November 4, 200816 yr NME DO cover more than two genres though. It had features on The Cure, Buraka Som Sistema, Thomas Tantrum, Crystal Castles, Oasis to name a few this week. Eclecticism there no? Q for me, is too fuddy-duddy and aged. Some bizarre reviews over the last year and somewhat musically-closed-minded I'd argue. Different strokes though and all that. Ok maybe a bit of over-exaggeration on my part about the number of genres, but even though they do cover lots of artists, they seem to stick to certain ones more. Oh and that prick Jon McClure seems to be in just about every issue, talking about some c**p or another :puke2: From reading NME, I have been introduced to some DOWN RIGHT AMAZING bands/ artists though, like Crystal Castles, Foals, Lightspeed Champion to name a few. The only reason I'm slightly embarrassed by Q is because it is such a "dad mag" (and they seem to love Razor$h!te and only gave Bloc Party's new album 3 stars :()
November 4, 200816 yr To be fair to Q in a year where Coldplay, Portishead, Oasis, Kaiser Chiefs, Razorlight, Kings Of Leon, Duffy and Snow Patrol have released albums they've only given one 5 * all year... to TV On The Radio....
November 5, 200816 yr To be fair to Q in a year where Coldplay, Portishead, Oasis, Kaiser Chiefs, Razorlight, Kings Of Leon, Duffy and Snow Patrol have released albums they've only given one 5 * all year... to TV On The Radio.... And what an album to give it to. :wub:
November 6, 200816 yr Why should I be on this my cherub? I am quite the socially-challenged polydactylite. Though for srs, NME isn't so bad anymore. They seem to have moved on from post-punk and focus on random alt-type acts. An interesting article on African music t'other week for example. If we label and whitewash NME surely we iz as bad as them? :( THAT SAID, the whole idea of a "cool list" is obnoxiously standard for NME. It defines everything negative anyone has ever said about NME ever. ¿Yeahhh? Vampire Weekend? :P Without dwelling on the complex socio-economic factors that can render a person homeless, really, Seasick Steve should have a bath, get a job and shut the f*** up. Of course, you can’t not dwell on such details; Steve’s shtick is singing about his time on the streets. Yet, 66 years old and four albums in, the former hobo ignores the abuse, the horror and the desolation that comes with not having a roof above you. Instead, Steve sings about life on the open road with no-one but his trusty hound for company. In doing so – just like this review’s tasteless opening sentence – he makes a bad joke out of the misery faced daily by over 100million people worldwide. Despite this, you can’t open a music periodical without being engulfed with lashings of praise about Seasick Steve. And why does no-one offer anything other than unswerving praise (ie: lies) about him? Because we live in an age where so many people pretend to like music, obsessed with not falling behind the hum of the blogosphere. Fact is, music finds itself in a time of flux– bands break in different ways and rarely unify people in the same way they used to – and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. But is this the best we can do? Desperate-to-be-authentic, carbohydrate-stodgy white blues, played by an elderly man pretending to be a tramp? Really, you deserve better. Apart from allowing Steve somewhere to sleep tonight, this is an irredeemable honk of $h!t. James McMahon 2 out of 10 Thats an awful review. Did they really let that be published? And this cool list is stupid, they're reccomending people, arguably telling people who to like, just like they're saying that in blogs they shouldn't as i've put in bold. I can decide for myself by hearing the song, which is why i don't really see the point in reviews, unless you have little time to listen to an album.
November 6, 200816 yr Vampire Weekend? :P Thats an awful review. Did they really let that be published? And this cool list is stupid, they're reccomending people, arguably telling people who to like, just like they're saying that in blogs they shouldn't as i've put in bold. I can decide for myself by hearing the song, which is why i don't really see the point in reviews, unless you have little time to listen to an album. What about Vampire Weekend? And why is it an awful review? It tells the truth, much more then most other magazines/websites do.
November 6, 200816 yr What about Vampire Weekend? And why is it an awful review? It tells the truth, much more then most other magazines/websites do. Well i just thought the african music review wouldn't be about traditional african music at all :P I think its an awful review because it doesn't review any songs, in fact it barely mentions what the album sounds like and how good it is without explaining it. It just says its $h!t, and that Seasick Steve shouldn't get praise and that he pretends to be a tramp...
November 6, 200816 yr Well i just thought the african music review wouldn't be about traditional african music at all :P I think its an awful review because it doesn't review any songs, in fact it barely mentions what the album sounds like and how good it is without explaining it. It just says its $h!t, and that Seasick Steve shouldn't get praise and that he pretends to be a tramp... I am confused. Are you saying Vamp Wknd are African? Or they're not? Or something else? It doesn't review songs on the whole no but I think it does a pretty good job on summing up the whole album/feelings on the album. You can't say it doesn't say what it sounds like when it does ("Desperate-to-be-authentic, carbohydrate-stodgy white blues") and it can't say how good it is simply because it is not. And so what of they say he's $h!t and pretends to be a tramp? Would you rather read review after review praising the artist/album with zero criticism. This is what I think NME does well. Eventhough I hardly agree with their reviews most of the time I can easily see where they are coming from and don't bull$h!t.
November 7, 200816 yr You can vote on the readers top 10, then the readers top 20 is going to be featured in NME in a few weeks. I'm hoping Noel Fielding gets a mention, at the minute he's only number 7, what is wrong with the world?! :o
November 7, 200816 yr James Ford has a cool rating of 3.62? Xavier from Justice only 4.15? Grff Rhys at 3.41!!!!???! Nicky Wire cool? He spends all day watching re-runs of Welsh rugby matches...in a dress, yes...but re-runs of Welsh rugby matches. NME readers are t****.
November 7, 200816 yr Thats an awful review. Did they really let that be published? And this cool list is stupid, they're reccomending people, arguably telling people who to like, just like they're saying that in blogs they shouldn't as i've put in bold. I can decide for myself by hearing the song, which is why i don't really see the point in reviews, unless you have little time to listen to an album. It was actually published in the magazine, which prooves how $h!t not only their journalism but also how $h!t their editor is. And why is it an awful review? It tells the truth, much more then most other magazines/websites do. It's a $h!t review because he doesnt even review it, not much of what he says is the truth, infact you say more that most magazines and webisites do, yet NME lie as much as The Daily Mail. And if he did tell the truth its still a $h!t review as he didnt even review it. I am confused. Are you saying Vamp Wknd are African? Or they're not? Or something else? It doesn't review songs on the whole no but I think it does a pretty good job on summing up the whole album/feelings on the album. You can't say it doesn't say what it sounds like when it does ("Desperate-to-be-authentic, carbohydrate-stodgy white blues") and it can't say how good it is simply because it is not. And so what of they say he's $h!t and pretends to be a tramp? Would you rather read review after review praising the artist/album with zero criticism. This is what I think NME does well. Eventhough I hardly agree with their reviews most of the time I can easily see where they are coming from and don't bull$h!t. It doesnt sum up the whole album/feelings on the album as he doesnt mention the album. Most reviews i read are actually professionally written so when they always do critise it, i dont know what reviews you read but it sounds like many NME reviews to me. 'dont bull$h!t' :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: thats a good one, you should be a comedian.
November 8, 200816 yr I am confused. Are you saying Vamp Wknd are African? Or they're not? Or something else? It doesn't review songs on the whole no but I think it does a pretty good job on summing up the whole album/feelings on the album. You can't say it doesn't say what it sounds like when it does ("Desperate-to-be-authentic, carbohydrate-stodgy white blues") and it can't say how good it is simply because it is not. And so what of they say he's $h!t and pretends to be a tramp? Would you rather read review after review praising the artist/album with zero criticism. This is what I think NME does well. Eventhough I hardly agree with their reviews most of the time I can easily see where they are coming from and don't bull$h!t. I agree with Chris, but maybe i shouldn't comment since i haven't heard the album. I'm not saying he isn't pretending to be a tramp, i'm saying that someone pretending to be a tramp doesn't properly describe an album. I see what you mean though.
November 10, 200816 yr Nicky Wire cool? He spends all day watching re-runs of Welsh rugby matches...in a dress, yes...but re-runs of Welsh rugby matches. NME readers are t****. Nicky Wire might've been cool in 1991, when The Manics were young, dangerous and kind of sexy.... But NOW???? ROFLMAO..... Anyway, I think we all know that Richie Edwards was always the coolest member of the Manics..... Yeah, I know, it's easy to say that when he was the one who disappeared without trace, presumed dead, and didn't become fat, old and boring like the rest of them, but still...... :rolleyes: And, indeed, NME readers are tw@ts.....Except the ones on BJ who actually KNOW it's cr@p..... :lol: :lol:
November 10, 200816 yr Most reviews i read are actually professionally written so when they always do critise it, i dont know what reviews you read but it sounds like many NME reviews to me. Actually, the review could be read as the journalist having so much contempt for the artist, that he just cant bring himself to review the album properly, because he feels it's that worthless....
November 10, 200816 yr That's precisely what it was. Christ, even Phil Collins didn't get that much $h!t for 'Another Day in Paradise'. The reviews editor should have told him to rewrite it or give it to someone else who would at least listen. Either that or the NME are annoyed that Seasick Steve made a name for himself without their help...you will notice the NME champion 'their' acts over any other regardless of how $h!te they are.
November 10, 200816 yr That's precisely what it was. Christ, even Phil Collins didn't get that much $h!t for 'Another Day in Paradise'. The reviews editor should have told him to rewrite it or give it to someone else who would at least listen. Either that or the NME are annoyed that Seasick Steve made a name for himself without their help...you will notice the NME champion 'their' acts over any other regardless of how $h!te they are. Collins DID get plenty of stick for it though, and rightly so, utterly patronising, dribbling sh!te.... The best criticism though for me came not from NME or Melody Maker (RIP), but from a quite brilliant rant from Bill Bailey on "...Buzzcocks"... Hilarious... :lol: :lol: I think you may be onto something with the second paragraph though, I mean, is Seasick Steve really worse then The Kooks, Razorsh!te or Pigeon Detectives....? I think that would be utterly impossible.... :rolleyes:
November 10, 200816 yr The weird thing is though that people who read and vote on the website are completely different to the readers of the magazine. :lol:
Create an account or sign in to comment