Pitchfork just called #1 Record and Radio City "overrated"

Is there no limit to their overt wrongness??

In what hopelessly hipster-ass universe have these albums EVER been "overrated" and can I please go live there?

haha, i did think that was a weird review. not even sure why they're bothering reviewing it, really. seem to be resentful that it's being reissued at all. if you've already got it, don't bother buying this new reissue. if you don't have it, for god's sake, buy it.

I like how 'just' in the subject header implies some sort of rolling Pitchfork news channel

Also, fourth reply in this thread: Most Overrated Underrated Band?

pitchfork can go fuck themselves with a rusty something

actually they call it "slightly overrated" which is probably fair:

For many listeners-- including, for a few years, me-- Big Star were more legend than band. They were the beloved patron saints for struggling musicians: These albums were inspired and inspiring but never found a wide audience, yet the fact that they eventually became so revered offered encouragement to young songwriters with their own dream of big stardom and No. 1 records. Even if you never found an audience in your prime, you could always hope for later cult success. And to some extent, of course, the myth overtook the music, which means these two albums tend to be slightly overrated. #1 Record begins to lag on side two, and Hummel's "The India Song" remains imminently skippable (I once tried to convince myself that it was a parody of Beatles mysticism, but that's wishful thinking). Similarly, the complexity of Radio City often masks an elusiveness that dogs Chilton even today. Even so, I would argue that such flaws make these albums all the more fascinating and endearing: "ST 100/6" is surely someone's favorite Big Star song, and Chilton's evasiveness made him a cult figure apart from Big Star.

was the old one in print? cuz if not would they prefer it just stayed out of print? i don't get it. it's not a music review, weird.

pretty much anything above average is at least slightly overrated these days

why not mention the box set coming out in september?

also, you can't overrate perfect, if we're speaking technically

and I hope we are

What's the point of a box set (I mean, is there anything from Big Star that hasn't already been released, re-released and re-re-released by Big Star)?

(xp)

Garbled post. Apologies.

apparently, yes, there's a fair amount of unreleased stuff ...

Nick beat me to it. The critic has a problem with the packaging and has learned to live with the records' flaws. So what?

it is weird to complain about the fact that the two albums are included on one disc ... i mean, it's not ideal, maybe, but there's this thing called the skip button ...

Even if you never found an audience in your prime, you could always hope for later cult success. And to some extent, of course, the myth overtook the music, which means these two albums tend to be slightly overrated.

In context, the statement makes perfect sense. They're slightly overrated among the cult that later found them.

The real unforgivable part of the review is

#1 Record begins to lag on side two, and Hummel's "The India Song" remains imminently skippable

Unless Deusner means that you have to press the skip button RIGHT AWAY, I'm assuming he means "eminently."

I owned this package when it existed in an earlier incarnation about 15 years ago, and, yeah, it was a pain in the ass.

my old big star twofer cd is still to this day one of the best-sounding CDs that i own.

complaining about a reissue and then not mentioning the forthcoming box set is weird

it is kinda annoying that the rating doesn't reflect the author's opinion of the actual music contained therein and is instead based mostly on his complaints about the packaging

i dunno, the fact that i could buy #1 Record & Radio City for $10 back in the day pretty much negated any annoyance with having to skip to track whatever to listen to Radio City ...

india song is lol, i don't skip it

and the 3rd album vinyl reissue from 4 men with beards is so great i will never have to buy it again. and their reissue is the 4th version of that album that i've heard. puts the horrible ryko cd to shame.

what's the prob with the ryko cd? that's all i've heard. is the sound better on the vinyl? or is it just the tracklisting...

In context, the statement makes perfect sense. They're slightly overrated among the cult that later found them.

^^^this - thread go die now

I press the skip button RIGHT AWAY when the india song comes on

"is the sound better on the vinyl?"

WAY better. like, this is a whole new record! better.

like, "i've heard this song a thousand times and i never heard THAT before" better.

four men with beards are angels sent from god, all their records sound amazing and they only put out straight classics

why did pitchfork review this?

ha you know what i think is overrated. . .

pitchfork! you know, the music website!

burn

it is kinda annoying that the rating doesn't reflect the author's opinion of the actual music contained therein and is instead based mostly on his complaints about the packaging

― Kitchen Paper Towel (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, June 16, 2009 5:27 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

it's not a review of the music, it's a review of the release

see also 6.67 for Kind of Blue 50th Anniversary, etc.

people complain about the weirdest shit. and to echo sentiments above, why the fuck is the rating not based on the music at all? utterly stupid review.

Because then every reissue of every classic album would automatically get a 10. Then the reader wouldn't be able to tell which version of the album to buy.

Scott totally OTM about the 4 Men With Beards 3rd/Sister Lovers LP. I Am the Cosmos sounds great, too.

Never picked up any Big Star.

I have "Kanga-Roo" on a sampler that came free with a magazine, some years ago, quite like that. Oh, and I have "Jesus Christ" on a 7", but it's a cover version by Family Cat, I think...

Well, the other weird thing about this headlining review is that the 2fer CD was never really out of print or circulation. It's not a reissue as much as it is just a new pressing of a readily available title with a couple of tiny updates. Not saying it wasn't a shoddy job, but it's hardly even worth mentioning. It seems like the review turns more into a vehicle for lessening popular opinion of the CD format.

...and yet I doubt they'd got to the trouble of highlighting a crumby vinyl pressing for some reissue.

I am apparently one of the few people who gets a kick out of "The India Song." It's a lark, sure, but I think it's fun. I also think that #1 Record is overall way better than Radio City (not to take too much away from RC).

Also, in this age of iTunes/iPods, you can always re-title and re-sequence so that you process each record on its own terms. I picked up the twofer from the library a couple years ago, loaded it into my iTunes, and have never considered the albums a "package" since.

I like the India song

mark stop messing about and buy both albums

i also like india song

i like everything on this twofer CD by Big Star.

it is a splendid way to spend 72 minutes or so

my skeletal frame tries to dislodge itself from my skin whenever that fuckin song starts

The only real duffer on the entire CD is "Mod Lang."

xpost but it's jody stephens i don't know how anyone can hate it :(

omg i need i am the cosmos on lp

i'm with tylerw i love mod lang wtf

tbh my least favourite song might be 'dont lie to me'

Because then every reissue of every classic album would automatically get a 10. Then the reader wouldn't be able to tell which version of the album to buy.

then surely they could just state that outright or have two ratings, one for packaging and one for songs. to force some bullshit score based on side issues that the reader may or may not care about seems needlessly formal.

no it's honest, you're reviewing a thing, that thing is a release, of music

mark stop messing about and buy both albums

― Henry Frog (Frogman Henry), Tuesday, 16 June 2009 23:51 (27 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Oh, OK...

Next time I'm passing Fopp...

Oddly, I personally agree that those two albums are overrated. I love the 3rd to bits, just not that impressed by what came before. Doesn't seem like you have to be insane to feel that way. To be honest, my first reaction when I saw that they were being reissued was "why." Surely there are enough used copies floating around to satisfy anyone with an interest.

There should always be people who write infuriating crap for no reason. On the other hand, I don't know too many assholes who like these albums.

no it's honest, you're reviewing a thing, that thing is a release, of music

yeah, which is odd since the review didn't really seem to consider the music much, did it? And does this 4.5 really represent the package as a whole? The value of the music and the packaging? I don't think so. I understand that it's a subjective score, but the packaging seemed to figure into the score much more than the music.

ebert used to give things generally favorable reviews but say shit at the end like "only watch this if there's nothing else available; i recommend you see __ instead" etc. i dont see why douchner couldnt have just given it a great score that he and everyone else knows the music deserves but devoted the last paragraph to saying "but ultimately, this product is completely inessential and i recommend you buy the original re-release instead if it's an option".

yeah, exactly.

The last time Elvis Costello's My Name Is True was reissued, Pitchfork rated it a 7.0 (down from 9.8 for a review of a previous and barely different reissue) -- imo they should have created a reissue section with different reviewing criteria a long time ago, or just ignore them in general, when it comes to big canonical records at least.

Am I the only person who thinks Big Star's "Radio City" is completely overrated?

Elvis Costello's My Name Is True

Liar.

a little funny how pitchfork still isn't as good as magnet
http://www.magnetmagazine.com/2009/06/16/the-overunder-big-star/

alex chilton looks like jon anderson

Eric Waggoner and his challenging opinions belong on ilm

ilm is so hard