give me a single example of a time this man has been wrong

>>73558612
>Kraftwerk-Trans Europe Express: 6.5/10

>Chumbawamba- Tubthumper: 7/10

>Slipknot 7/10

>>73558612
>In Rainbows 5/10

>>73558612
everything Death Grips above a 5 is way too high

the beach boys and beatles ratings should be lower

>>73559077
this desu
should be a 4

>>73558612
>
>Automatic for the People 5/10

He is still right 90% of the times.

http://www.scaruffi.com/music.html

File: chrome_2017-06-09_20-19-52.png (138KB, 236x328px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 236x328px

Has Shitruffi ever made music?

>>73559098

So should the rating of your mom.

File: mooncat.jpg (113KB, 730x1024px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 730x1024px

>>73558612
I love Moondog and it seems Scaruffi does too but

http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/moondog.html
>His works encompass everything that was known and a lot of what was still unknown. He virtually invented every single genre of rock, electronic and world music.

I can't even fathom what he was thinking here. Moondog was hugely influential in Western Microtonal/Third Stream/Minimalism and classical music in general, but that he "created rock, electronic and world music" doesn't even make an iota of sense

>>73558612

>Appetite For Destruction - 8/10

>>73559169

the keyword here is "virtually"

>>73558612
Everything about Bowie

Him rating Little Creatures and True Stories higher than every other post SABAF Talking Heads albums.

>>73559210
>Everything about Bowie
too high? I agree

>>73559169
His actual reviews don't always make sense but his scores are accurate

when was he right lmao

>>73559169
I think what he meant by that is that Moondog discovered elements that would contribute to those genres (maybe without knowledge of him, and him without knowledge of them).

>The more recordings surfaced, the less relevant the band seemed to be. Most of their music was disposable, an inept imitation of the Velvet Underground occasionally decaying into childish mayhem.

Guess the band.

>>73559177
Literally nothing wrong with this

>>73559210
Also him rating the Modern Dance so high

>>73559244
he's not wrong about this

>>73559263
He's as wrong as one can be about that.

>>73559169
could be mistranslated, but that's all I could think of other than him just being straight up wrong/misinformed

>>73559189
>the keyword here is "virtually"
but it's not even close. What exactly do you mean by this? Moondog didn't start making music until the 50s and electronic and "world" music existed far before then. And saying "Moondog virtually invented rock" is just delusional.

>>73559242
But all of those genres existed far before Moondog began making music at all.

>>73559244
LDR lmao

>>73558612
>Fred durst one of the best rock singers in history

>>73559266
he's not wrong though
lrd is the dumbest rip-off in the history of music ever

>Operation Ivy- Energy: 6.5

this isn't an example of him being wrong per se, but it shows just how biased he is and why you should take his reviews as seriously as an onion article

>Jonny Greenwood's Bodysong (Capitol, 2004) is an ambitious and difficult ethnic-jazz-ambient instrumental soundtrack. Each piece stands on its own as a manual of avantgarde rock production, and the whole, while perhaps a bit too austere, feels awe-inspiring.
-wait, he's associated with radiohead...-
>6/10

>>73558699
Yeah you're right tubthumper deserves at least a 7.5

>>73559282
>they ripped off noisy music in the late 60's

Did you even read what you wrote down?

>>73559431
they ripped off tvu
isnt that fucking obvious

>>73559500
Sounds literally nothing like tvu. tvu didn't even come close to the noise lrd were making on their guitars.

>The critic is the real artist

>>73559540
that's literally not true
the whole lrd thing is just ripping wl/wh with different levels of distortion

>Madvillainy-7/10

His views toward improvised music are absolutely retarded, considering he seems to think he understands jazz

I agree with everything except the fact that he didnt give Down Colorful Hill a 10

>>73558612
http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html

>>73560350
Nice photoshop

>>73559317

you literally don't even understand Scaruffi, 6/10 means good to him, he says in his criteria that you should literally buy 6/10 albums if you are a fan of the artist.

>>73559663

very accurate

>>73559252
Nah man watch antonioni films.

Industrial working class anxiety is the shit

>>73560688
>6/10 means good to him, he says in his criteria that you should literally buy 6/10 albums if you are a fan of the artist.
And then he takes a massive shit on Beatles/Radiohead/Bowie and still gives them 7 and 7.5. I don't understand him at all, there's always a huge difference between his ratings and his actual written review, sometimes he'll say an artist is an overrated piece of shit who didn't do anything worthy in their whole career and give some albums a 7, and sometimes he'll praise someone for making something truly exceptional and phenomenal and give it a 6.

>Gas - Narkopop: 2/10

>Kid A 6,5/10
I think it deserves 7 or 7,5.

>>73558612
>Piper at the Gates of Dawn
8.5
According to Scaruffi, Piper is better than everything that came after it in Pink Floyd's discography.
>Meddle
6.5
>Dark Side of the moon
6.5
>Wish You Were Here
7
>Animals
6
>The Wall
6.5

File: aja.jpg (22KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x300px

>6