-
Not exactly music blogging, but this shares a common thread conceptually.
NY Mag invited "ordinary citizens" to be music critics for a few new CDs:
http://nymag.com/arts/popmusic/features/31796/
This is fun stuff! -
Oh yeah, he spoke to me about that once - that's a really weird but brilliant project.
-
i have to disagree here. i really don't like this feature (it's been a recurring one in the magazine) if only because a) it reveals the magazine's bias that pop music is not worthy of 'serious' criticism (this from a publication that has one of the best straight-up writers ever, john leonard, reviewing tv, which is just as much of a serious art form as pop music!) and b) the people they get, and the albums reviewed within, are so reflective of the 7-grain-bread new york magazine demographic that it makes me want to start tagging subway trains with the missing foundation upside-down martini glass.
-
Ha, I didn't pick up the "ordinary citizen" & NY Mag readership relationship, but that was definitely obvious. Fred Wilson is not THAT ordinary, I suppose. :P
I still like it though even knowing all this, I don't read enough NY Mag to know it's their regular feature. OTM. -
I am totally not their demographic though, it's fair ;)
-
Posted by: maurai have to disagree here. i really don't like this feature (it's been a recurring one in the magazine) if only because a) it reveals the magazine's bias that pop music is not worthy of 'serious' criticism (this from a publication that has one of the best straight-up writers ever, john leonard, reviewing tv, which is just as much of a serious art form as pop music!) and b) the people they get, and the albums reviewed within, are so reflective of the 7-grain-bread new york magazine demographic that it makes me want to start tagging subway trains with the missing foundation upside-down martini glass.
but they're doing it for their demographic, so why shouldn't they pick people who represent that demographic? why do you think that's wrong?
you have a point regarding the magazine's not taking pop music seriously enough to hire a "real" writer, but at least this way you get more than one guy's opinion/critique. -
And, furthermore, what about us non-New Yorkers who think it's sorta funny and don't understand (or care) about the cliques and classisms of NYC life re: NY Mag? And I've seen plenty of "real" writers have dunderheaded opinions about pop music.
-
Posted by: mjrc
but they're doing it for their demographic, so why shouldn't they pick people who represent that demographic? why do you think that's wrong?
you have a point regarding the magazine's not taking pop music seriously enough to hire a "real" writer, but at least this way you get more than one guy's opinion/critique.because of the false construct that the panel provides a forum for 'ordinary people and their opinions,' when it's really 'people who happened to be at ollie's on 5th avenue that day'? because whoever reviews the albums doesn't really try to challenge the people on the panel at all, and covers the same nu-yuppie shit? because anyone who plunks bjork and sigur ros in the category of 'icelandic music' should maybe look outside their comfort zone a little bit?
and the big one: because music writing is being devalued by this, and it's never fun to see that happen to your vocation. i dislike 'inquiring photographer' features as a rule, because i think it's a cynical ploy to get readers to feel like their 'voice is being heard,' but this sticks in my craw even more because ny mag has money to dole out to writers, but for whatever reason they don't feel music criticism is worth the line item on their budget. -
maura you are awesome!
do you want to get lunch/drinks with me and Taylor? Taylor is in NY as you may have heard via your G. channels. :) -
Posted by: maura
and the big one: because music writing is being devalued by this, and it's never fun to see that happen to your vocation.oh boy. don't even get me started on the "value" of music writing (or any kind of entertainment writing). there are plenty of people who argue that what we do devalues it, but I completely disagree. fact is, music writing is being constantly devalued as time progresses, and something like this is the least of it. chances are that music writing will never get back to what is was in the early days, and it has just as much to do with changes in music criticism as it does with changes in how we experience music and its role in society, as well as changes in the music industry, as well as changes within music itself. hell, myspace is a perfect example... wait, didn't I say don't get me started? shit.
-
Posted by: MatthewHa, I'd just like for things to be as awesome as they were even back in 2001-2003. That's totally attainable!
Ah yes, I call that the BMS era: "Before MySpace."
-
What'd I miss, I was just eating some 7-grain bread down at Ollie's on 5th
-
I don't understand what that means, never having lived in a city of over 100,000 population.
-
listening to the feist record kinda makes me want to dance with somebody else's husband
-
feist would approve
-
i want maura to get a job at ny mag! let's start a petition. we'll all send letters to the editor demanding some real music writing and suggest that we know just the person to do it. i'm actually not kidding. : )
i don't know how i feel about the whole *real* criticism vs. man-in-the-street. (although i totally cringed when i read that about the icelandic music, too.) it would be valuable to have someone writing about music who could put it into context for the reader, but then again, even i don't always get the references to older bands' influences on current music, and i care deeply about the subject, so i'm not sure the *average* reader would benefit all that much from it.
on a much larger scale, i think most people these days shy away from anything that requires them to use their brains to actually digest meaningful writing, thought-pieces, critiques, whatever. we're basically lazy s.o.b.'s who want our information spoon-fed to us in bite-sized portions. hence the success of myspace. i'm probably being cynical about this.
i suppose they pick the non-challenging music they do because "ordinary" people have actually heard of it. ? -
maura already has a job though... ny mag forever wishes they were as cool as gawker anyway
-
this just in: 9 grain bread has replaced 7 grain bread. when asked why this happened, 9 grain bread responded, "because...we have two more grains than they do."
-
12 grain bread did not immediately return phone calls
-
Posted by: mjrc
on a much larger scale, i think most people these days shy away from anything that requires them to use their brains to actually digest meaningful writing, thought-pieces, critiques, whatever. we're basically lazy s.o.b.'s who want our information spoon-fed to us in bite-sized portions. hence the success of myspace. i'm probably being cynical about this.i remember having a conversation once where a friend and i formulated a theory that the more dumbed-down the culture a person is exposed to, they more ignorant they become in their output, and we placed video as being more dumbed down than even bad blogging, because we wanted to understand why people who comment on youtube are often so incredibly awfully stupid.
-
Posted by: maura(thanks, you guys, for the compliments!! i had a shitty day, and they mean a lot.)
i think also with youtube there's a low bar for entry -- and very little repercussions on comments, so anyone can just say any old thing, really."barriers to entry" is kind of the interesting part of all this. the net effect of "everyone can be a critic if they have a blog" or "user-generated content" is that we all just have more crap to wade through.
and i think all the crap actually pushes people back to those who have some insight, knowledge, etc. and can keep it up over the long haul. (in the music baz, people say "with protools and CD Baby, you don't need a record label". well, 20% more albums will be released this year, but 90% of all albums this year will sell less than 1,000 copies. compare that to 1995 when 90% sold less than 10,000 copies.)
i actually think in the long-run, the real effect might be that we have a better appreciation for quality. -
Posted by: adam_beggars
i actually think in the long-run, the real effect might be that we have a better appreciation for quality....just not from a very large portion of mp3bloggers, who will continue to crap out 10 or 12 posts a day, every other one of which is OMG THIS IS DEFINITELY A CONTENDER FOR MY TOP ALBUM OF THE YEAR
-
Posted by: catbirdseatPosted by: adam_beggars
i actually think in the long-run, the real effect might be that we have a better appreciation for quality....just not from a very large portion of mp3bloggers, who will continue to crap out 10 or 12 posts a day, every other one of which is OMG THIS IS DEFINITELY A CONTENDER FOR MY TOP ALBUM OF THE YEAR
exactly. and i think we all need filters, ryan, and hyperbole doesn't do much over the long haul as a filtering mechanism.
maybe reader comments are the true bellweather with blogs. i think a good example is stereogum (i like amrit and scott, so this isn't a dig on them or stereogum)....but, the quality and intelligence of the user comments is just not there. it seems like a lot of idiots. it's not stereogum's fault, it's just a product of how big they are. but, it's kind of like going to a show and having a bunch of dumb jocks yelling out "Freebird" and ruining the vibe for everyone. i don't know if that's an audience i wanna hang with.
Posted by: J HoaSPosted by: adam_beggarsi actually think in the long-run, the real effect might be that we have a better appreciation for quality....and the realization that that quality might very well come from outside the usual channels.
totally - the sheer diversity of filters and channels is a good thing. it gets to squashed's comment on another thread about finding the right mix between older and newer filters to suit yourself. (i think he put it in a much more combative, major label die, kind of way, but that's what he was trying to say)
-
It's a good point about the "filters" Adam; I agree, and these filters become more and valuable as time wears on. And I think one of the things that a lot of people have had a hard time coming to terms with is the shift of music blogs as "filter" (as most were in the beginning) to the blog as essentially almost 100% promo, which is what the "modern" music blogs are, almost exclusively. Part of it is due to hyperbole being the only language they know, and part of it is their drive for flag-planting, ever-increasing traffic & ad revenues, other perks, etc.
Not that I think that "blog as promo" is wrong/bad! I think it's a very important tool for (ugh) "marketing" in today's world, but I do think there's a distinction to be made.
(As for your original comment about "better appreciation for quality," eh, well, we can always hope, can't we? But like I always say, don't hold your breath for stuff like that, after all, we live in a country that voted Bush into office TWICE, thinks that a game show about opening random briefcases is totally thrilling, etc. (Side note: after moving to NY, I was dumbfounded to discover how many people I would see reading the freaking NY Post on a daily basis; I mean, it's practically the Weekly World News! But again, like I say, "THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!") -
"modern" music blog. Hah. This as oppose to what? cave wall painting blog during the ice age? Come on, most mp3 blogs only been around a year or two. The oldest is 3-4 years old.
People will be bored posting and reading "promo blog", I bet. It's too limited, even for selling ads, let alone personal blogging or general talk about music.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions3,267
- General2,523
- Band Promotion217
- Blog Promotion259
- MP3 Blog Tips148
- MP3 Blog Tools120
- Private Messages0