"then downloading their record on Limewire just because of the review"
Am I a thousand years old? That's what it feels like. Also, am I crazy? You can remember an instance of your reading something and then DOWNLOADING A RECORD WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT. Am I crazy?
Also, no, critics never mattered. It's one of the few fields where you get to talk like you're an expert about things you know absolutely nothing about from an outsiders point of view while resting on the laurels of "being cool".
They're the original "bloggers" - and I mean that in the worst possible way.
... My day-time gig is essentially reviewing things. A decent chunk of my friends are music journalists, so I know them and the way most of them think. None of them have ever been in bands or actually independently championed things purely based on love.
so reviewers are basically failures? maybe for yourself and others. I consider myself very successful with my day job and what I do outside of reviewing. I think critics matter, just specific ones like people have already mentioned. The ones who align with your tastes are still relevant otherwise I wouldn't get hundreds of twitter replies and messages asking for more information and analysis anytime I tweet about a new album
..Inside of the field they're supposedly "experts" in. Very few are actual enthusiasts who are driven by no ulterior motives. I'd consider myself to be a successful musician, I guess - outside of my journalism. Opposite ends of the spectrum here.
And thanks, you mentioning tweeting as a measurement of how relevant something is, thinking it actually means something - says it all; I don't even have to think of anything to say myself.
I would say I'm an actual enthusiast since I begin by writing reviews in my xanga blog back in 2002 that only my friends read, I have no ulterior motives other than to discuss good music and share that passion with others. Twitter and tweeting do mean something, it's how a lot of musicians and bands reveal updates, songs, etc. It is a way to interact with musicians, etc.
just sounds like you are a really bitter person, I feel sorry for you.
Yeah, because someone like you would actually admit to being anything less than "incredibly genuine" and "caring about grassroots musicians".
Alright, I'm bitter just because I choose to live outside of words people type on the internet that won't matter as soon as someone posts something new. Good. That's established now.
Please, tell me more. What do you review, where are they published, and who are your friends. I would love to read these so I can find out what a leeches review sounds like.
Musical equipment. Most current magazines in the field. People from most paper magazines based in the UK as well as some popular internet-based things. It's all about what you can get and sustaining your popularity without actually having any genuine knowledge about what it is that you are talking about.
it's fine if you want to live outside of the words on the internet, that's fine, more power to you, but you don't have to be a shithead about it and piss in everyone's cereal. That's what makes you sound bitter.
I know I'm genuine and countless other people on this site and elsewhere would back me up. If I was just in it for the free records or to make friends in the industry or feel important, I would have quit writing years ago.
I stated my opinion. I didn't say that anyone could have another opinion. I'm only of the opinon that people should create more original content and attach themselves less, that's all.
I don't know you and have absolutely no desire to, until you create some thoughtful original content.
So you bullshit in your reviews about technical things? You don't know what you're talking about but you're reviewing objective, measurable things from equipment? Not only does that make you an awful person, it makes any magazine who publishes your reviews less reputable, but it's also completely different from reviewing subjective pieces of art.
I do not review music - I review equipment. I love equipment because I love making music. I love making music because I love listening to music.
I am not a music journalist, so what you said at the end goes without saying. You really didn't get the gist of my original comment.
Geeking out over equipment using pen and paper is as far away from music as I get. I spend all my waking time engrossing myself in it.
Your argument is basically a rehashed version of the argument that says "People who can't play music shouldn't be reviewers." Well LOL then. The best sports broadcasters in the world - let's talk about Marv Alberts, let's talk about Al Michaels, Mike Tirico, Jim Nantz, Bob Costas, Howard Cosell, the list goes on - did any of those guys play the sports they covered? Some of those guys can dissect a play-by-play like no one else, without ever playing the game professionally. You don't have to be a musicians to criticize music.
It really isn't. You can really know what you're talking about if you're a true enthustiast and it'd be obvious if a sports commentor didn't know his shit because he'd fall flat on his face. I feel the same way about _a lot_ of critics. They talk a lot about things they have no fucking clue about what so ever.
It all comes down to the fact that here in the 00's, I simply do not think it is alright that "music journalists" make a living whereas bands are supposed to supply free content and not even make ends meet. It's absolute bullshit.
And no, you don't have to be a musician to criticize music, but I also do not have to respect you just because you think that you should make a living of talking about things you know nothing about.
Speaking as a "grassroots musician", dedicated press coverage is one of the most critical boosts you can get. Without people to write "words people type on the internet" it would be a lot harder to sustain the creation of original things. Meager as our profile/sales are, they've been helped significantly by coverage by people just like Drew.
Though not actually Drew, 'cause he ain't listened to us. Jerk.
Something that is truly great will take on AND survive without the internet; All my favorite bands came about before the internet and they're all pretty fucking weird. Interesting how that works.
Most critics are more prone to simply fuel the fire of whatever happens to be hip and the moment, only to later abandon it for the next thing.
haha! music journalists making a living. that was a good one. none of the hacks who write for this website get paid a dime, man. you're caught up in a world where everyone has an agenda.
Yes, I am talking about people who has it as a full-time gig... That's usually what you mean when you refer to people using a title. Otherwise "a critic" would be anyone with a semi-functioning brain. I share my thoughts on music and art with my friends, but I would never call myself a critic just for that.
But otherwise, you're no John Peel, dude. He truly had no hidden agenda.