Why would they even review this  

Too high

4.1M units in its first week yes

Pitchfork is always desperate for attention, they take days to review some albums but when a big artist they hate is releasing, they review it immediately; says a lot about their professionalism

Should've been a 0.0 

4 minutes ago, Squall said:

Pitchfork is always desperate for attention, they take days to review some albums but when a big artist they hate is releasing, they review it immediately; says a lot about their professionalism

They rate accurately

Just now, Cain said:

They rate accurately

No they don’t. I don’t give a damn about Morgan Wallen but I am sure you didn’t even listen to his album  

 

Anyway, I have a real problem with reviews, not sure how they can have a final opinion on release day. Sometimes, it takes weeks/months for me to appreciate an album.

They listened to all of it that fast?

so many indie artists unknown prolific deserves to be reviewed and covered their albums, then they go to most commercial album wasting time to his audiences who dont read your staffs at all.

 

 

 

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by Polgg48

Deserved

this is gonna destroy his sales. His main target can't wait to read every week what pretentious pop music Pitchfork is saying is good. 

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by vale9001

13 minutes ago, Squall said:

Pitchfork is always desperate for attention, they take days to review some albums but when a big artist they hate is releasing, they review it immediately; says a lot about their professionalism

They probably heard it weeks ago. Some publications put reviews out (or snippets of them) before the album is even released. It's not that weird 

2 minutes ago, tellem said:

They probably heard it weeks ago. Some publications put reviews out (or snippets of them) before the album is even released. It's not that weird 

i really doubt his team sent to a pitchfork journalist the album weeks before 

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by vale9001

5 minutes ago, vale9001 said:

i really doubt his team sent to a pitchfork journalist the album weeks before 

i don't think it's up to his team

Pitchfork loves grandstanding (they have their good days and bad days), but I don’t doubt it’s nothing special.

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by Obsession

I love it when they do this 

 

P4K can suck but I would argue they are at their absolute best when they eviscerate country artists for making **** music.

People are still going to stream his album regardless.

Sorry, but Pitchfork taste has been questionable lately and doesn't align with what GP want.

 

37 minutes ago, Squall said:

No they don’t. I don’t give a damn about Morgan Wallen but I am sure you didn’t even listen to his album  

 

Anyway, I have a real problem with reviews, not sure how they can have a final opinion on release day. Sometimes, it takes weeks/months for me to appreciate an album.

I agree. They act is if they’re the pinnacle of music reviews. Didn’t it take them a few days to review Midnights, or at least give it a rating, but, reviews/rates this album in a matter of minutes 

His music is just awful, I like a lot of country artists but he literally brings nothing to the table and his voice is grating as ****

56 minutes ago, Squall said:

No they don’t. I don’t give a damn about Morgan Wallen but I am sure you didn’t even listen to his album  

Some albums they review on Thursdays. Then I'd check streaming and the album is not even out until next day. In many cases labels send them CDs in advance to have reviews ready on the day of release

36 songs…. This is never leaving the Top 10 just like Dangerous. Honestly, Billboard should implement a limit on SPS of like 15 tracks because this is ridiculous. 

3 minutes ago, Brando said:

Some albums they review on Thursdays. Then I'd check streaming and the album is not even out until next day. In many cases labels send them CDs in advance to have reviews ready on the day of release

We are not sure about that, it’s not automatic. 
 

3 minutes ago, Both Sides Now said:

36 songs…. This is never leaving the Top 10 just like Dangerous. Honestly, Billboard should implement a limit on SPS of like 15 tracks because this is ridiculous. 

No, that would be totally stupid, see Australia/the UK.

10 minutes ago, Squall said:

We are not sure about that, it’s not automatic. 
 

No, that would be totally stupid, see Australia/the UK.

Explain why it would be totally stupid. 
 

The UK has another rule where it neutralises the top 2 songs of an album - I’m not suggesting that. However, the SPS of 33-track album (Dangerous) has been counted the same as the SPS of an 11-track album which is why Dangerous is breaking all time records. It’s essentially three albums in one. 

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by Both Sides Now