people lost their minds at anthony fantano giving sexyy red an 8. why does that bother people so much? i try to answer it and more

also does a bad review always hurt an artist, or can it sometimes help?

Because at the end it's all about musical taste, there's no such thing as good or bad music, even worse giving it numbers as scores.

agree. giving scores is really the only reason anyone gets mad. most people mad dont even read or watch the review. but at the same time, most people wouldnt click a review in the first place if they knew there wasnt a score to get mad about waiting for them

so its kind of like a chicken or egg situation

theneedledrop ruined everyone

do u think people got as fired up about reviews in the pre needledrop era? or did people just not care as much

we need 2 stop giving needledrop attention half of it is just from outrage but we know hes out of touch and does not represent anyone really as a 45 year old white bald dude reviewing music
it really dont matter, just stop giving them attention

fans didnt care much but artists prob did

like eminem always voiced his upset against critics

yea all the time bro remember the source mics and s*** what do you mean
Scaruffi is notorious for this

I personally miss the diverse set up of hip hop blogs and media reviewing albums, feel like fantano disregards genres more than others. which is why I can’t take him seriously as I once did in my teens

For what he knows and enjoys he’s pretty in depth

People are insecure about their music tastes and need confirmation bias that what they listen to is "good"

Not me though, I'd like to thank Pitchfork and TND for showing me showing me several cool albums over the years

idk im young(er?) i never had a source magazine. but facts

Definitely mad about this same topic getting revived every 3 days

yea ppl always been getting upset about reviews its nothing new. Pitchfork too before fandingus.

yea its impressive that one dude can be as in depth as some platforms are on his own. but at the same time hes gonna have big deficiencies in some areas no matter what

yea i was gonna say i always think back to some of the weirder pitchfork eminem reviews lol

thing about fantano is like
he has the width of a ocean depth of a puddle thing going on where he fundamentally misunderstands a lot of the subgenres he reviews or has personal backpacker biases that interfere with his judgment, and he has the pitchfork problem of INSTANTLY trying to get a review in
for a few select scenes yes he has like RYM level knowledge but his worst reviews he stays static on, showing that hes not really fully genuine. Speaking of those worst reviews he often completely just assigns his own narrative to a project to dismiss it, or in the case of something like the MBDTF review lets a lot of stuff outside music affect it. This is generally just a problem with critics, and yeah it can get pretty frustrating when these people have a huge mob of little supporters that just parrot everything they say affecting the legacy of a project temporarily.
It can even be restricting on innovation, like with his reviews of griselda before they blew up and he suddenly liked them, where a different song structure and approach with no hook is used as a criticsm, when that is him trying to fit a work into his conception of what is inherently "artistic", which can also end up in a lot of works, specifically the trap subgenre being dismissed in music communities the same way hip hop was back in the day.

Even when pitchfork had stinker reviews or whatever, their good reviews were usually very well written and a lot of them had these great observations even outside the music and an understanding of the place the artist is trying to fill, which inspired more skilled WRITERS, fantanos formula is more just a guy saying what he thinks with really colorful language, which has inspired droves of lazy music criticism.

yea. i put some of the reviews fantano got really wrong (goldlink and paris texas) in the video too. and i think about that redveil exchange a lot lol

Its not the reviewers themselves its the people who try to prop up the reviewers l.

interesting. like who? you mean people who use their scores as an argument that their opinion is objective fact?

my fault