Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by carl brutananadilewski on Jul 5, 2013 14:20:19 GMT -5
American Gangster IMO is still his best post-"retirement" album and is right up there for me with his other classic albums. And as for Kingdom Come I think lyrically it was one of his best (the title track is still one of my favorite Jay tracks of all time), and BP3 never grew on me. But with MCHG I think it's good but not great. I felt like he mailed it in on a few songs and the best song to me ("Beach is Better") should have been a full length track because the beat is a beast and the lyrics were great.
Post by Mista Don't Play on Jul 5, 2013 17:53:14 GMT -5
Has Jay-Z's flow changed over the years? Sure. If you prefer the old flow to the new, that's fine. I don't think you can really say he has fallen off, though. His lyrical content has become more diverse and wordplay is still strong. There is real intellect behind the lines he is delivering. If someone isn't really feeling this album based on preference, cool, but its a really good (imo great) album from all angles.
I will agree that I would have loved to hear "Beach is Better" as a full track, it started off so hard and when it cut off I was like "Wait...wha...aw man"
Post by ShortieSensei on Jul 7, 2013 10:39:06 GMT -5
Such a dope album! The production is fantastic and the lyrics are phenomenal. I can't say if it's the best hip hop album of 2013 but it's definitely top 5.
Post by itrainmonkeys on Jul 8, 2013 10:06:21 GMT -5
Does anyone know how reviews work for places like Pitchfork, Rolling Stone, and other big sites/magazines? Like.....is the overall rating a consensus of the reviewing staff and then one person is chosen to write the words up? Or is it usually like a movie critic where it's only his/her opinions on the work? I was wondering about this the other day. Sometimes I think it'd be cool to see more "roundtable discussion" reviews where you get a few points of view and they discuss certain aspects of what worked and didn't work for them. Anyone know of music reviews like that? I know AVClub does them for some TV shows/episodes.
I just want to know how P4K comes up with such a precise number as 5.8 and how many people are involved in determining that number. It must be some group of people that pick a number and then they're averaged out, or something along those lines, right?
I saw that Pitchfork review coming a mile away. They've been itching to scrape up a "KANYE VS JAY-Z" thing for a while now. Hell, they almost couldn't contain their glee when Rick Rubin was all "I didn't work on the album, I just listened to it and talked to him about it" a couple weeks back. P4K was all "ZOMG JAY DIDNT GET RICK RUBIN BUT KANYE WEST DID." It seemed like they were working really hard to make it Yeezus vs. MCHG for some reason, which was weird. And agreed, the review makes no sense.
And, unless I misread the whole thing, Rubin was brought into the Yeezus think tank very late in the game, when Kanye was feeling the pressure of his release date deadline and was a mess mentally. Rubin helped him cut the fat, gather his thoughts and finish the album (with a lot of unfinished material remaining, to the point there were hints towards a Yeezus part 2 being released at some point.
Jay-Z had his friend (Rubin) listen to an album that was pretty much finished and give some commentary.
Entirely different situations, from everything I've read.
I know how the Pitchfork thing works. One person writes the review, their editor reads it over and makes necessary edits, and the reviewer submits a "suggested score" for the album along with the review. The editor-in-chief then reviews the score and adjusts it as he sees fit (he also applies the Best New Music tag if applicable, usually for albums garnering an 8.2 or higher). I'm not sure, but I believe the other editors might also have some input on the score. So it's at least a two-person process.
I don't think they're itching to start up a "Kanye vs. Jay-Z" rivalry; I just think they greatly favor Kanye's recent work over Jay's. I didn't read their reporting on the Rick Rubin thing, though.
I know how the Pitchfork thing works. One person writes the review, their editor reads it over and makes necessary edits, and the reviewer submits a "suggested score" for the album along with the review. The editor-in-chief then reviews the score and adjusts it as he sees fit (he also applies the Best New Music tag if applicable, usually for albums garnering an 8.2 or higher). I'm not sure, but I believe the other editors might also have some input on the score. So it's at least a two-person process.
Thanks for the info dude. That's exactly what kind of info I was looking for. Very interesting.
After a quick first listen I'm not blown away, but sometimes it takes a few listens for a record to sink in.
However, the opening track "Holy Grail" is outstanding. After Timberlake's first segment when the beat kicks in, it makes me want to drive 100mph down the interstate through a major metropolitan area.
"Beach is Better" is also brilliant, I hate that it is so short.
But a lot of the tracks don't really stir much up inside me. As opposed to Yeezus, where most every track makes me feel insane.
You think Pitchfork was rough on the album, read what The Washington Post had to say.
I've noticed a common theme. Every person who writes a horrible "Jay-Z sold out his real fans!!" article it HAS to include the "businessman/business, man" line in the first 100 words.
After a quick first listen I'm not blown away, but sometimes it takes a few listens for a record to sink in.
However, the opening track "Holy Grail" is outstanding. After Timberlake's first segment when the beat kicks in, it makes me want to drive 100mph down the interstate through a major metropolitan area.
"Beach is Better" is also brilliant, I hate that it is so short.
But a lot of the tracks don't really stir much up inside me. As opposed to Yeezus, where most every track makes me feel insane.
I basically agree with this. With the way the album starts, I had such high expectations. I really thought "Holy Grail" and "Picasso" were great songs. It really starts to go downhill from there though. I'd say he mailed home about half of these songs, but he's been doing that inbetween classics for years. It's really a shame. This album had potential to be one of his bests, but it just fell a little short. Id give it a 7.5 on my first listen. Perhaps I'm being too critical here though. I'll give it another shot tomorrow.
PS: Now that I feel compelled to compare this album to Yeezus, I'd certainly pick Yeezus. But: MBDTF>Yeezus. So yeah.
I think Jays record is suffering from a post Yeezus release date. If it had been released before hand I don't think critics would be this harsh. Also, less is more. La familia and Nickels and Dimes are horrible, and Jay Z blue is pretty mediocre as well. The end of this album kills the overall vibe of the whole thing. He should of left those tracks off the album.