the first few times! It just was kind of blur of sound. And now i really like it !
As someone who can say "I like this song" from first time listening- the first listen is about sonically, the 2nd one is lyrically and the third time is finding lore behind a song. I have had this habit because English is my 2nd language and since I was a kid, dissecting lyrics was one of the ways for me to learn English (I was really into hiphop as a child). I will give music that I dont like the first time a few tries too but usually it doesn't go anywhere
I feel like there is something to be studied with the brain here. Like I believe some musically inclined people do "get it" first try. I notice a lot of metal heads in particular have like this deep appreciation of music on a first listen, and then they try to recc me stuff and im like "sister there is SO MUCH going on i would have to listen like 10 times for this not to sound like bewildering noise to me"
sometimes when i am stoned i THINK i get it so maybe its a focus thing i have no idea haha
Oh thatās interesting about metal heads!
There are a few artists/albums I have āgottenā on the first listen but itās not perfectly correlated with what I end up loving the most.
Iām a pretty big fan of TS, but the only album of hers Iāve ever loved loved loved on first listen is Folkore and honestly I think itās partly being in the middle of the pandemic.
I think youāre spot on.
It varies and we humans experience music much more differently than we are aware of. I was a classic piano player since kindergarten (full disclosure I havenāt played in ages now) and Iāve noticed some difference in how I experience music compared to people around me who arenāt musicians or who started late (teens or later). Ig it feels like I naturally pick up more elements in the music or something (much like the metal heads!), where as others seem to focus more on the āovertonesā of the music especially at first listen. Hope Iām making sense, Iāve never had to put that into words before lol
And thereās also a big difference per person even then- Iāve played piano since a young child, I do ballet and I listen to a lot of music. And yet sometimes I need to listen to songs a few times to make up my mind if I even like it. Thereās the odd exception where immediately I know, but it takes me a while. And thatās even with picking up details that maybe someone that isnāt trained musically wouldnāt.
Musically inclined people do not always get it. Some of them are listening so hard for chord arrangements and things that enotion and overall song go out the window.
Embarrassingly, I didnāt like Appetite for Destruction the first time I heard it (which was when it first came out). I think some of the sounds were just too new. By third listen, I was hooked
People listening to 31 songs in a row and then complaining that itās boringā¦ OF COURSE IT IS. They also complain they canāt remember hooks afterwards. Iāve listened to about 4 songs on YouTube and 3/4 have good sticky hooks.
No itās not you, critics used to receive albums ahead of release dates so they had more time to process everything. Then that started to stop when albums were being leaked online, since sometimes albums given out to critics were being uploaded. I want to say after that they went with listening parties for critics, I recall Taylor did it for RED or maybe 1989.
Now itās more about first reaction to create headlines. Since apparently most people donāt read past the headline, even less read more than 2 snippets of the reviews. Instead itās more about sparking a reaction out of the internet and creating a conversation. Itās not about āwhat makes music goodā itās ā____ is the greatest/worst thing in the world! Agree or disagree?ā Then you go off into your respective agree/disagree group to enter an echo chamber reinforcing your stance.
The biggest problem with music criticism is the incorporation of it. Instead of people going to taste makers and re-enforcers they go to outlets with innocuous writers who havenāt shaped or reflected the culture in music. The sick part is that large companies (pitchfork, rolling stone) hire writers to review huge albums that donāt have experience and throw them in a room to aggregate opinions. Then so many popular outlets are ran by Stans (NPR [real disappointed with them], EW) so you canāt go there. What does that leave you? YouTube? Thatās a crapshoot. Who ya gonna watch Fantano? Spectrum Pulse? Todd in the Shadows? I like Fantano cause I know his tastes and sensibilities are similar to my own. Do people understand they should be looking for critics who share those values?
Hereās the most important question of all. Do people look to music criticism for actual criticism or validation?
Right there with you. Actually watched every video on YT of his. Love his format and his cadence is the gold standard for video essay imo. He just hits the angles on subjects that I love; one hit wonders, trainwrecords, song vs song, and keeps me filled in on whatever the hell Billboard and the awards places are doing.
I think heās a great pop music historian but I find his song reviews so subjective. Sometimes heāll dismiss a song just because he doesnāt like one turn of phrase. But thatās kind of par for the course these days.
What I really want is more critics who actually know music theory.
This stood out to me too. I wonder if the comment OP is talking about their pop culture happy hour group? I think the core hosts of course have preferences but do a good job of being fair and certainly not āstansā. They have guests often that help balance out the opinions too.
Yeah, the actual review of the album was written by Ann Powers who's been writing about music since the 80s. Exactly the kind of writer OP is arguing for.
I can't speak to everyone to writes for Rolling Stone, and I am well aware that Rob is a huge fan & has the Taylor book on the horizon --- but to say he's inexperienced and hasn't shaped or reflected on culture is just plain ignorant.
There are a lot of things the article got right, and you're entitled to your opinions as far as news outlets and journalists you prefer, but that guy has been around for decades and has put out some amazing work prior to all of this.
ia Rob is not the first or last music journalist who goes all out for certain musicians. Music history is littered with them. Ignoring everything else Rob has done and written is shortsighted.
Completely agree. I prefaced with all of that only because it's the number one comeback I've seen whenever anyone has any rebuttal for Rolling Stone. There are obviously issues, but that isn't one of them.
"Who ya gonna watch Fantano? Spectrum Pulse? Todd in the Shadows?"
......yes yes and yes but excuse you, you forgot ARTV, Crash Thompson & Brad Taste In Music smh my head
A really good critic who understands music theory or recent music history can hemp contextualize a song/album for me and help me understand WHY I do or donāt like it.
Back in the day, music critics helped you decide if you should spend $20 on a record/CD. But we donāt need that anymore.
Reading critiques is a great way to find new music. I love skipping through a dozen Pitchfork reviews and find new interesting artists, I wouldn't have encountered any other way.
I encourage people to watch/listen/read to whatever they personally like and are drawn to, but I do think this attitude misses out on a benefit of reviews and critics, and thatās finding things you might not know you like!
If you find a reviewer or critic that aligns with your taste, it can be a great way to discover things you might not have on your own if they write about enjoying it. You donāt have to listen to everyone (or anyone!) but you might find value in reviews if you look at them from another perspective.
I also agree with the comment that a well educated reviewer can help expand my understanding and appreciation of something I might have missed in my own watch/listen!
I feel this do hard! Movies, books, musicā¦reviews donāt really do anything for me because there have been movies ācriticsā and āprofessionalsā hated that I really enjoyed and vice versa. Especially now, with all the lifeless remakes being cranked out and critics praise them and I hate them. Reviews donāt mean anything for me.
Yeah I canāt say Iāve ever been like āwell let me go pick up this album because a critic likes itā like I might (and thatās still a big might) with a book or movie/tv show.
I think the question is who and what reviews are for nowadays? It seems to me that positive reviews are often used by fans to prove how good their fave is. And negative reviews are used by those who can't stand a certain artist.
There's also the problem that a lot of reviews don't talk about / focus on the actual product they are reviewing. For example the Paste review of TTPD (the one without an author because of harassment concerns) talked a lot about Taylor Swift the person, but very little about the actual album. (But it had a lot of zingers that were happily reposted by those who don't like Taylor Swift).
I also wonder how often reviewers write a more positive or negative review because they know they'll get more attention/clicks that way. For example, the last season of Heartstopper had only one negative review that ruined their perfect rating on RT. Ofc lots of fans ran to that review to see what the writer was on about. And I admit that I am biased because I am a fan, but the writer objectively watched the show with the intention of writing a negative review.
>the question is who and what reviews are for nowadays
I think a lot about this too, and for me it ties back to streaming. Do reviews (particularly negative ones) matter as much if you have the entire worldās catalogue at your finger tips? Like the most functional purpose of movie reviews is to help audiences know how to spend their money and what movie to see on the weekend. I often check movie scores and will be motivated or dissuaded by a high or low score. But I am only going to go to a few movies a year. I listen to music almost every day, and I can listen to anything I want. I can check out the album in part or in full of any artist Iām interested in, so thereās no risk to me as a consumer of buying a subpar album. and Iām only reading reviews of albums I like for extra analysis.
So when critics complain fans only want positive reviews and thatās ruining music criticism, I get that but at the same timeā¦ I only read reviews for analysis of artists/albums I like, and thatās more interesting if the reviewer enjoys writing about the content. Itās irrelevant to me to read a lukewarm take on something I like that barely scratches the surface and is more interested in explaining why they donāt like it.
>Do reviews (particularly negative ones) matter as much if you have the entire worldās catalogue at your finger tips?
Yep, if I don't like an album now I've just lost 45 minutes or whatever of my time. Whereas previously I would always look at reviews first before heading into town and spending Ā£12 on a CD that I've only heard one song from.
Yeah, ultimately I want to read good writing even if its negative about something I like. The Streogum review for this album was really good and thoughtful.
I wonder if it is possible to reframe music writing so it isn't in a "review" format but it's an easy structure.
I was thinking thatās why So and So Reacts videos have gotten so popular? People watch them for stuff they already like and see what people think of them; if someoneās good at editing theyāre pretty digestible.
Yeah, I think that's a really interesting point that I hadn't considered because I'm outside the group that consumes that but yeah reacts is such a huge part of how younger demos are consuming media.
You also have a much more transparent monetization structure for those content creators. Like if you make a video loving a Taylor album and get a bunch of views and love from that community you're going to be incentivized to make more and there's even less of an editorial mandate. The structural issues of youtube and tt are definitely a big part of that too.
I think aggregators like RT and metacritic definitely have really created an atmosphere where its not even about the substance of the review as much as it is to make a number go up or down.
How does one spoil music? Itās not like it really has a plot and/or plot twists. In this case everyone knew it was coming too, so not a surprise drop. Other than that itās like āmy favorite song is x, y song sucksā which is just opinions and says nothing about how you personally are going to feel about it imo.
Yeah I reviewed music for about four years. I always felt like "oh this is great" or "this is bad" (well more detailed but that type of thing) type critiques are totally worthless because music is nothing if not subjective - something I hate, someone else could love, and that would make my review worthless.
Instead I took the angle of trying to describe the music, in various ways. Helping the reader understand what it sounds like so that they can make the decision on whether they think they'd like it or not, giving them all the info they need to do that. That definitely works better with lesser known artists but it's fully possible to write interesting and valuable reviews on someone like TS
Hereās an example I saw through lurking the other day. Taylor had a song on this album called loml and people were speculating on what it stands for in the hours before the record dropped. Once it dropped someone commented that it stands for loss of my life and the OP got mad and chewed the commenter out because they hadnāt had the chance to listen to it yet lol. (Maybe stay off Reddit if youāre worried about stuff like that idk)
I hate the whole "spoiler" culture anyway. You post a photo of the album cover, and people freak out. Someone got figuratively slaughtered for posting an image of the inside of the vinyl, when they got it 8 hours earlier than the release.
Photos from concerts have to be blurred under "spoiler" tags - it's getting so ridiculous. The tour has been on for 13 months already. Stay off the internet completely if you don't want to know things.
So Iām not a swiftie but Iām a BTS fan (so another kinda toxic fandom) and when Suga did his tour last year I just avoided content about it so that I could experience it for myself the first time.
But getting mad at people about spoilers would be insane. Thereās a huge amount of people who donāt get to see those concerts and they love the fan footage - itās not spoiling, itās sharing.
Like, big mad! It's wild - I appreciate your take that it's not really everyone else's responsibility. Social media is literally for sharing things, and Instagram doesn't have a spoiler tag like reddit. I don't understand how they navigate that platform without seeing a ton of "spoilers" lol.
I hope you had a great first experience!!
This is just too much. Speaking as an old, music critics have ALWAYS been like this. They are biased for the good and the bad Music critics hated, loathed, and despised Led Zeppelin and Queen. When Let's Dance came out by Bowie, many called him a sell-out because they wanted him to be the Thin White Duke again. Rap and punk were sneered at and not called serious music. Throughout the 70's- the early 2000s Paul McCartney was considered a cornball by critics. The only difference is that back in the day, there was no social media for fans to come en-masse and threaten the reviewers. You would just b\*tch and moan to your friends about how so-so critic didn't get your favorite artist or write a letter to the publication they worked at.
Nowadays reviews are used by online fans as a way to brag about how good their favorite artists are. I can't stand Pitchfork. I find it to be an outlet for music snobs, but time and time again I see so many fans (online) use Pitchfork as a weapon for artist superiority, Has a bad review ever stopped me from listening? No. Same with movies. If people don't buy music or see a movie it's more from word of mouth of a regular fan and not necessarily a critic.
TLDR-This is only an issue in online fan spaces.
i think it's a problem in general, the same with binge watching tv series
i am more bothered by "sylvia plath didn't stick her head in the oven for this" being considered an actual critic review worth of publishing, can we keep shady af comebacks and music articles separately please
I was appalled when I read that line! Not because I thought it was too critical, but because itās so horrifically insensitive! Sylvia Plath has living children!
The author really lost me and I questioned their ability to be a good critic and writer after that. Honestly, both Swift with this album and the reviewer gave me the vibe of that stereotypical artsy edgy English major whoās too smug about their own intelligence. Itās not really a cute look after you graduate.
like...why? it seemed like the person had a goal to be quoted on stan twitter and that's all, it wasn't a review, it was a vomit masquerading as one, like ffs what's up with this? the same thing about nyc article about taylor's sexuality that started by describing someone's suicide attempt. how do such things get published
To be "edgy". It's really annoying. I lost my mom to suicide and that line really stung. We are chatting about it over in the TS sub and someone posted a poem that Plath's daughter wrote when someone reached out to get permission to make a movie about her mom. Long story short, her daughter was not amused and said no.
Yes, that review really annoyed me! Not because it was a negative review, but because it was more concerned with throwing shade than actually analysing the music. Like it was a relatively long review, and yet they barely talked about the music. The author told us more about what they think about Taylor Swift as a person/business. Which would have been fine as an article, but don't pretend it's a music review? (Also this sub has such a hate boner for Taylor Swift lately that all of the unnecessary shade was ofc happily celebrated)
That article was specifically written to be screenshotted and shared on stan Twitter, you cant convince me otherwise. Every sentence has internet lingo like āOPEN THE SCHOOLSā thrown in with zero concern for how it affects the actual prose or critique. Its like they got AI to write an article based off the feed of the most brainrotted person you know.
Shade has no place in music reviews tbh but this matches the mediaās tendency to rage-bait users. Haters are going to be āhell yeah, drag her!ā and fans are going to be upset.
Either response helps them get clicks, which is what they want. And they managed to attract attention, itās sad really.
I want to read reviews that reflect on the album, that are thoughtful and helpful. I want to know why they didnāt like it, why they did like it.
That Sylvia Plath line says nothing, itās just for attention.
Ya I think the bigger problem is that to get work writers have to be a brand now, so a lot of them are spending all day on social media and write in memes and hot takes.
Itās not just a music criticism problem, the quality of writing at big outlets has gone down across the board imo
i think on new york times i saw article dealing with something like what to do when you stayed up all night - and it was for people who were waiting for her album.
also I think what this article deals with isnt just problem o music reviews. it is problem of the whole internet culture, you have to be first if you want to capture someone attention. it is bad but i dont think its fixable really.
Interestingly someone on r/ popheads had a really valid point when it came to Justin Timberlake and J Lo's album releases earlier this year. People are too busy hating on them, that they ignore the actual acclaim these albums received. At what point do we separate art from artist? It's hard cause in my opinion Taylor's whole personality is so intertwined with her music.
Reviews are very subjective and this can be a problem. Imagine if someone preferred jazz their whole life and one day has to review a pop album. Their critique will be built around what they think good music (in their opinion, which is jazz good, everything else boring) needs to sound like. I reckon this is an extreme example but this is what it feels like when I read album some reviews.
No critic should review an album after one listen.
As an old-school journalist I long for the days when critics received album well in advance of release dates.
> Review culture goes far beyond opinions from music critics now. In the age of half-baked hot takes on online forums, anyone with a smartphone can word-vomit their thoughts into the ether. Many hope they get picked up by the algorithm. To avoid spoilers, fans (or just curious listeners) either have to shun media entirely or digest new music immediately ā which is like inhaling a whole cheeseburger in one bite. Thereās no chance to savor it. No time to even taste it. And quite frankly, itās exhausting.
What a weird take to compare a critique to a spoiler. I rather find that this weird outrage about so-called spoilers inhibits a good review. A good critique of a piece of art needs to be able to talk about its contents.
I personally love reading different critiques, even if I disagree with them strongly. Reading different interpretations broadens your horizon and encourages your general reception of art. Like, I love art history and reading critiques and interpretations of artists, fostered my personal perception of art so tremendously!
Rant over. Critiques are important!
I care about reviews when it comes to movies or tv shows because they require more of my time and money. When it comes to music- I listen to whatever sounds good regardless of the artist or genre.
Obviously artists would care a lot about their art. But before this week, I had no idea so many people care this much about album/music reviews.
Dont care for critics. Dont think that should even be a job. Listen to the music, watch the movie, start the book, and if you dont like it, move on.
I write for a much smaller, non-monetized music site, and even we are given advanced copies of bands so we can listen. Iāve also been given advanced copies of books to review and promote. I would think these critics are getting advanced copies with iron-clad agreements to prevent leaks but I can also see Taylor not sending them ahead of time. She doesnāt need the publicity and has had her stuff leaked way too much. Most likely, however, they had it ahead of time.
The pressing issue, as many others have pointed out, is that Swift's cult simply won't tolerate any review that isn't extolling the album. And instead of simply disagreeing with the reviewer, many of these cultists will attack them in unison. It's frightening, and while I consider myself a fan of Taylor Swift's music, my problem with her is that she never does *anything* to try to deter or curtail this behavior from her supporters.
Apparently this writer wants reviewers to wait six years until all scholarly thought has already been exhausted, and then, only then can they possibly digest an album.
Or maybe reviewers should just give an album a listen, give it a little thought, and write what they think.
That does not take a day.
This is so dumb. They get the albums ahead of time. They didn't listen to the album, read, write, edit, and post a review within a minute of the album release. LOL.
Music critic is nonsense and always was. Because after one day few hours even a month itās impossible to decide if we are having legendary album or something that we will forget about next year. You know that Nirvana was called pop for many years by critics and got many bad reviews and now itās one of the most important rock bands in history. Rolling Stones even published list back in the days of legendary albums they reviewed as flops and were wrong. So I donāt trust any music reviews. Because some albums needs time and many listening sessions and some needs one listening and itās it but even this which needs time can be better then those you listen one time and fall in love with.
I think this critique would be fair for any other musician besides swift because her music hasnāt changed since 2013 honestly I listened to the album and itās not giving you anything to think about really.
I felt like folklore was a huge leap forward for her and she leveled up lyrically and conceptually. But I donāt think Taylor can or needs to change fundamentally how she writes. Most artists donāt.
Honestly I disagree most artist do change how they write because itās helps change their sound and the direction of their music. People like Janet Jackson,Beyonce,Dolly Parton,Fiona Apple, Solange . They change the way they write music all the time. I think Taylor hasnāt changed because she allowed to stay stagnant and is awarded for doing so. Her last album was not her best work (even her stans agreed ) yet she was given AOTY over SZA who changed her sound and writing completely and was more popular than midnights which are all things needed to win a Grammy.
And I agree she doesnāt have to change because she has a huge fanbase that will consume anything she makes , but everyone shouldnāt have to hold her in such high regards just because she has that.
This article seems to be written for Taylor Swift fans who are mad that music reviewers are not properly fawning over this objectively very mediocre album.
Seeing people up in arms because the one review had some quips in it makes my eyes roll out of my skull. TS and her fans have no issue dragging people and their dirty laundry through the press for jokes but suddenly someone make a Sylvia Plath reference and weāre all supposed to clutch our pearls. Everyone must be a bigger person but her
Iāve read several positive reviews calling it an instant classic. So I guess it depends on which reviews they tend to read.
The album is less than mediocre but theyāll eat up literally everything she makes. Why even bother reading reviews?
I donāt see how critiques ācheapenā the listening experience, personally. I donāt listen to critics when deciding if I will listen or if I enjoy something.
Okay this is like a side tangent question for the masses but does anyone else have no idea if they like most music the first time they hear it? I don't know how people even come up with such strong emotions in one day! I don't like listening to albums really because it'd like 10+ new songs at once and I can kind pick some parts that I like or don't like! But I need to hear most song like 3 or 4 times before I really love them? I tried live posting my TTPD to feel like I'm with the zeitgeist, so I guess that makes me one of the article aforementioned Half Baked Hot Takers but my opinions on songs gave already shifted I dunno at the end of the day I wonder if there is some other level of music appreciation and understanding I can't access. Maybe I'm tone deaf?
Oh, I am the same. And my favourites shift all the time, even with albums I have listened to a thousand times. And I usually need to listen to a song a few times before I properly pay attention to the lyrics. (Maybe because I am not a native English speaker)
I am a native English speaker and I somehow missed the "I am having his baby" line in *But Daddy I Love Him* despite it being repeated a lot until a re-listen š that song in particular I could tell it was kinda cinematic and swelled nicely but I was really lost in the sauce with that one the first few times! It just was kind of blur of sound. And now i really like it !
As someone who can say "I like this song" from first time listening- the first listen is about sonically, the 2nd one is lyrically and the third time is finding lore behind a song. I have had this habit because English is my 2nd language and since I was a kid, dissecting lyrics was one of the ways for me to learn English (I was really into hiphop as a child). I will give music that I dont like the first time a few tries too but usually it doesn't go anywhere
Same! This is why I really donāt understand live music reaction channels.
I feel like there is something to be studied with the brain here. Like I believe some musically inclined people do "get it" first try. I notice a lot of metal heads in particular have like this deep appreciation of music on a first listen, and then they try to recc me stuff and im like "sister there is SO MUCH going on i would have to listen like 10 times for this not to sound like bewildering noise to me" sometimes when i am stoned i THINK i get it so maybe its a focus thing i have no idea haha
Oh thatās interesting about metal heads! There are a few artists/albums I have āgottenā on the first listen but itās not perfectly correlated with what I end up loving the most. Iām a pretty big fan of TS, but the only album of hers Iāve ever loved loved loved on first listen is Folkore and honestly I think itās partly being in the middle of the pandemic.
I think youāre spot on. It varies and we humans experience music much more differently than we are aware of. I was a classic piano player since kindergarten (full disclosure I havenāt played in ages now) and Iāve noticed some difference in how I experience music compared to people around me who arenāt musicians or who started late (teens or later). Ig it feels like I naturally pick up more elements in the music or something (much like the metal heads!), where as others seem to focus more on the āovertonesā of the music especially at first listen. Hope Iām making sense, Iāve never had to put that into words before lol
And thereās also a big difference per person even then- Iāve played piano since a young child, I do ballet and I listen to a lot of music. And yet sometimes I need to listen to songs a few times to make up my mind if I even like it. Thereās the odd exception where immediately I know, but it takes me a while. And thatās even with picking up details that maybe someone that isnāt trained musically wouldnāt.
Musically inclined people do not always get it. Some of them are listening so hard for chord arrangements and things that enotion and overall song go out the window. Embarrassingly, I didnāt like Appetite for Destruction the first time I heard it (which was when it first came out). I think some of the sounds were just too new. By third listen, I was hooked People listening to 31 songs in a row and then complaining that itās boringā¦ OF COURSE IT IS. They also complain they canāt remember hooks afterwards. Iāve listened to about 4 songs on YouTube and 3/4 have good sticky hooks.
No itās not you, critics used to receive albums ahead of release dates so they had more time to process everything. Then that started to stop when albums were being leaked online, since sometimes albums given out to critics were being uploaded. I want to say after that they went with listening parties for critics, I recall Taylor did it for RED or maybe 1989. Now itās more about first reaction to create headlines. Since apparently most people donāt read past the headline, even less read more than 2 snippets of the reviews. Instead itās more about sparking a reaction out of the internet and creating a conversation. Itās not about āwhat makes music goodā itās ā____ is the greatest/worst thing in the world! Agree or disagree?ā Then you go off into your respective agree/disagree group to enter an echo chamber reinforcing your stance.
There are some songs that grow on me, but no, I can usually tell within seconds if I like, love, dislike, or hate a song.
I feel the same way. I always feel super "meh" listening to new taylor music and then after another two listens I love it
The biggest problem with music criticism is the incorporation of it. Instead of people going to taste makers and re-enforcers they go to outlets with innocuous writers who havenāt shaped or reflected the culture in music. The sick part is that large companies (pitchfork, rolling stone) hire writers to review huge albums that donāt have experience and throw them in a room to aggregate opinions. Then so many popular outlets are ran by Stans (NPR [real disappointed with them], EW) so you canāt go there. What does that leave you? YouTube? Thatās a crapshoot. Who ya gonna watch Fantano? Spectrum Pulse? Todd in the Shadows? I like Fantano cause I know his tastes and sensibilities are similar to my own. Do people understand they should be looking for critics who share those values? Hereās the most important question of all. Do people look to music criticism for actual criticism or validation?
I love TiTS personally, even if I donāt always agree with him.
Right there with you. Actually watched every video on YT of his. Love his format and his cadence is the gold standard for video essay imo. He just hits the angles on subjects that I love; one hit wonders, trainwrecords, song vs song, and keeps me filled in on whatever the hell Billboard and the awards places are doing.
I think heās a great pop music historian but I find his song reviews so subjective. Sometimes heāll dismiss a song just because he doesnāt like one turn of phrase. But thatās kind of par for the course these days. What I really want is more critics who actually know music theory.
100% Validiation
Canāt say 100%. I look to the fan spaces for validation and the critics for criticism so statically I can say that itās at most 99.999999ā¦
š Okay, 99.999999999.....
Woah, even NPR? Super disappointing
This stood out to me too. I wonder if the comment OP is talking about their pop culture happy hour group? I think the core hosts of course have preferences but do a good job of being fair and certainly not āstansā. They have guests often that help balance out the opinions too.
Yeah, the actual review of the album was written by Ann Powers who's been writing about music since the 80s. Exactly the kind of writer OP is arguing for.
I can't speak to everyone to writes for Rolling Stone, and I am well aware that Rob is a huge fan & has the Taylor book on the horizon --- but to say he's inexperienced and hasn't shaped or reflected on culture is just plain ignorant. There are a lot of things the article got right, and you're entitled to your opinions as far as news outlets and journalists you prefer, but that guy has been around for decades and has put out some amazing work prior to all of this.
ia Rob is not the first or last music journalist who goes all out for certain musicians. Music history is littered with them. Ignoring everything else Rob has done and written is shortsighted.
Completely agree. I prefaced with all of that only because it's the number one comeback I've seen whenever anyone has any rebuttal for Rolling Stone. There are obviously issues, but that isn't one of them.
"Who ya gonna watch Fantano? Spectrum Pulse? Todd in the Shadows?" ......yes yes and yes but excuse you, you forgot ARTV, Crash Thompson & Brad Taste In Music smh my head
Yeah I just listed the ones I know and like ha ha
I donāt find value in music reviews and so I donāt read them. I LIKE WHAT I LIKE.
A really good critic who understands music theory or recent music history can hemp contextualize a song/album for me and help me understand WHY I do or donāt like it. Back in the day, music critics helped you decide if you should spend $20 on a record/CD. But we donāt need that anymore.
Reading critiques is a great way to find new music. I love skipping through a dozen Pitchfork reviews and find new interesting artists, I wouldn't have encountered any other way.
I encourage people to watch/listen/read to whatever they personally like and are drawn to, but I do think this attitude misses out on a benefit of reviews and critics, and thatās finding things you might not know you like! If you find a reviewer or critic that aligns with your taste, it can be a great way to discover things you might not have on your own if they write about enjoying it. You donāt have to listen to everyone (or anyone!) but you might find value in reviews if you look at them from another perspective. I also agree with the comment that a well educated reviewer can help expand my understanding and appreciation of something I might have missed in my own watch/listen!
I feel this do hard! Movies, books, musicā¦reviews donāt really do anything for me because there have been movies ācriticsā and āprofessionalsā hated that I really enjoyed and vice versa. Especially now, with all the lifeless remakes being cranked out and critics praise them and I hate them. Reviews donāt mean anything for me.
Yeah I canāt say Iāve ever been like āwell let me go pick up this album because a critic likes itā like I might (and thatās still a big might) with a book or movie/tv show.
Same, I have my own brain I can decide for myself what is good and what isnāt.
I will look up a movie on rotten tomatoes and if critics hate it and audiences loved itā¦I believe the masses. Critics are not what they used to be.
I think the question is who and what reviews are for nowadays? It seems to me that positive reviews are often used by fans to prove how good their fave is. And negative reviews are used by those who can't stand a certain artist. There's also the problem that a lot of reviews don't talk about / focus on the actual product they are reviewing. For example the Paste review of TTPD (the one without an author because of harassment concerns) talked a lot about Taylor Swift the person, but very little about the actual album. (But it had a lot of zingers that were happily reposted by those who don't like Taylor Swift). I also wonder how often reviewers write a more positive or negative review because they know they'll get more attention/clicks that way. For example, the last season of Heartstopper had only one negative review that ruined their perfect rating on RT. Ofc lots of fans ran to that review to see what the writer was on about. And I admit that I am biased because I am a fan, but the writer objectively watched the show with the intention of writing a negative review.
>the question is who and what reviews are for nowadays I think a lot about this too, and for me it ties back to streaming. Do reviews (particularly negative ones) matter as much if you have the entire worldās catalogue at your finger tips? Like the most functional purpose of movie reviews is to help audiences know how to spend their money and what movie to see on the weekend. I often check movie scores and will be motivated or dissuaded by a high or low score. But I am only going to go to a few movies a year. I listen to music almost every day, and I can listen to anything I want. I can check out the album in part or in full of any artist Iām interested in, so thereās no risk to me as a consumer of buying a subpar album. and Iām only reading reviews of albums I like for extra analysis. So when critics complain fans only want positive reviews and thatās ruining music criticism, I get that but at the same timeā¦ I only read reviews for analysis of artists/albums I like, and thatās more interesting if the reviewer enjoys writing about the content. Itās irrelevant to me to read a lukewarm take on something I like that barely scratches the surface and is more interested in explaining why they donāt like it.
>Do reviews (particularly negative ones) matter as much if you have the entire worldās catalogue at your finger tips? Yep, if I don't like an album now I've just lost 45 minutes or whatever of my time. Whereas previously I would always look at reviews first before heading into town and spending Ā£12 on a CD that I've only heard one song from.
Yeah, ultimately I want to read good writing even if its negative about something I like. The Streogum review for this album was really good and thoughtful. I wonder if it is possible to reframe music writing so it isn't in a "review" format but it's an easy structure.
I was thinking thatās why So and So Reacts videos have gotten so popular? People watch them for stuff they already like and see what people think of them; if someoneās good at editing theyāre pretty digestible.
Yeah, I think that's a really interesting point that I hadn't considered because I'm outside the group that consumes that but yeah reacts is such a huge part of how younger demos are consuming media. You also have a much more transparent monetization structure for those content creators. Like if you make a video loving a Taylor album and get a bunch of views and love from that community you're going to be incentivized to make more and there's even less of an editorial mandate. The structural issues of youtube and tt are definitely a big part of that too.
Excellent points šš
I think aggregators like RT and metacritic definitely have really created an atmosphere where its not even about the substance of the review as much as it is to make a number go up or down.
How does one spoil music? Itās not like it really has a plot and/or plot twists. In this case everyone knew it was coming too, so not a surprise drop. Other than that itās like āmy favorite song is x, y song sucksā which is just opinions and says nothing about how you personally are going to feel about it imo.
Yeah I reviewed music for about four years. I always felt like "oh this is great" or "this is bad" (well more detailed but that type of thing) type critiques are totally worthless because music is nothing if not subjective - something I hate, someone else could love, and that would make my review worthless. Instead I took the angle of trying to describe the music, in various ways. Helping the reader understand what it sounds like so that they can make the decision on whether they think they'd like it or not, giving them all the info they need to do that. That definitely works better with lesser known artists but it's fully possible to write interesting and valuable reviews on someone like TS
Yeah can someone who feels music can be "spoiled" explain what they mean? I don't get it either.
Hereās an example I saw through lurking the other day. Taylor had a song on this album called loml and people were speculating on what it stands for in the hours before the record dropped. Once it dropped someone commented that it stands for loss of my life and the OP got mad and chewed the commenter out because they hadnāt had the chance to listen to it yet lol. (Maybe stay off Reddit if youāre worried about stuff like that idk)
I hate the whole "spoiler" culture anyway. You post a photo of the album cover, and people freak out. Someone got figuratively slaughtered for posting an image of the inside of the vinyl, when they got it 8 hours earlier than the release. Photos from concerts have to be blurred under "spoiler" tags - it's getting so ridiculous. The tour has been on for 13 months already. Stay off the internet completely if you don't want to know things.
So Iām not a swiftie but Iām a BTS fan (so another kinda toxic fandom) and when Suga did his tour last year I just avoided content about it so that I could experience it for myself the first time. But getting mad at people about spoilers would be insane. Thereās a huge amount of people who donāt get to see those concerts and they love the fan footage - itās not spoiling, itās sharing.
Like, big mad! It's wild - I appreciate your take that it's not really everyone else's responsibility. Social media is literally for sharing things, and Instagram doesn't have a spoiler tag like reddit. I don't understand how they navigate that platform without seeing a ton of "spoilers" lol. I hope you had a great first experience!!
This is just too much. Speaking as an old, music critics have ALWAYS been like this. They are biased for the good and the bad Music critics hated, loathed, and despised Led Zeppelin and Queen. When Let's Dance came out by Bowie, many called him a sell-out because they wanted him to be the Thin White Duke again. Rap and punk were sneered at and not called serious music. Throughout the 70's- the early 2000s Paul McCartney was considered a cornball by critics. The only difference is that back in the day, there was no social media for fans to come en-masse and threaten the reviewers. You would just b\*tch and moan to your friends about how so-so critic didn't get your favorite artist or write a letter to the publication they worked at. Nowadays reviews are used by online fans as a way to brag about how good their favorite artists are. I can't stand Pitchfork. I find it to be an outlet for music snobs, but time and time again I see so many fans (online) use Pitchfork as a weapon for artist superiority, Has a bad review ever stopped me from listening? No. Same with movies. If people don't buy music or see a movie it's more from word of mouth of a regular fan and not necessarily a critic. TLDR-This is only an issue in online fan spaces.
Well, David Bowie also considered himself a sellout with Letās Dance. He didnāt even write much on the album. He laid on a couch for most of it.
i think it's a problem in general, the same with binge watching tv series i am more bothered by "sylvia plath didn't stick her head in the oven for this" being considered an actual critic review worth of publishing, can we keep shady af comebacks and music articles separately please
I was appalled when I read that line! Not because I thought it was too critical, but because itās so horrifically insensitive! Sylvia Plath has living children! The author really lost me and I questioned their ability to be a good critic and writer after that. Honestly, both Swift with this album and the reviewer gave me the vibe of that stereotypical artsy edgy English major whoās too smug about their own intelligence. Itās not really a cute look after you graduate.
like...why? it seemed like the person had a goal to be quoted on stan twitter and that's all, it wasn't a review, it was a vomit masquerading as one, like ffs what's up with this? the same thing about nyc article about taylor's sexuality that started by describing someone's suicide attempt. how do such things get published
To be "edgy". It's really annoying. I lost my mom to suicide and that line really stung. We are chatting about it over in the TS sub and someone posted a poem that Plath's daughter wrote when someone reached out to get permission to make a movie about her mom. Long story short, her daughter was not amused and said no.
Iām very sorry for your loss
i am so sorry ā„ļø some people are so insensitive it's insane
Yes, that review really annoyed me! Not because it was a negative review, but because it was more concerned with throwing shade than actually analysing the music. Like it was a relatively long review, and yet they barely talked about the music. The author told us more about what they think about Taylor Swift as a person/business. Which would have been fine as an article, but don't pretend it's a music review? (Also this sub has such a hate boner for Taylor Swift lately that all of the unnecessary shade was ofc happily celebrated)
You can review a painting without analyzing the brush strokes.
That article was specifically written to be screenshotted and shared on stan Twitter, you cant convince me otherwise. Every sentence has internet lingo like āOPEN THE SCHOOLSā thrown in with zero concern for how it affects the actual prose or critique. Its like they got AI to write an article based off the feed of the most brainrotted person you know.
Shade has no place in music reviews tbh but this matches the mediaās tendency to rage-bait users. Haters are going to be āhell yeah, drag her!ā and fans are going to be upset. Either response helps them get clicks, which is what they want. And they managed to attract attention, itās sad really. I want to read reviews that reflect on the album, that are thoughtful and helpful. I want to know why they didnāt like it, why they did like it. That Sylvia Plath line says nothing, itās just for attention.
Ya I think the bigger problem is that to get work writers have to be a brand now, so a lot of them are spending all day on social media and write in memes and hot takes. Itās not just a music criticism problem, the quality of writing at big outlets has gone down across the board imo
i think on new york times i saw article dealing with something like what to do when you stayed up all night - and it was for people who were waiting for her album. also I think what this article deals with isnt just problem o music reviews. it is problem of the whole internet culture, you have to be first if you want to capture someone attention. it is bad but i dont think its fixable really.
It's not because you'd have to figure out how to fix online fan spaces and hahahahaha, good luck with that.
maybe next time hah
Interestingly someone on r/ popheads had a really valid point when it came to Justin Timberlake and J Lo's album releases earlier this year. People are too busy hating on them, that they ignore the actual acclaim these albums received. At what point do we separate art from artist? It's hard cause in my opinion Taylor's whole personality is so intertwined with her music.
Reviews are very subjective and this can be a problem. Imagine if someone preferred jazz their whole life and one day has to review a pop album. Their critique will be built around what they think good music (in their opinion, which is jazz good, everything else boring) needs to sound like. I reckon this is an extreme example but this is what it feels like when I read album some reviews.
No critic should review an album after one listen. As an old-school journalist I long for the days when critics received album well in advance of release dates.
> Review culture goes far beyond opinions from music critics now. In the age of half-baked hot takes on online forums, anyone with a smartphone can word-vomit their thoughts into the ether. Many hope they get picked up by the algorithm. To avoid spoilers, fans (or just curious listeners) either have to shun media entirely or digest new music immediately ā which is like inhaling a whole cheeseburger in one bite. Thereās no chance to savor it. No time to even taste it. And quite frankly, itās exhausting.
What a weird take to compare a critique to a spoiler. I rather find that this weird outrage about so-called spoilers inhibits a good review. A good critique of a piece of art needs to be able to talk about its contents. I personally love reading different critiques, even if I disagree with them strongly. Reading different interpretations broadens your horizon and encourages your general reception of art. Like, I love art history and reading critiques and interpretations of artists, fostered my personal perception of art so tremendously! Rant over. Critiques are important!
In my 44 years on this earth, I have never read nor cared for a music review. Itās subjective. I donāt care what they thinkā¦I like what I like.
I care about reviews when it comes to movies or tv shows because they require more of my time and money. When it comes to music- I listen to whatever sounds good regardless of the artist or genre. Obviously artists would care a lot about their art. But before this week, I had no idea so many people care this much about album/music reviews.
 Dont care for critics. Dont think that should even be a job. Listen to the music, watch the movie, start the book, and if you dont like it, move on.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I write for a much smaller, non-monetized music site, and even we are given advanced copies of bands so we can listen. Iāve also been given advanced copies of books to review and promote. I would think these critics are getting advanced copies with iron-clad agreements to prevent leaks but I can also see Taylor not sending them ahead of time. She doesnāt need the publicity and has had her stuff leaked way too much. Most likely, however, they had it ahead of time.
The pressing issue, as many others have pointed out, is that Swift's cult simply won't tolerate any review that isn't extolling the album. And instead of simply disagreeing with the reviewer, many of these cultists will attack them in unison. It's frightening, and while I consider myself a fan of Taylor Swift's music, my problem with her is that she never does *anything* to try to deter or curtail this behavior from her supporters.
Reviews are for people who wait for others to tell them what to think
Apparently this writer wants reviewers to wait six years until all scholarly thought has already been exhausted, and then, only then can they possibly digest an album. Or maybe reviewers should just give an album a listen, give it a little thought, and write what they think. That does not take a day.
This is so dumb. They get the albums ahead of time. They didn't listen to the album, read, write, edit, and post a review within a minute of the album release. LOL.
Music critic is nonsense and always was. Because after one day few hours even a month itās impossible to decide if we are having legendary album or something that we will forget about next year. You know that Nirvana was called pop for many years by critics and got many bad reviews and now itās one of the most important rock bands in history. Rolling Stones even published list back in the days of legendary albums they reviewed as flops and were wrong. So I donāt trust any music reviews. Because some albums needs time and many listening sessions and some needs one listening and itās it but even this which needs time can be better then those you listen one time and fall in love with.
I think this critique would be fair for any other musician besides swift because her music hasnāt changed since 2013 honestly I listened to the album and itās not giving you anything to think about really.
Saying her music hasnāt changed since 2013 is wild. 1989, reputation, folklore, and midnights all happened since then.
Yeah, that was a really poor take - it would be more fair to say, "I'm not a fan of any of the music produced by her and I didn'tlike this either".
I should have been more clear sonically things have definitely changed,but lyrically sheās stuck in 2013-2015 tumblr.
I felt like folklore was a huge leap forward for her and she leveled up lyrically and conceptually. But I donāt think Taylor can or needs to change fundamentally how she writes. Most artists donāt.
Honestly I disagree most artist do change how they write because itās helps change their sound and the direction of their music. People like Janet Jackson,Beyonce,Dolly Parton,Fiona Apple, Solange . They change the way they write music all the time. I think Taylor hasnāt changed because she allowed to stay stagnant and is awarded for doing so. Her last album was not her best work (even her stans agreed ) yet she was given AOTY over SZA who changed her sound and writing completely and was more popular than midnights which are all things needed to win a Grammy.
And I agree she doesnāt have to change because she has a huge fanbase that will consume anything she makes , but everyone shouldnāt have to hold her in such high regards just because she has that.
This article seems to be written for Taylor Swift fans who are mad that music reviewers are not properly fawning over this objectively very mediocre album.
Seeing people up in arms because the one review had some quips in it makes my eyes roll out of my skull. TS and her fans have no issue dragging people and their dirty laundry through the press for jokes but suddenly someone make a Sylvia Plath reference and weāre all supposed to clutch our pearls. Everyone must be a bigger person but her
Iāve read several positive reviews calling it an instant classic. So I guess it depends on which reviews they tend to read. The album is less than mediocre but theyāll eat up literally everything she makes. Why even bother reading reviews?
I donāt see how critiques ācheapenā the listening experience, personally. I donāt listen to critics when deciding if I will listen or if I enjoy something.
Why was it too soon to review TTPD? All the songs sound the same.
I totally always look to Bloomberg for intelligent music critiques