I Hate Pitchfork

Yeah you heard me all you indie fuckers- I hate pitchfork. So I like this German group Modeselektor. They gave their newest cd 7.4 - which is a fine score, although I believe it merits higher than that. But let me give you a run down of what was established in this interview.

The first two paragraphs are talking about how IDM and glitch music are bad music genres (which I also disagree with - there is no such thing as a bad genre, just bad artists within it - and frankly it's the reviewers that make up genres anyway to try to compare and analyze everything that way... back to the point though). At the end of the second paragraph they say:
"Truth is, though, these guys (Modeselektor) have moments where they're so good at what they do that they practically redeem the concept altogether"

That seems like a pretty lofty compliment, to pay someone, so let's read on and see where they knocked off these points. 3 paragraphs of glowing praise follow before they get to their reason for bashing the album:

"If there's one criticism to be made of Happy Birthday!, it's to do with its length. 70+ minute records are increasingly difficult to justify in the mp3 age"

I hate to say it, Pitchfork, but when I find that a cd is over an hour, I'm usually THRILLED. And if it's under 45 mins I usually find it very disappointing. They go on to say that the cd is not without its lulls - but what cd isn't? I have only a VERY select few albums where I think that there is not a weak point on the album. In fact the only one I can think of off the top of my head is OK computer. So let's say, with an artist who I like, an average of 80% of the music will be the meat and potatoes to me. On an 160 min album (like Bassnectar's magnum opus "Mesmerizing the Ultra") that's over two hours of music I will love. On a 40 min album (like Radiohead's "In Rainbows") that's just over a half hour of music I'll love. In Rainbows, in my opinion, was tragically short - the material is good, but I would have loved just something like 2 more tracks (and the overall quality of the b-sides on the second cd warrant it in my opinion). I've kinda digressed here, so let me get back to the point. In the mp3 era, where you can receive almost any album for $9.99, what merit is there in praising groups that give you only enough music to fill half a cd. If anything, shouldn't we praise people for going PAST the 80 min mark, and casting off the time constraints that cds instilled on us? I know that most rock albums are in their nature shorter than electronic albums, so I'm NOT saying everyone should try to create an hour and twenty minutes of music per album, but unless the music is decidedly poor quality, I'd rather get more for my money.