It's no secret, Pitchfork doesn't like Coldplay. Sure they will post all their news and review their albums, but they definitely make more than a few jokes at their expense. Now the other side of the coin here is that as pretentious as Pitchfork are, they have a pretty big audience and are pretty influential, especially when with the mainstream indie crowd. So what will they score the album? I feel like they could put out a masterpiece and it will still get a shit rating. You can vote and also write down your exact prediction at the Coldplay forum now [thanks Briggins]
On X&Y (4.9/10), Pitchfork commented: "[X&Y] is bland but never offensive, listenable but not memorable. It may be pointless to hate them, but with this album, they've almost certainly become the easiest band on the planet to be completely indifferent to."
On Viva La Vida (6.9/10): "[Chris] Martin is still a hopeless sap. He's clearly aware of Thom Yorke's apocalyptic verve and Bono's most cunning reflexive confessionals, but thus far he's incapable of matching either one. The record's violent, revolution-themed artwork is misleading. Viva is more like a bloodless coup-- shrewd and inconspicuous in its progressive impulses."
In a sure sign of the apocalypse, Pitchfork the new Coldplay live album LeftRightLeftRightLeft a 6.8 out of 10, which in Pitchfork terms equals a pretty frickin' high score: "Not only do they provide a service-- essentially giving listeners what they want-- but in this case, they're doing it without charge. Ironically, those contradictory qualities mean the band may be wasted in a studio, Eno notwithstanding. LRLRL suggests that Coldplay songs truly live only in vast concert halls and smallish arenas, where they are performed for, and arguably by, a captivated audience."
So what score will Mylo Xyloto get in Pitchfork's harsh world of album reviews? Your comments on Pitchforks forthcoming rating of Mylo Xyloto are below, current poll results to the right...
I don't think Pitchfork are influential. Only to those who don't have half a brain and only listen to music by their word but at the same time have a smug sense of satisfaction about themselves... [thanks howyousawtheworld]
While pitchfork definitely rips on coldplay, i think most of their ripping has been from a place that made sense. i love coldplay, they're my favorite band, but a lot of that doesn't have to do with how incredible their albums are in comparison to other bands musically. they reach me at a personal level very little other music can. That said, i really think coldplay are primed to get their best album rating yet, probably closer to 7.5. the tracks that we've heard sound good and i bet their album versions will musically push themselves further than they ever have before. i don't think they were kind in their evaluation of viva. i think they were right on the mark for them. but this time i think it'll be up even higher. [thanks footyfan10]
Well, they gave VLV a good rating (at least for Coldplay... 6.9? right?). In my opinion (from what I've heard) I think LP5 might be better. There's hope for it, but some critics' favorite sport is to bash on Coldplay. I don't think know if much will change. I originally voted on the low score, but I'm beginning to think it might actually be a bit higher now... [thanks Skin&Bones]
The first 3 albums scored in the 5.0 range and yet Viva la Vida somehow got a 6.9 or something, so Pitchfork clearly has their heads screwed on backwards when it comes to Coldplay. Judging by the crap we've heard so far from the album, I'd say it will almost be worthy of Pitchfork's Best New Music stamp, but not quite. They'll give it a 7.8 so it can still be below The King of Limbs. [thanks Corkus]
They'll give it around a 5.5 purely because they don't like Coldplay. Pitchfork are very childish and it's a shame how some idiots get taken in by them. A lot of good bands have been put down by them purely because they're no indie enough. Ridiculous. Really the whole concept of a music review is stupid. Music means different things to different people so one reviewer's opinion means nothing. Also, we all know MX is going straight to No. 1 no matter what score Pitchfork gives it. [thanks Cleggy]
Yeah guys they make fun of Coldplay a lot, but that's also kind of the fun of their whole site. Their news section is top, and some reviews are ok, and then they often just give a rating that's meant to polarize (recent examples: King of Limbs, My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy). It's a show. But that's why I read it. And not to forget, sometimes they discover and hype some real good shit. [thanks VivaGroaning]
I found the parachutes review to be extremely douchey. Going on about the cons of it being 'safe' and 'harmless', when you could apply those same categories (and more accurately) to a million bands they love. However, it seems that it was written in a context when the hipster community had already bought into writing off the band as a short-lived trend riding off a cliche one-hit wonder. Whereas, though the rating for AROBTTH is actually worse, the context and personality of the writer seems intent on giving the band much more credit insofar as he admits parachutes to be: "...innocuous, to be sure, but it was also honestly rendered, and the opening three songs, effortless and hummable as they were, were hard to deny." The writer compliments the band in numerous ways, such as for going in a new direction, and saying that Martin's vocals improved. He also puts half the blame on the producer instead of the band itself. So its odd, because from the sound of the review you'd imagine a more positive rating which lends to innumerous coldplay fan conspiracy theories against pitchfork. VLV's rating though was a bit shocking. Even I wouldn't have given it a 6.9. [thanks Tnspieler1012]
If the King of Limbs got a 7.9, Coldplay is in trouble! I love Pitchfork but I wish they'd stop putting scores on their reviews. It's such an arbitrary and confusing system, and it distracts from the reviews themselves. Kill Screen just stopped scoring games and I think it's a much better way of doing things. Everybody is biased. We're human beings. A critic's job isn't to be perfectly objective; music isn't objective to begin with. So I resent when people complain about scores they don't agree with by calling a critic "biased." It's meaningless. Critics are paid to articulate their opinions and analyses. You don't have to agree with them. [thanks blankshore]
This is totally off-topic... all I meant is, if pitchfork have given Coldplay bad scores before... (and they're pretty average), they'll most likely do it again, it's a personal thing, yeah, but in such a way that not likeing something by a band initially means you'll put down the rest of their future work? That IS pretty biased. Coldplay is too mainstream for Pitchfork. And that's what I'm saying.. I don't agree with them. I form my own opinion and don't let what other people say affect them music I listen to, or the movies I like or the video games I play, etc... [thanks hadoken_zero]
I think Pitchfork ratings are the most reliable. NME and RS ratings are random and they have a preocupant lack of "vision". But that doesn't mean that I always agree with Pitchfork. Since they are so indie-alternative-arty I think they give fair enough ratings to Coldplay albums. The VLV 6.9 it's a pretty good mark for a pop album. But this time I feel like they are giving MX a very low mark, since Coldplay are "less cool". And although I feel like the album it's going to have a lot of pop great songs, I also think that it's going to be their less arty album. [thanks Bloody]
There are no comments to display.