>gives high ratings to well crafted pop acts like Jellyfish,

yep.

Nah, he's right about the Beatles.

>>72883169
All those bands you mentioned are better than Beatles

>>72883169
Maybe, just possibly, he thinks The Beatles actually aren't that good and that well-crafted pop acts like Jellyfish, XTC and The Magnetic Fields just made better music and earned better ratings.

>>72883169
what means to be a Scaruffidrone?

>>72883262
I basically subscribe to his musical beliefs I feel like, at least generally speaking, but then again I used to do the same with p4k and before that with /mu/core bullshit
I'm still trying to figure out how to have my own opinion, all the while the advice I give /mu/ newfags is exactly that, so basically I'm a massive hypocrite.

Bump you faggots

Scaruffi is a classic pseudointellectual. He has good taste for sure but he tries to pretend that he's being objective and commenting on the cultural value of an album rather than just admitting that it's his taste. Why else does he love Bruce Springsteen but hate The Beatles and Bowie? He's perfectly within his rights to hate The Beatles and Bowie but the intellectual dishonesty arises when he tries to justify the fact that they're objectively bad, it just boils down to the fact that he doesn't care for them.

>>72883332
Try to find albums you love that he dislikes and try to find albums he loves that you dislike. If you can find those try and figure out where the disparity comes from then you may begin to figure out what your taste is. If you're unable to do this you may just be destined to be a drone incapable of original thought forever.

>>72883332
how about you listen to and like your own music you little bitch

>>72883332
This is a disgusting post but at least you are self aware

>>72883169
is this fag even employed a known publication? website??

get over him PLEASE

>>72883896
somehow even more pleb than
>>72883332

>>72883896
>appeals to authority
>credentialism
>in 2017

>>72883896
It's pretty nuts that the most plebby post in this thread isn't from the guy who admitted to being unable to form his own tastes.

File: christgau.jpg (71KB, 212x244px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 212x244px

>>72883169

Still not as pretentious as this fucker

>In 1978, Lou Reed recorded a tirade against Christgau and his column on the 1978 live album, Take No Prisoners: "Critics. What does Robert Christgau do in bed? I mean, is he a toe fucker? Man, anal retentive, A Consumer's Guide to Rock, what a moron: 'A Study' by, y'know, Robert Christgau. Nice little boxes: B-PLUS. Can you imagine working for a fucking year, and you get a B+ from some asshole in The Village Voice?"

>>72883730
I definitely agree with this
>>72883874
I'm still disgusting
>>72883780
Yeah I'm still at least starting to do that
>>72883874
No I'm not
>>72883896
f a g g o t

How can you drone the opinion of a man who has publicly lied multiple times, reviewed albums without listening them to completion even once, and writes reviews which frequently contain blatantly incorrect information?

>>72884709
Because the albums that he does like are generally very good and his ethos is generally very well stated and forms a greater whole

Bump you gay faggot niggers

Bump you gay faggot niggers

I made a thread and for some reason I need replies in order to have my own self validified

>>72883236
Could be, but his point still stands:
>gives high ratings to well crafted pop acts
Not to mention that this isn't the only contradiction.

>>72883332
>I'm still trying to figure out how to have my own opinion
What is this? I can only hope you're not being seriuous.

>>72883730
>commenting on the cultural value of an album
This is an important point to talk about, although it doesn't justify his contradictions at all.

>>72885080
>I made a thread and for some reason I need replies in order to have my own self validified
If you're not ironic, this is just sad.

>All subsequent albums are 5/10 or less

more like scarusi