ITT

>>69420271
if you take his ratings as a diameter of the stick's end that is increases to the other end up to 10 inches you can sure see how it's easy to shove up right in his asshole

File: IMG_5224.jpg (306KB, 596x1083px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 596x1083px

Swans - To Be Kind

Like what the actual fuck is up with these comparisons?

He'll probably change it later on. Age can do alot for a record. And imho, an album like Benji will age like wine

>>69420363
Read his reasons behind giving it a 6, he's not gonna change shit.

>>69420354
His most retarded comparison was when he said Mother of The World's two notes repeatedly played for like 4 minutes was Swans trying to copy some generic bands' jam.

Let's be real here Scaruffi, you don't like new Swans because they're popular among younger audiences.

>>69420271
Scaruffi praises Modest Mouse's first two albums so much going in detail with each song of LCW and then gave them a 7. Compare that to the 7 he gave to the Beatles or Pavement and how he wrote about those albums. It doesn't make any sense.

>>69420499

He just tends to be harder on artists he finds to be overrated. His "goal" in his History of Rock Music project is to show that the most popular and best selling artists aren't that important compared to the less popular but more innovative bands. Yes there is a bias, but it's clearly laid out that he favors the experimental and the truly alternative. The ratings are more of a consumer guide thing than a reflection of his actual opinion. Everyone seems to forget

>Ratings: 10=best album ever; 9=rock masterpiece; 8=buy it now; 7=buy it eventually; 6=buy it if you are a fan

Another example: Green Day's American idiot gets a positive review, no negatives spoken about, but only gets a 6.5 because it's just a good album in the pop punk genre and it's not very innovative or essential at all. You can do everything "right" but not be amazing, and you can be overrated but still be worth checking out.

Also in an email someone shared here, Scaruffi complained people care too much about ratings. People can't seem to discuss Scaruffi in any way other than "he gave my favorite album a 6 :(" or "lol THE FACT THAT..."

>thinks nu-metal s better than britpop

>>69420803
anythings better than britpop

>>69420354
This just made me lose a lot of respect for him, these are the stupidest comparisons I've ever seen

>>69420851
Wrong idiot

ITT plebs

>>69422514
t. Scaruffi ass eater

>>69420271
Sun Kil Moon is garbage.

>>69420354
Swans are garbage. The real mistake was him ever praising them in the first place.

>>69420499
Modest Mouse are garbage.

>>69422608
"The good thing about Sun Kil Moon, Swans, and Modest Mouse is they're objectively good regardless if you believe that sorta stuff or just an idiot"
-Neil Degrade Tyson

>>69422608
>bait actually cannot succeed on the Swans part since he actually gave them positive scores
>baiter admits that Scaruffi was wrong
fucking high grade kek

File: scarface.gif (548KB, 209x204px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 209x204px

>>69420499
>you don't like new Swans
he likes Swans, though

File: IMG_5229.jpg (29KB, 450x444px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 450x444px

>>69423765
>implying new swans means the whole of there discography

File: 1478186535360.jpg (7KB, 235x222px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 235x222px

>Tfw scaruffi is a hack.

>>69420803
It is.