Why are they generally not touching new hip hop projects that we listen to? It seems like they are ignoring or oblivious to some dope projects like Lute Goldmouf, Tall Black Guy, Damu, etc.

Where do I go to see the support for artist like that? I need some website suggestions.

Peace
Doitall76

/end post

Search the project you're looking for and find which publications/critics gave it a review.

We are not it.

Pitchfork's kind of a weird outlet right now. They get a lot of hate, and I get some of it, but as far as mainstream venues go they're far more eclectic than most and more willing to shine a light on little-knowns or unknowns. They keep a close eye on the biggest acts but the bulk of their reviews are actually pretty diverse in terms of genre and recognition. If anything, that diversity has become sort of a challenge for them because it has given them a sort of empty identity: like, what's their beat, really? I think this is underscored by the gap that exists between their news coverage and feature stories, on the one hand, and their reviews on the other.

That said, hip hop has never been their strong suit and I feel like their coverage isn't so much bad in itself as it's just really sporadic and uneven. Yeah, they miss a lot, but their reviews this year have included a lot of stuff we do talk about here: Little Simz, Ka, a lot of Griselda projects, Topaz Jones, Wiki, Navy Blue, a few MMG releases, etc. With hip hop, I don't think they really know who they are, let alone what audience they're trying to reach. Whereas with their coverage of, say, jazz and experimental shit, there's more coherence across the reviews (even while retaining some sense of diversity).

Anyhow, I don't have a recommendation for where to go for good hip hop coverage... I haven't found much. I keep an eye on Reddit's hiphopheads subreddit for news and new releases -- even though it skews more popular on the whole (and distinctly younger, lol), there's a steady beat of underground shit that gets shine. I take bits and pieces from different places but there's not a good single source, imo.


-thebigfunk

~ i could still snort you under the table ~

I'll add that they don't really do snarky know-it-all reviews much anymore, especially with rap artists. Negative reviews in general are out of fashion in music criticism right now. With so much music available, seems dumb to devote a lot of journalistic energy to not liking something.

>I'll add that they don't really do snarky know-it-all reviews
>much anymore, especially with rap artists. Negative reviews in
>general are out of fashion in music criticism right now. With
>so much music available, seems dumb to devote a lot of
>journalistic energy to not liking something.

Yeah, and to the extent that they've embraced "poptimism" (ugh, i hate that term), the old snarky voice is harder to reconcile with a "we take even the poppiest of pop seriously" perspective.

They *do* still lash out occasionally, most recently at Ed Sheeran. And I can't even be that mad at that, lol...

They have a lot of flaws but I still learn a lot from watching their reviews section (moreso than actually reading the reviews, I suppose).

-thebigfunk

~ i could still snort you under the table ~

they did go pretty hard on the zack fox album, which to be fair felt like 25% joke, but it didnt go over well online.

i think the point that they dont have as honed in of a HH audience, its easy for them to miss certain pockets of releases

They don't cover various genres as much as they cover the loose field "interesting music". While I know some people applaud the surface-level lack of boundaries, I think it has led to *less* diversity in the types of music covered in reviews and due to their influence, it's an across the board issue in "general", non-genre specific music writing.

Do you mean it has led to less diversity of more in-depth coverage, i.e. covering a little of everything leaves a lot underserved? I'd agree with that.

One of the things the Quietus does well is, I think, is they have semi-regular columns that are a little more genre- or scene-based. So even though their formal reviews are a little of everything, they try to provide a bit more of a genre perspective in other ways.

-thebigfunk

~ i could still snort you under the table ~

because it wasn’t nihilistic drug rap or some weirdo late career Outkast shit, I’ve written them off as being a publication whose hip hop opinions I couldn’t care less about.

They read as very rockist. Not in the sense that Pitchfork didn't respect hip-hop as music as some rockists think. They viewed it more as a voice of rebellion and not an expression of Blackness.

Granted, music criticism was (and seems to still be) a white field, so they probably didn't know what was wrong with them. But they never seemed to acknowledge their limited view of hip-hop made them inauthentic gatekeepers.

If you weren’t doing some outright ignorant or outright “weird and different” shit, they scoffed at it. Like these mustached wannabe hipster dickheads can tell me something about some Little Brother? FOH. That was their chance (because I still read reviews back then) and they blew it.

Nowadays I’m not reading any of that shit. I’ll watch YouTube videos of people who actually know/like hip hop.

I shouldn't have been, but I figured Minstrel Show was about as universally loved as a mid-00s album could possibly be so I couldn't believe when I saw that they'd panned it.

Hating on “pure” hip hop, while touting the outlandish, stupid shit. This board had a whole bunch of those posters around that time too-geeks trying to be cool talking about “bitches ain’t dancing to it”, as if they were getting bitches like that.

Lots of cornball shit gets forgotten over time.

https://pitchfork.com/features/lists-and-guides/pitchfork-reviews-rescored/

For fun (not official or anything) they re-scored some albums. Overall, they didn't do any albums I thought they really underrated. I was hoping they'd have King Krule 6 Feet Beneath The Moon, which I think they gave a 7, but have really liked everything by him since. I have too, but that's still my favorite album of his.

Interpol bummed me out a bit. I still enjoy that album, but have to admit there's plenty to not like about it--just none of it happens to bother me.

I have always checked for RapReviews.com for well over 20 years. I think that Steve "Flash" Juon has been a phenomenal caretaker for hip hop and doesn't get the shine that he deserves.

That said...I am always puzzled with typically at 1 album that land on the site each week. What radar are they watching to get some of these unheard of's??? I am all for giving exposure to the underground, and shining a light on good hip hop that other sites are sharing. But when you see reviews for "unheard of's" like Glaive & Ericoda and they get a 4, and then I see a review for Scuba Chicken and they get a 0.5, I am like why did they even spend time on these artist instead of better projects. They lost the time listening to the project, typing up and publishing the review, etc. It seems to take away from the site.

I do like that they are looking to bring shine to UK hip hop. Kudos to them for that.

Peace
Doitall76