Active Member
for what its worth, the review isn't even that far off from AMOK -- which you would think would be a Pitchfork shoe-in. seems like an honest review from the reviewer, albeit one that comes in with a ton of baggage. I am loving this album more than any of Trent's output since With Teeth, so to each his own.Originally Posted by thefragile_jake
Stubby Member
Bingo. No one should be basing their tastes on reviews and I find it almost counter-intuitive to read reviews AFTER you have experienced the album. Sometimes, they shed light on things you may not have realized; but most of the time, it simply ends up confusing your personal experience with the record as it becomes more difficult to tell what is your genuine reaction versus what you hearing based on the review.
I personally read reviews (and multiple ones) to get a gauge on an album I have not heard and if it's worth my time sitting down and listening to for 60+ minutes.
The keyword there is READ, as I find the scoring system for most reviewers inherently flawed.
she/her/hers
finished my first listen-through today and my one criticism is that "hallowed ground" contains the same piano motif that trent has been using for years, now. as fun as it was to hear that interwoven in songs the first few times, it is getting old. i still enjoyed the song, and i loved the album, but hearing that piano motif again seemed stale. :/
Hairy Member
Here are a couple reviews I personally found to be a lot more interesting and enlightening than the Pitchfork review:
http://blog.kexp.org/2013/02/25/albu...come-oblivion/
http://www.antiquiet.com/reviews/201...come-oblivion/
I found both of these takes to be from people who were clearly very familiar with Reznor's body of work and inspirations. Well worth reading.
Active Member
yeah but then you have to read antiquiet
the kexp review was interesting, albeit seemed to be obsessed with dropping as many references as possible
really digging this album. excited for the vinyl to arrive at some point; just been rocking it on spotify until then. contemplating also buying a CD because my fanboyism is out of control and this album is great.
Bent Member
The Antiquiet review is by an ETS member, you know.
Science Officer
Ha!
https://twitter.com/trent_reznor/sta...61685058174977@trent_reznor: Mandatory bad Pitchfork "review" alert! Comforting to know some things are a constant and entirely predictable in these confusing times.
Also, while I think the Pitchfork review goes out of its way to be obtuse, it is important to have disinterested reviews from non-fans. I bought the vinyl version as soon as I could, so this review isn't targeted at me.
Throbbing Member
I will admit it had good points, but the reviewer does seem to exaggerate them tbh. Ah well, it's Pitchfork. This isn't really bad at all when you look at some of the stuff they say.
Hairy Member
Welcome Oblivion is clearly not an album for most people. Hell, it's not an album for most avid music listeners. It appeals to a specific niche the way certain authors appeal to certain readers. The album is commentary on the difficult times we live in, and a meditation on the role that technology has on our lives. It is not a danceable pop album, and there is a definite barrier to entry.
It's also completely unlike anything else that exists right now. If there is one part of the Pitchfork review that I despised, it was this:
"At its worst, Welcome Oblivion is passé and redundant, suggesting recent successes by Salem, Burial, Laurel Halo, Purity Ring, Gold Panda, and a litany of others without improving upon them."
I think those comparisons are pretty ridiculous.
Stubby Member
I didn't even notice the Burial comparison. Looking forward to his next review:
"The new Aphex Twin album is pretty good, but it doesn't sound like Pantera. 3/10"
Active Member
... ok, I'll be nice(?)
Bent Member
I think the suggestion that WO is "not an album for most people" and that it "appeals to a niche" is actually more damaging to the album than anything Currin said in his Pitchfork review. (And I don't think it's that bad of a review, honestly.) This is not elitist music. It's not impenetrable. It's not highly experimental. It has the same pop sensibility that has driven TR's work over two decades, even ratcheted up a few degrees. It wasn't recorded for the lucky few who could "get it."
Why do you think the comparisons to those bands are ridiculous? I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you on this point, but I'm curious to hear more of your thoughts on this.
Bent Member
::chuckles:: That was more for the commenter before you.
words.exe
I think maybe you guys aren't looking at this the right way. Low-scoring reviews happen - they're almost guaranteed when an album isn't a near-objective masterpiece. The Pitchfork review does get some background information wrong, and yeah, it focuses on Reznor a bit too much (there are three other people contributing to the project, Pitchfork), but those things don't automatically rule the review out as a bad one. Defending the album by saying it isn't supposed to appeal to the masses is, in my opinion, an insulting thing to say about it - it's very obviously supposed to appeal to a wide spectrum of people. That's why there are bigger swells of pop sensibilities in the album when compared to previous work - that's why it was released through fucking Columbia Records. To get to as many people as possible. If HTDA were going for a niche market, they would've posted a download link on Tumblr with zero promotion and no label.
I think Trent's reaction to the review was a bit of a knee-jerk one. Might be because Pitchfork premiered the album themselves and then proceeded to have a reviewer shit on it. They certainly didn't have any obligation to put out a glowing, cock-sucking review, though.
Hairy Member
It might be damaging to the album if you are uncomfortable with the thought that this isn't going to be universally loved, or that universal love is a requisite of "success".
I didn't say the music was elitist or impenetrable. I specifically said there is a "definite barrier to entry". It simply is not the kind of thing most people listen to. There are 7 billion people on the planet, fwiw, and a niche of that really isn't so bad
As for the Pitchfork reviewers comparisons to Burial, Salem, etc... I simply do not hear that in HTDA. If someone were to ask me "What does Welcome Oblivion sound like?" I would be hard pressed to come up with anything outside of Trent's other material (or soundtrack collaborations with Atticus). Trent's sound hasn't been well copied by anybody, and almost exists as a sub-genre unto itself.
Hairy Member
fwiw, I don't pretend to know how big of an audience HTDA wants or what they consider to be successful. If I had to guess, they want as big an audience as they can get, of course?
When I state that it's a niche album, I am giving you my personal opinion that is is a niche album. It's not going to appeal to everyone. And if it doesn't, that doesn't make it good or bad. Or successful or not successful. It is what it is, and the people who find it will either love or hate it. The album will likely sell well enough, and the live shows will certainly continue to sell out. That's successful enough for me. I don't expect it to be some kind of big crossover success, nor do I believe it is a requirement that everyone "gets it".
The Pitchfork reviewer was honest enough. I don't really have an issue with it, other than making comparisons to other acts that are peculiar, and getting his facts wrong.
Throbbing Member
Has anyone else noticed that the embedded lyrics for How long? kind of get weird a few lines in? Like, completely wrong, nowhere close to what's being sung, and completely incoherent.
"They can't have it (stronghold) build a fortress - so familiar - built of"
I have to wonder if the wrong thing was copy/pasted there. It's really weird.
Hairy Member
I doubt it's a typo. Looks to keep in Trent's tradition of putting the wrong or slightly different lyrics into the notes. Possibly a variation of the song that will appear in the live show?
Stubby Member
Dammit.... I wish Trent would stay out of the way sometimes. By simply mentioning the review he drives traffic there.
Be the bigger man and just walk away knowing that there is a large sub set of people who truly enjoy the album.
Active Member
This isn't even the first time P4K has streamed an album and promoted it then gave a less than glowing review. FIDLAR's album was up for streaming on the site and got a similar review, as did Sonic Youth's "The Eternal" three years ago. I also thought the comparisons to Purity Ring and Gold Panda, with the former putting out a similar but much better album last year. While I do think the focus was too much on Reznor, I think the review is spot on to my opinion on the album. It's pretty divisive and I think an album only diehards (like the clientele on this site) are going to enjoy much more than your normal guy who hasn't been following Trent like you guys (myself, sometimes) does.
Also, I'm really puzzled on Reznor's relationship with Pitchfork. It's no secret that I back Pitchfork, and read it a couple of times to day, so it's odd to see Reznor announcing NIN's reformation on the site and having this album stream on their site considering they've given him low scores before and NIN/HTDA aren't exactly projects your normal Pitchfork reader is excited to hear. I remember Reznor being stoked when they gave the PHM re-release a glowing score and with his tweet today (and I recall him being similarly pissed off at another review for one of his projects), it's tough to see the connection. I guess he figures, whether we like it or not, that Pitchfork is THE source for alternative music or am I reading too much into this?
Active Member
No I think you're completely on the money. I too read Pitchfork often, generally agree with much of their consensus on certain records and pretty much check it every day. I also check out the other popular review blogs like Consequence of Sound or Tiny Mix Tapes but I find myself more interested in what Pitchfork has to say, plus I loved going to their festival in 2011...it was one of my favorite live music experiences so I tend to back them up.
They once mentioned Trent Reznor as the cool uncle or something to that affect and they know he has great taste in music and is constantly trying to be innovative when it comes to experiencing both his music as well as new music in general. Sure, 1999 was a different time for Pitchfork (look at who they cover sometimes now) and I laugh at that Fragile review these days but they seem to appreciate Trent Reznor and Nine Inch Nails as a whole. I can totally see The Fragile getting a "best new reissue" when it comes out.
They're just being honest with their opinion and quite frankly, besides some points in the article..I see what the reviewer is getting at. I don't think Welcome Oblivion is horrible by any means, it's just not as interesting to me. I think a 6 quite frankly is not too bad considering how Pitchfork can often really give hurt an album. Look at the M.I.A. situation, they let her take over Pitchfork's social media and by the time her record came out they gave it a 4. I like that Pitchfork doesn't just cater opinions to who they like, they're honest most of the time with what they think. I think Trent likes Pitchfork just as much too, he praised their advance album streaming and had the Nine Inch Nails reunion be a Pitchfork exclusive. I don't think this hurts the album, most people that read Pitchfork and like Trent's work will be into this just fine.
Last edited by thefragile_jake; 03-06-2013 at 02:19 PM.
Throbbing Member
Didn't think I'd be saying this after The Omen EP which to me was so so, but I utterly love this album! Most consistent thing TR has been involved in since The Fragile in my opinion, I like every album released subsequently, but they always had two or three songs that just didn't do it for me at all. With the possible exception of Strings and Attractors, which still doesn't really grab me, (I know I'm in the minority on that one!) I just love the atmosphere evoked throughout, so bleak, and yet so compellingly listenable. Brilliant stuff.
Makes me want to know, is there anything similar musically, because I want to listen to it now!? Suggestions appreciated.
Stubby Member
You clearly did not read the Pitchfork review...
Hairy Member
I would seek out the stuff that has inspired Trent over the years. Not to point out the obvious, but Coil comes to mind
Active Member
CoS gave a more favorable review to the album, although it didn't seem like they thought the album was anything spectacular. Judging by the Pitchfork review, you'd have thought they would've given it a 4.2 or something. I back Pitchfork for their views as well as their free showcases they do for SXSW here, they always have awesome things and Ryan who owns it always tweets me back if I tweet at him.
And yeah, the site has changed since '99, and I'd be willing to agree that a Fragile reissue would get a more favorable review. Case and point, the original review for PHM and the review for the reissue. I also agree that this won't hurt sales, I think HTDA have put out enough material and promoted enough to the fact that anyone who's going to buy it, isn't going to be spoiled by any negative reviews. Then again, they never liked West Indian Girl either, so we probably should've seen this review coming.
Josh Wink was on HLAH
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com...TIIAW9oVqGN030
There's a wide one too that I saw but forgot to grab, and no tall one seen yet
Camera shy
Thank you, it's appreciated.
Active Member
Personally I think if Pitchfork started to give rave 9.8 reviews to everything Trent was involved with, it would come across as insincere given how they plug him, people would just dismiss the review thinking it had been 'paid for' (although I haven't read it because it would just annoy me, compared to before 6/10 is positively glowing)
Last edited by WorzelG; 03-06-2013 at 04:43 PM. Reason: Typo
Hairy Member
Fucking loving the sounds in the background of "ATSBTS"
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/c8yb7xv7478...c3BEO4L-ZzuGg&
EDIT: MP3 https://dl.dropbox.com/s/nyccicch9yt...5OV5yNqHvKYnw&
Last edited by danzo_rezno; 03-06-2013 at 05:01 PM.
Throbbing Member
Much of the criticism has a central theme around WO being disjointed, but you could just as easily divide an album like The Fragile up into categories like white-boy funk (Slipping Away, Where is Everybody), heavy industrial (No You Don't, Starfuckers, Wretched), soundtrack songs (all the instrumentals, The Day the World Went Away, The Great Below) and then call it disjointed. I think what binds the collection of songs together on WO are the conceptual themes, minimalism and sound design aesthetic. But then, it's all a matter of perception, just look at the comments in this thread declaring it to be the most cogent Reznor album in years.
At this point in his career Trent probably often has a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' sentence hanging over everything he does. I am by no means saying that's an excuse for bad music (most of the soundtrack work bores me to death, and I love instrumental music), but it seems as if he is often held to a higher standard. Ultimately, I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing; more importantly, it's a great reason for him to do whatever the flying cunt he wants.
My personal take is that I love Welcome Oblivion, but I'd love even more to see him push further still outside his comfort zone.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
Reply With Quote