Jimmy Eat World - Integrity Blues (October 21, 2016) Album • Page 18

i feel basically the opposite haha

 

I liked the first album enough, new one is decent too I guess. I don't go back to them much

 

yeah i agree with jake, though i would say the second album is still decent

 

Teddy Picker also good. I was crazy about AM when it came out but i play everything else by them way more than that

 

Saw someone call AMs pop punk the other day (in reference to the first two) and it fucked me up for a few minutes but i guess it's probably as close as england ever came to that scene

 

Teddy is so ridiculously catchy. Yeah I liked AM a lot when it came out, but I'm so sick of hearing those songs at this point. I'd rather them play more from Suck It And See or Humbug.

A Certain Romance might be my actual favorite AM song. Just such a well crafted rock song.

 

Guess think means I oughta listen to arctic monkeys

 

Do I Wanna Know and RU Mine are still 2 of their top 5 or so songs. It's just a front loaded record

 

Yeah, you could make a fair argument that music reviews aren't actually journalism. But still, opinion piece or not, the subject should be discussed in as objective a manner as possible. There's a difference between saying something sucks and describing the reasons why you think something sucks. For example, journalists are allowed to hate Trump, but if someone just writes about his ugly hair and makes fun of his mannerisms, that's bad journalism. I say Pitchfork's Bleed American review is bad journalism because all the author is doing is pissing over the band and making sarcastic, immature jokes about the lyrics. There's nothing professional about it whatsoever. You can surely say the author is "entitled" to those "opinions," but that doesn't mean the author wrote about those opinions is a journalistic manner.

 

I have no interest in reading objective music reviews, because they aren't real. I do not think music reviews can be objective in any manner.

 

ban music reviews

 

That's totally false. Almost every good music review contains objective facts. Most critics actually do some research before writing a review, so they can quote interviews or refer to things that happened in the band members lives while making the album, or heck, even to refer to the producer's name. An album review should be littered with facts, and ideally those facts would be used to make good writing and to support the reviewer's opinions about the album. In Pitchfork's Bleed American review, the only "facts" I saw were that the album is titled Bleed American and the singer is named Jim Adkins.

I still think subjective pieces about art can be better written and more professional than other pieces. I've read plenty of music reviews that had legitimate falsehoods in them. Also, I'd be willing to argue that some objectivity does exist within art...but we don't have to go there unless you'd be interested in having the conversation.

Also @CoffeeEyes17 I want to throw you in here since you liked @stillbrazy's initial comment about journalism.

 

interview:

Jimmy Eat World's Jim Adkins Talks 'Integrity Blues' | Harms | ALT 98.7

 

I mean yeah, there are facts about the name of album and band but aside from that no review is objective as far as the content is concerned. I just don't see how any of those facts could make a review good or bad.

Also, someone disagreeing with my opinion doesn't make it a bad review. It's when the reviewer blatantly misses the point or just doesn't put any effort into the album.

 

"Blatantly misses the point" and "doesn't put any effort into the album" is a pretty great way of describing that Pitchfork review, haha. I was never suggesting that any reviews are bad because I disagree with them--that is foolishness and debatably even more subjective than the music criticism to begin with! haha. There are some reviews that I think are poorly written and poorly conceived even when I wholeheartedly agree with the author.

 

I actually think it's just about as strong, if not stronger, on the backend. Fireside through I Wanna Be Yours is such a good stretch. Basically that album is extremely good and on a given day I will tell you it's my favorite and other days I will tell you Humbug or something different BUT on THIS day I will commend you on a good choice for favorite band, Patrick.

 

John K. Samsons' new album on the same day, just put that together.
Weird to think that two of the likely candidates for my top three of the year (almost certainly top five) will come out on the same day.

 

Outside of getting album name and band name there's no need for "facts" in a review, you can use them as supplements sure, but they are not necessary for a good review and they are not what the review should focus on. a review should be what the writer thinks of the record, however broad or narrow their scope of that will be is up to the writer. at the end of the day, reviewing a piece of art will always be subjective. it's that simple


my point is really that none of this has to do with journalism. the pitchfork review is not a reflection of bad journalism, just bad writing

 

Like for real if someone's looking for facts about an album they need to be reading interviews not reviews

 

Jimmy Eat World and Kevin Devine on the same day is going to be insane.

 

Love the cover. The artwork for the singles almost gives me a Dinosaur Jr. vibe.

 

The part before the second verse in Sure and Certain gives me copeland vibes, for some reason. I haven't stopped listening to it.

 

People keep forgetting that Dan Layus (lead singer of Augustana) has a record dropping the same day.

 

American Football too

 

Actually not aware of who he is. Apparently a lot is coming out the 21st though based on comments throughout the site.