Anyone Else Read DJ Mag's Review Of Flying Lotus' $tunt$ ???

diss04 · Post by **diss04** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:28 pm

that dude seems a bit like a wanker.

dubstee · Post by **dubstee** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:29 pm

Start : Stop wrote:
Chef wrote:
Start : Stop wrote:
Chef wrote:
Start : Stop wrote:Is this the issue that's been out for most of the month? Popped in my local smith's and couldn't find it

As for the review, being so unprofessional i would guess it's a guest review, which would throw up whether Benga reviewed the section as he has done the CD?
Very unproffessioal and silly on the reviewers behalf but just assuming it could be Benga being the reviewer because he has a mix cd on the frontcover is nearly as silly.
I wasn't assuming but purely suggesting that as a possibility, i don't actually think it was Benga but just throwing it in the mix. Anyone is capable of dislike and bad words, and whoever it was shouldn't have made it public.
Well if you really didn't think it was him then why even mention it... what was the point of 'just throwing it in the mix'.
Because it seems an applicable suggestion in the circumstances. But in hindsight it was a mistake on my part to actually state a name

TBF if it was a guest review it would have been stated in big letters i.e. BENGA GUEST REVIEWER

Either way, whoever edited it is the real twat in all this.

ufo over easy · Post by **ufo over easy** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:31 pm

did they really not print the reviewers name?

how cowardly is that.. should at least have the decency to stand behind their words

benjah · Post by **benjah** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:40 pm

Did anyone see the Flying Lotus issue, though, where we put him on the cover and did a big article on him?

The reviewers name was on it! And that's just his opinion, not of the mag's in general and certainly not mine, I reckon FL is quality.

jim · Post by **jim** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:42 pm

Flying Lotus is pretty shit but calling someone a twat for making mediocore IDM is a bit much.

djshiva · Post by **djshiva** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:26 pm

pretty unprofessional in my view. not liking what the guy does is a fair opinion (one i disagree with, but that's the joy of music: different strokes for different folks), but saying to ignore everything he does and calling him a twat is seriously out of line.

where do they get these asshole anonymous reviewers?

i have always thought the best method is just NOT to review stuff you don't like. not saying anything at all is not giving any press to something you hate, so why bother, unless it's just a matter of actively WANTING to be a dick.

paulie · Post by **paulie** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:43 pm

sapphic_beats wrote: i have always thought the best method is just NOT to review stuff you don't like.

Really this defeats the whole point of reviewing, surely. If you can't say something is bad, then what is the point of being a reviewer? As long as you can be objective about it, there should be no problem.

ufo over easy · Post by **ufo over easy** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 7:19 pm

some of the criticisms being thrown around here don't really connect to what i hear, certainly not this record anyway.

for the most this release particularly is totally raw, club music.. 'IDM?'

djshiva · Post by **djshiva** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 8:45 pm

Paulie wrote:
sapphic_beats wrote: i have always thought the best method is just NOT to review stuff you don't like.
Really this defeats the whole point of reviewing, surely. If you can't say something is bad, then what is the point of being a reviewer? As long as you can be objective about it, there should be no problem.

oh i know the theory behind reviewing stuff that you don't like, it's just not one that i personally subscribe to, honestly.

i mean, i am ok with saying that i think something is not up to par with the artist's other material, or if something is out of place on a release or whatever, but overall, i just would rather focus on what i think is good. i remember i did a review looong ago where i pretty much slated the second goldie album, but that was more a matter of thinking it was overhyped and disappointing compared to "timeless", and not a seemingly personal vendetta.

but i don't write regularly for some massively popular site or magazine, although i do freelance writing and reviewing for some smaller sites and mags, and with freelancing i do have to review what they give me to review. in those cases i have to say what i think even if i don't like it. but for my blog in particular, i tend to stick with the stuff i think stands out.

and in regard to this case, it's obviously just someone wanting to be a dick, which i refuse to do, no matter how much i may dislike the material. best to just say nothing at all if you think it sucks that goddamn much, because if you hate it, why bother giving it any press at all?

tony k · Post by **tony k** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 9:16 pm

omg un-quantized beets!

we're all gonna die!

but srsly Dilla created a fork in the road, and dudes like FlyLo, Thavious Beck, Samiyam took the turn-off.

but for a magazine not to print a reviewers name is very keyboard-gangsta...

and the new Flylo video is awesome!
google dat shit!

surface_tension · Post by **surface_tension** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:49 pm

Paulie wrote:
sapphic_beats wrote: i have always thought the best method is just NOT to review stuff you don't like.
Really this defeats the whole point of reviewing, surely. If you can't say something is bad, then what is the point of being a reviewer? As long as you can be objective about it, there should be no problem.

I agree here actually, to an extent. As long as you aren't straight bashing the tune, there's no harm in pointing out what rubs you. Constructive if you can, destructive if you must.

Does anyone really believe that Fly Lo would make a tune or series of tunes that would be of such ill quality that it would get slated like this? Neither do I. In any case, I certainly can't wait for the new 3024 with Roberta Flack remix on it.

If in the future I am to release tunes under my name or as a label head, please don't break out the red ink, just be a fluffy little teddy bear

relaks · Post by **relaks** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 7:57 am

I find the idea that 'review' should be 'positive' to be 'unprofessional' and 'bizarre'.

Bad review is oftentimes as intriguing. And most of the time more entertaining.

juliun_c90 · Post by **juliun_c90** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 8:42 am

i took this so personally i've been crying for a month. my fat salty tears have made the ink on the page run so much that so i can't even read the review any more.

how i hate it when people express an opinion contrary to my own.

relaks · Post by **relaks** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 9:28 am

juliun_c90 wrote:i took this so personally i've been crying for a month. my fat salty tears have made the ink on the page run so much that so i can't even read the review any more.

how i hate it when people express an opinion contrary to my own.

Are you FlyLo?

chef · Post by **chef** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:57 pm

Big up the crew being sarky, it's got nothing at all to do with people having different opinions from your own, it's all good reviewing stuff and not loving it, give it 0 stars out of 10 if you really think it's crap, say it's their worst piece of music to date, they can make better music etc.

But saying ''Ignore this twat forever'' is quite simply over the line.

gragy10 · Post by **gragy10** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 4:12 pm

relaks wrote:I find the idea that 'review' should be 'positive' to be 'unprofessional' and 'bizarre'.

Bad review is oftentimes as intriguing. And most of the time more entertaining.

Nail on head business.
Don't agree with the reviewer much, but considering that most album reviews (and mainstream dance mag journalism in general) takes the bland out 7or 8 out of 10 press release recycling path a bit of ill informed spleen venting makes for a refreshing change.

angrymidget · Post by **angrymidget** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 4:58 pm

The point people are making is that reviews should be approached from an objective stand point. This doesn't mean that you should only publish reviews on records you love - which is clearly not the case in said article.

I feel that it's not only poorly written but in poor taste as well. The "journalist" has made little to no reference to the record he or she has been assigned to review.
Instead they have used it as an opportunity to launch a personal attack on an artist.

Waste.

pure · Post by **pure** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 5:31 pm

EDIT

dont matter

planas · Post by **planas** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 5:37 pm

Me and you and yer mum could cook up more interesting sounds in roughly the time it takes to listen to this half-baked non-threatening mediocrity. Ignore this twat forever.'

Is this geezer TRYING to piss me off? I think FlyLo is the shit, fair enough if you're not into it but if you haven't listened to tunes like tea leaf dancers and massage situation then give them a go for starters...i just can't actually understand how this guy could give him a 1 out of 5

juliun_c90 · Post by **juliun_c90** » Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:07 pm

pete bubonic wrote:
juliun_c90 wrote:i took this so personally i've been crying for a month. my fat salty tears have made the ink on the page run so much that so i can't even read the review any more.

how i hate it when people express an opinion contrary to my own.

Wow. Way to miss the point. You rock.

wait a minute. 2 x sarcasm.

are you being serious now or not? i can't tell.

this did all start with a review in DJ magazine, yeah? maybe those looking for decent writing from such an institutionally piss-poor rag as DJ might have missed the point?

Anyone Else Read DJ Mag's Review Of Flying Lotus' $tunt$ ???

Who is online