Especially since none of those two camps have any sort of definitive set of bands whatsoever. People lump bands that you've expressed disdain for into "ap.net bands" and people who hate on p4k ignore the fact that they love a lot of bands who get some serious love around these parts too.
agreed. people who shit on supposed pitchfork/ap while riding the nuts of the other tend to ignore that they cover many of the same bands, and many users here listen to artists from both camps
The only thing I like about Pitchfork (I mean, over AP) - is that they're not afraid to give out low scores. Look at a lot of the staff (and indeed user) reviews on here and like 90-95% of them are a 6/10 or above. Which gives a very small scale to work on, and doesn't set albums that are really good apart from albums that are just average.
I feel more inclined to read a review if a score is extremely high or extremely low. not that I don't enjoy reviews more in the middle, but maybe it's the "car crash" factor to reading low-score reviews. If I'm browsing reviews here I always click on the ones that are really bad
If I get a grade on a test less than an 80%, I consider that to be a poor test. Same with reviews, If I see an album with a score of 7.9 or below, I'd consider it to be a poor score. So for me, I find pitchforks scores to be much too low most of the time, so I don't really rely on what they say at all. AP.net, on the other hand, gives out scores 8 and above all the time, so I'm more inclined to listen to what reviewers here have to say. But that's just me.
I hardly consider a 7.9 a poor score whatsoever when it comes to a review score