Exai reviews

[Guest]

At least he seemed to have forgotten that Ae veterans often are beyond 40 years. Maybe he just wants to prove to himself, that he stayed young in mind. Yes. I agree with you, old daddy apriorion.

 

The rhythms "fart" their way into existence? What is with that expression?

 

This FACT mag review brought to you by a thirteen year-old boy.

 

Is this the vocabulary and expressive power we should now expect from professional journalists?

[Roo]

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/17691-autechre-exai/

 

Pitchfork offer Exai a 5.9?!?!? Scum!

 

Raises some valid points as well as some silly points.

 

Oversteps was definitly a return to form from Pitchfork's point of view...

 

For the record, Draft only got a 6.2. I guess if you are so good for so long, hip sites dont want you.

[syd syside]

thats about as bad as their drukqs review which got a 5.5

[awepittance]

while the pitchfork review does make a few alright points i guess.. they have such a holier than thou faux authoritative way of writing about stuff like Autechre it makes me want to commit violence

[lumpenprol]

 

If Autechre's earliest records were typically classified as intelligent dance music, their later efforts might best be dubbed intelligence-enabled dance music-- with eclectic touchstones absorbed and dissolved, they did whatever they wanted.

this is purest gibberish

[awepittance]

fuck it, someone hand me a suicide vest

[syd syside]

lol

 

 

[lumpenprol]

like you said, he raises some ok points, but the review makes me angry. He sounds like quite a snob. Plus he raves about Quaristice, automatic disqualification from ae fandom (also how can he like Quaristice but complain about Exai's lack of editing? Hasn't he heard of versions and quadrange?)

 

edit: any ae album receiving less than a 7 seems like a crime. 5.9 should be reserved for Michael Bay movies.

[awepittance]

it's just really annoying

[Roo]

The saddest thing is that their one decent ae review (Confield) is soiled because of a ridiculous facepalm quote about Kubrick's Barry Lyndon in the opening paragraph. Fools.

[Polymershapes]

 

In the last decade, the Manchester duo rewrote their own rules, leaning on the risks of their early works until, by their untitled and eighth LP, it was clear that their intention was no longer simply making bodies move, though that was sometimes a by-product.

 

How are people still making this mistake? Also confield would be a better example for the point he's trying to make in that sentence. Such mediocrity.

[pikkio]

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/17691-autechre-exai/

 

Pitchfork offer Exai a 5.9?!?!? Scum!

 

Raises some valid points as well as some silly points.

 

Oversteps was definitly a return to form from Pitchfork's point of view...

 

For the record, Draft only got a 6.2. I guess if you are so good for so long, hip sites dont want you.

How is it possible to do a review so long and who took time to describe so many songs and then fill it with so many wrong conclusions? And what is the meaning of 5.9 instead of a plain 6? Is that a joke?

[awepittance]

the whole site and most of the 'authors' seem like a unintentional participants in a python sketch of a furious circle jerk

[Polymershapes]

 

But that doesn't solve Exai's fundamental problem: Some of its songs deserve to be cut into halves, while others should have been chopped wholesale. With those snips, Exai would be a really good Autechre album

 

Those snips? Well, which ones? That's a really specific thing to say without any supporting evidence. Shallow thought like this is so commonplace now it makes me wince. Pitchfork is especially irksome for some reason I can't put my finger on. I guess because my expectations are already so low, and yet they consistently get worse as time goes on.

[lumpenprol]

as nuanced and obtuse as Autechre

word police. I think the word you are looking for is oblique. That, or abstruse. People use obtuse obtusely far too often!

 

Are you sure you aren't related to Pitchfork in any way?

 

Or maybe I am, being douchey like this!

[syd syside]

I'm sure I have mentioned this before but yeah their reviews are generally worthless and their focus is certainly business/festival driven. The score is in some ways just branding. As they show little consistency or an attempt to be consistent. A good example is them giving 5.0s to Ariel Pink early material and now doing a 180 because of the "chill wave" or "lo-fi" trending that was/is surfacing. But besides that their news/interviews/video stuff covers a lot of good music (a lot of bad as well).

 

Overall, my insignificant anecdotal observation is that most people remain un-phased and confused by more abstract and radical ideas. They may be polite about it and lie to you, but generally these things are the minority. Not to say that humans who don't like music at all are wrong or are missing out. But within this realm the will to investigate and explore a less ventured path is the will to wonder. And those who wonder often have great knowledge and wisdom within. Pitchfork is more or less a cultural reflector and hopefully it opens up new music and sparks more wonder. Hopefully things won't be so damn linear and displaced as its formula has become thin and empty. A little more AE Reality in my Grande Frappocino Latte and an AFX biscuit, to go

[Mindphaser]

Pitchfork should just stick to Pop music and stay well away from abstract Electronic music.

[Guest CurlyAngryman]

 

But that doesn't solve Exai's fundamental problem: Some of its songs deserve to be cut into halves, while others should have been chopped wholesale.

 

Like what? Grayson Currin seems to be too interested in making claims about how music should sound like to notice that he fails to actually name any specific track that "should have been chopped wholesale". Excuse me, but if some tracks are so bad that they need to be chopped, don't you think it'd be your job, as a reviewer, to mention them? I mean, it makes it really hard to believe your criticism of an album when you say that an album is dragged down by horrendous music that can't be described or identified.

[Ivan Ooze]

fucking lol at the reviews, its like drukqs all over again

[syd syside]

Yeah, there is a odd level of elitism with a comment like this and its resulting score.

With those snips, [/size]Exai would be a really good Autechre album that summarizes the various successes of their career in an hour or so. As is, it's as much a frustrating obstacle course as it is a grueling marathon.[/size]

Without further comment on what needed to be halved or cut the review is basically a waste of time. When you are arguing your main point, you should hammer down on that with examples to illustrate it. Especially when you assume to know the key to unlocking the really good version of an album. It's akin to saying you know god or the meaning of life but not telling anyone.

[xyrofen]

What the fuck is "ginuwine" (from the FACT review)?

Also, smirked at the "Untitled" thing in the Pitchfork one. He rates it so lowly while saying it's a good album. I'm really confused. It felt like I was reading a lot of beating around the bush.

 

Holy shit, I'm reviewing a review.

[syd syside]

*tin foil* maybe the elites don't want music like exai to be more talked about because how can market analysts predict the future trends of AE? Consensus is the main issue here, capitalism should be about inter-penetrating opposites fighting till one is victor but instead our capital is more and more mono, in that trends/pop culture demands consensus amongst one another. The rigorous battle that the 90s electronic scene was producing had real blood and sweat. A real war of the minds. Ranking systems is the main culprit to this continued decline because the rank contains no inter-penetrating elements. All it is is a press conference for those who have gained consensus already. Another example is the American Presidential "Debates."

[Guest CurlyAngryman]

Seriously, this is fucking petty. If you can't listen to an album enough to make an insightful, detailed analysis of how the music made you feel, don't just pull criticism out of your ass and make musicians suffer for it. I don't believe the author of this review feels anything about Exai. The conclusions this review has about the quality of the album are poorly supported to the point of literally being factually incorrect.

 

 

In the last decade, the Manchester duo rewrote their own rules, leaning on the risks of their early works until, by their untitled and eighth LP, it was clear that their intention was no longer simply making bodies move, though that was sometimes a by-product.

 

I thought the album was fucking titled "Untilted", but I don't know. Maybe the person over at Pitchfork who feels entitled to have an opinion about how Autechre should sound like truly knows more than the rest of the staffOH WAIT.

 

 

Tortoise: Thank you. For starters, it's called Untilted. Isn't that funny? "Un-til-ted." They really do have a good sense of humor, don't you think?

Achilles: Um, not really. It's kind of stupid.

Tortoise: Well, I think it's a decent title all the same. But funnier still, I will admit, is that it's comprised of eight letters.

Achilles: Oh shit, yeah, that's hilarious.

Tortoise: Which is to say, funny when I recall that their previous album's title
was also comprised of exactly eight alphanumeric characters (not
counting the colon, of course). As was the full length before that-- Confield. Don't you think that's strange?

Achilles: No.

Tortoise: And even stranger still, Autechre-- A-U-T-E-C-H-R-E-- has the identical
number of characters. Why, when I happened upon this, I was struck by
the similarity in form.

Achilles: Okay, way to go off the deep end. Are you going to tell me now that they're geniuses and I
can learn trig faster by listening to them? I mean, what's funny is I
might actually study to them more if I could hear a beat somewhere.

 

If you couldn't tell, that was an excerpt from the infamous Untilted review. Here, Tortoise and Achilles are fucking discussing, in detail, the title that Grayson Currin got wrong. Notice my choice of words: detail. The Untilted review may be rightfully derided for being a pretentious, shitty review, but at least the author wrote it from actual feelings about the album, enough to go on to these little, tangential conversations. If the Exai review fails, it's not because it gave Autechre a negative review, it's because it was obviously poorly researched, gave no evidence to support the rather sweeping conclusions made about the album as a whole, and had a pathetic, snobbish tone.

 

 

Arguing that an album offers too much music seems passé at best, entirely irrelevant at worst.

 

Or, y'know, fucking lazy. Just like how you justify your negative appraisal of the album.

 

 

Pieces shift into bridges that lead nowhere ("T ess xi"), suddenly mix their metaphors and mechanics (the end of "recks on") and wallow in aesthetic indecision (tone-setting opener "FLeure").

 

Tell me, from those descriptions, do you have any fucking idea how those tracks sound like? "Metaphors and mechanics" was just there for the alliteration and "aesthetic indecision" means absolutely nothing.

 

 

There's nothing actually wrong with the sounds on Exai: Though they don't turn many new tricks, Autechre have once again proven to be top-notch sonic magpies and brilliant technicians.

 

Seriously? Fuck you, I'm tired.

[Guest trananhhung]

It's their opinion and they're untilted to it.

[Guest trananhhung]

Frankly, I'm a bit shocked by the intolerance of some regarding negative reviews, implying the reviewer doesn't know shit about music. It sounds like those kids on Eurogamer when their favourite Xbox game doesn't get a 10/10. He likes Hecker, though. http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/17468-chimerization/