I used to hate on Pitchfork

I used to hate on Pitchfork.

It's true. In my younger and more vulnerable years I hated Pitchfork.

I hated the ostentatious prose, harsh review scores, and the hipster badge that was attached to being a Pitchfork reader. I hated the fact that a significant amount of the music I was into when I was younger received hilariously brutal reviews and scores from Pitchfork writers.

I guess a significant part of it was jealousy; my friends were all into fresh indie that was readily approved by Pitchfork (or at least decent major label stuff, Radiohead et al), while my head was stuck in the Rock orientated past. To put it bluntly, Pitchfork represented cool, new (often American) contemporary indie, where as my taste leaned far more towards uncool (often British) major label dinosaurs.

Fast forward several years, and Pitchfork is a webzine I read, pretty much every day without fail. Its reviews, featured articles, and lists are an essential pleasure - for the writing itself just as much as the music that the writing recommends.

Why the turnaround? I suppose it reflects more of a change in me than in the Pitchfork writing. In fact, my later affection for Pitchfork doesn't really indicate a adjustment in my perception of the webzine; because many of the criticisms I have suggested above are still valid. Pitchfork is still indie-centric, overly harsh, theatrical and almost entirely focused on American music. The sad fact of the matter is that all of those things damage Pitchfork's central premise - to bring new music to people looking for it.

But as an institution, Pitchfork has earnt my respect and my readership because it has succeeded - wildly - in spite of these flaws.

Fleet Foxes, Deerhunter, Interpol, Cut Copy, Arcade Fire, St. Vincent, Passion Pit, Grizzly Bear, The XX, Hot Chip, Animal Collective, Santigold, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, The New Pornographers. These are just a few of the new bands that the website has introduced me to. It's no exaggeration to say that when you listen several hours of pop music a day - like I do - genuinely insightful writing can seriously enrich the way you think about music new and old.

So as soon I started taking music, and particularly the idea of new music seriously, then Pitchfork very quickly became essential. Soon after that it wasn't long before I wanted to write my own blog.

Pitchfork quite literally blew my mind, opened me up to new music, new ideas about music, and new ways of writing about music.

In fact, the sad truth of the matter is that this blog has often failed to do much more than regurgitate things Pitchfork has already said. But then, it wouldn't be untrue to say that a great deal of the music journalism in circulation today often has to fall in line behind Pitchfork, it's just fucking light years ahead, plain and simple.

Pitchfork is 15, which is a lifetime in internet years. Veteran writers from the site have come together to write a little retrospective feature. Each writer has one song from one year to discuss; the intimacy is startling, and the writing is, as always, remarkable.

http://pitchfork.com/features/staff-lists/8016-15-writers15-songs/