base talk More impressive list of women: AOTY wins or 10.0 from Pitchfork?

[Price of Fame]

since the question is which group is more impressive and not which is more meaningful (obviously that is AOTY) - the pitchfork group by a mile. Miseducation is the only truly excellent work in the AOTY list

 

retroactive reviews should be taken with a giant grain of salt though  

Edited May 7 by Price of Fame

[cloudbusting]

15 minutes ago, Blue. said:

Aren't all those pitchfork 10.0s retrospective reviews?

Fetch the Bolt Cutters achieved it on release 

[sway]

2 minutes ago, Trash said:

I actually think the question is which list of women is more impressive, not the accolade.

If that is the case, I would say both, because it is harder for women to get a perfect score from this publication, especially pre-2010s, just as much as it was pre-2018 Grammys before the Recording Academy implemented new changes to their rules following backlash from the 60th ceremony. 

[50thStateofMind]

ATRLers says both are totally irrelevant so whatʻs the tea?

[Shinning]

25 minutes ago, Arrows said:

AOTY means thousands of musicians voted for you.

 

Pitchfork means 4 journalists in a basement jerked eachother off.

 

Be serious.

AOTY is a popularity contest though. It stopped being an accolate for artistic excelence a long time ago.

[swissman]

I'd say AOTY is more impressive, BUT AOTY is also highly political and winning it says less about the winner and more about the system.

 

So my best answer would actually be: AOTY is more impressive as an accolade, but individually a Pitchfork 10 says a bit more about the music itself, literally, as it's a review.

[Miracle Whip]

AOTY pre Taylor winning hers.

[swissman]

Put another way:

 

There has to be an album of the year winner every year. If the artists of the world ALL collectively flop artistically and give 5/10 albums, one of them still is going to be an AOTY winner.

A perfect score on Pitchfork (or anywhere where perfect scores aren't often given) doesn't need to meet a quota. We could go a hundred years without it if the publication doesn't think anyone reaches that height, which makes it more of an individually more impressive thing even if the Grammys mean far, far more than Pitchfork does.

 

EDIT: oh I see I got the point of this thread wrong. well ya, the answer is the Pitchfork grouping.

 

 

Edited May 7 by swissman

[PoisonedIvy]

Id say the one that is actually voted on/decided by other musicians, writers, and producers; as opposed to the one decided by a couple of journalists with no musical talent.

[Kavish]

AOTY. 

 

The industry > A magazine.

[Relampago.]

I mean the answer feels like it should be AOTY but the category screams fraudulent wins like every year  

 

No one in real life cares about a Pitchfork rating but their ratings feel more "legitimate" so I guess.., that?

[Shimenawa]

Björk & Kate >> the others

[Relampago.]

11 minutes ago, swissman said:

I'd say AOTY is more impressive, BUT AOTY is also highly political and winning it says less about the winner and more about the system.

 

So my best answer would actually be: AOTY is more impressive as an accolade, but individually a Pitchfork 10 says a bit more about the music itself, literally, as it's a review.

Actually this is exactly what I was trying to say, thank you  

[liquiddiamonds]

Any list with PJ Harvey is an automatic win

[Arcadius]

I mean I don't think you'd see physical albums with stickers that say "Received a perfect 10 from Pitchfork", so I'm going with the Grammy.

[Blue.]

49 minutes ago, cloudbusting said:

Fetch the Bolt Cutters achieved it on release 

As it should

[zoldyck]

I misunderstood the question but my answer is still list of women with AOTY.

 

One list has legend like Celine and Whitney. And possibly future legend like Adele, Taylor and Billie.

 

Other list are known primary by small group of people who acts like their music taste is superior because they enjoy what is unlistenable to most people . 

[punisher]

i mean with the pitchfork 10/10's you can actually see that all those artists have delivered so much quality music

but the grammy's chi-

[Headlock]

Let's ask which one musicians would rather have 

[zoldyck]

51 minutes ago, swissman said:

Put another way:

 

There has to be an album of the year winner every year. If the artists of the world ALL collectively flop artistically and give 5/10 albums, one of them still is going to be an AOTY winner.

A perfect score on Pitchfork (or anywhere where perfect scores aren't often given) doesn't need to meet a quota. We could go a hundred years without it if the publication doesn't think anyone reaches that height, which makes it more of an individually more impressive thing even if the Grammys mean far, far more than Pitchfork does.

 

EDIT: oh I see I got the point of this thread wrong. well ya, the answer is the Pitchfork grouping.

 

 

My counter arguements.

1. In contrast to what you said. Even if they are more than 5 solid albums in a year, only one can be awarded Aoty. However there is no quota on those critics reviews if they want to give 100 albums in a year a 10, they can.

2. Heck they can even revisit old albums to gave them 10 like they did with this list. AOTY is like Yes/No. There is no redo.

3. Pitchfork is pretty much no difference from other critics in eyes of artists. Whereas, almost all artists value Grammys more than VMAs, EMAs, People Choice Awards etc.

[SylMacPer]

folklore and Golden Hour are 10.0 for me so AOTY list is more accurate! 

[liquiddiamonds]

45 minutes ago, zoldyck said:

I misunderstood the question but my answer is still list of women with AOTY.

 

One list has legend like Celine and Whitney. And possibly future legend like Adele, Taylor and Billie.

 

Other list are known primary by small group of people who acts like their music taste is superior because they enjoy what is unlistenable to most people . 

Everyone in that list is at least multiple grammy nominated or grammy winner themselves. There was a bias against alternative music in the major fields during the 90s and 2000s, same as pop girls. The Grammy themselves will eventually recognize those artists as the groundbreaking figures they were

[Joaco95]

im not impressed by grammys voters or pitchfork score

grammy committee are very biased and pitchfork are a bunch of music elitists 

 

but i will go for pitchfork cause most of the time they are not wrong 

[swissman]

18 hours ago, zoldyck said:

My counter arguements.

1. In contrast to what you said. Even if they are more than 5 solid albums in a year, only one can be awarded Aoty. However there is no quota on those critics reviews if they want to give 100 albums in a year a 10, they can.

2. Heck they can even revisit old albums to gave them 10 like they did with this list. AOTY is like Yes/No. There is no redo.

3. Pitchfork is pretty much no difference from other critics in eyes of artists. Whereas, almost all artists value Grammys more than VMAs, EMAs, People Choice Awards etc.

Are these counterpoints ones you actually believe or is this like a debate-team-thing where someone offers the other angle? Because:

 

1. Pitchfork could give out 100 scores of "10" in a year, but they do not which is why it's impressive to get a "10" from them. Naming an album "perfect" and naming an album "better than these other albums" are different types of accolades: one is about individual achievement, the other is competitive and the better album doesn't always win. In the case of "scores", there's a bit more fairness and thus a bit more of an impressive achievement to make it to a perfect "10" than it is to get to AOTY when there's so many more factors than just quality involved. It's true that winning against solid albums is probably more impressive than getting one "10" from one publication, but the Grammys have been known to nominate less-than-solid albums, and the general reasons we can come up with for why an album won seems to change every year because it's actually not based on any one thing but a popular vote from a selection of recent albums. Looking at the "10"s from Pitchfork, the criteria seems pretty consistent.
2. I don't think a re-do is necessarily the benchmark for what makes one more or less impressive. Most of these Pitchfork "10"s seem to have been released before Pitchfork was even launched, so it's less a re-do and more a catch-up, anyway.
3. Comparing critics and awards are apples and oranges here. Critics (should) dive deep into the album, examine it, explore its themes, talk about its successes and weaknesses. Awards only deal with successes. Plenty of mid-albums have won or been nominated for AOTY. And plenty of great albums have bad songs, and awards overlook that because they're not critiquing an album as an individual piece of art, they're merely comparing it to other works, good or bad. Most of the awards are also pretty politicized and/or gearing for ratings. The MTV ones especially don't have a clear logic in their winners, where an overall BEST winner can still lose in their gendered category all because they want to spread awards out and get as many stars attending/winning as possible. It's a big difference to how critics function, where it's not just a number assigned to the album, but an entire essay to explain it and defend their position. Awards are simply won, no reason given.
   
   
   
   All that said, Pitchfork is not a perfect reviewer. They can be as inconsistent as the Grammys, they make mistakes, they are not all rated by the same people, and I'm sure there are other reasons it's not perfect either. My point is just that at least from the examples given, one grouping seems to represent a clearer image of great albums and the scarcity of them plus the fact that we get actual reasons we can actually argue if we disagree seems to suggest it is a more impressive feat than to get an award that's going to be given to one winner regardless of if the album is truly great or not, and with no real reason given, thus no opportunity to understand or offer a counter point.

 

 

 

Edited May 8 by swissman

[NickAurora]

2 hours ago, jezebelvictoria said:

Is this lady Gaga?

"My first name Stefani..."