Mmm i'm not too sure how to put this and i may have to edit this a few times. But do you think that these are having too much of an influence on people's exposure to music now?

I used to be an avid listener to Kexp upto a year ago. For me it used to be a breath of fresh air compared to the mainstream crap that is being churned out. The last year though, to me, it has become so predictable. I mean i can write down some bands names and then check the playlist and lo and behold they will have been played.

Nearly every band that gets talked about on here is getting exposure from Kexp or Pitchfork, yet there are so many fucking great new bands out there.

For a lot of people its becoming the same as any mainstream bullshit, an easy way to be forcefed "indie" music.

Believe it or not, I have never listened to KEXP and rarely check out Pitchfork these days. I am inclined to check out a lot of mag sites and music blogs for new and interesting music. KCRW introduces me to some new stuff now and then.

I do, however, agree with you, Pete. What it comes down to is that the "indie mainstream" (for lack of a better description) is eager to listen to something other than what the regular radio play is willing to offer. KEXP and Pitchfork have become more popular in the past couple of years. People who are getting their indie feet wet, turn to who/what's long been essential listening/reading. Has it become TOO popular? Maybe so. Should they change and introduce you to more groundbreaking artists? Probably. Dunno of any other radio stations out there who are just under the radar waiting to be listened to. But there are definitely lotsa websites out there worth checking out.

I can see where you're coming from, but I'm not sure I agree. KEXP and Pitchfork hype up Band of Horses and you feel that it's predictable that they do so, but would you have heard of BoH without KEXP (since in this case I think they were first)?

I have a problem with most music blogs now. It seems one person will post about a band and the rest will just copy. Biggest example is crap like Tapes 'n Tapes & Birdmonster.

I must check out KCRW.

At the moment i spend some time looking at gig listings and searching websites of bands i have never heard off.

I'm really liking some programs on a London station called Resonance FM. Rough trade host a show on interesting new release's and also The Wire have a show on there.

I'm not sure on this. BOH could be one of the biggest examples. I heard a few tunes before KEXP were plugging them then somebody on here PM'd the album. Then they had the airplay and a ton of blogs pimping them and i really don't rate them at all.

I'm finding it hard to explain because i don't think its a terrible thing. Obviously i would rather hear those guys than say Fallout Boy. But it is going that way.

Pitchfork reviews four albums a day 5 days a week.
so that's a little over 1000 albums a year
so if i were to read it every day, that would probably about 700 new bands every year.

i'm not sure i get your point about pitchfork.

Whoa...are you looking over my shoulder?! I do the exact same thing!

So your happy limiting yourself to the bands that pitchfork reviews?

Only bands that have released albums.

Your not bothered about the ton of the bands that are making great music now but haven't released anything yet.

I could list bands that have released great albums but will never be reviewed in pitchfork.

I understand people maybe do not have the time.

But you don't get my point?

no, i guess i don't understand your point.
i certainly wouldn't be happy limiting myself to what pitchfork reviews, but what more do you want from them? like i said they are introducing some 700 bands every year. Of course they are going to miss amazing bands because there are 700 albums put out every day.

and yes i am happy for them to only review bands that have albums out. It's not that hard to put an album out these days. Not to mention it's a site for reviewing albums.

I think my point is quite clear.

I think Kexp & Pitchfork are becoming the easy option or as T says the "indie mainstream" for too many people.

It's a good point.

A lot of mp3 blogs are all hyping the same indie bands which to me is pretty annoying when there are loads of other unheard of musicians that need discovering/praising.

KEXP = never listened to it
Pitchfork = haven't read it in years

I seek out new music based on the opinions of a few music message boards, trade magazines, sharing networks, recommendations and referrals, and quite a few independent mp3 blogs that only review stuff they really like.

Works for me.

yeah, do that as well. if i like what i hear on their site or maybe they have a myspace page that plays a few songs of theirs, i'll go check the band out.

even xfm plays the same thing over and over. i love "munich" but i don't want to listen to it every hour.

i think they are both just 'common ground' to us...what is wrong with that? they are both so far out of the mainstream that most people have no idea what you would be talking about if you brought them up....

think about it.....this board is a super small sampling of the music listening public....

i could tell you shit loads about bands that get reviewed on pfm but on the other hand, just for fun i listen to american top 40 on the way to the gym on sunday mornings, its 15 minutes tops, but i usually have no fucking clue who they are spinning......

wait, im not sure i've even made a point here....

Rolling Stone has a write-up about Tapes N Tapes this month. For what it's worth, I really enjoy "Loon". Jack Bauer is on the cover, which is why I flipped through it.

np: DM-Suffer Well-M83 rmx

i dont see your point here at all. i mean i understand what you are saying, but SO WHAT.

if pitchfork gets people into what they consder is good - so be it. i think those things are actually good. if you want to be more "underground" then so be it.

i think pitchfork and kexp are good starting points and if people just use those strictly for their music what is the harm?

your almost making them out to be the "bad guys"...if anything they are helping out. i would rather have them weed through BS bands then having me do it.

Yes they are just "common ground".

I can't wait for the next round of Band of Horses, Liars, Wolfmother, TVOR threads.

Thats fucking retarded.

Sweet fucking Christ, cry me a river. If you don't like it, then don't read Pitchfork, but don't blame it nor the people that read it. Who gives a fuck how many bands they write up, who cares how many they don't, and who cares whether they pick the "right" bands to expose. They review a lot of music every year, and I have no problem admitting that Pitchfork is where I've heard about some of my favorite music. If you're not satisfied with the amount of music they cover, then go elsewhere.

who cares...let the people make up their minds if they like it or not.....sure pitchfork can suggest shit - but the listener decides whether its a keeper or not. if the next round of similar bands sound like the liars and its rocking good - then GREAT.

keep in mind - very FEW bands are originally sounding anyway. blame the bands not the review sites

how so......

i am sorry but i think your point is retarded - i was just being nice and not saying it. but since you went down that road.

alot of the time we talk about bands here BEFORE the get reviewed (Edit:TVOTR, for example, isn't even out yet)

I dont read pf much anymore and ive never listened to internet radio at all, i just use message boards (obner + some ILM, hipinion, ihatemusic etc) and the occasional review. I have noticed PF branching out alot more into other genres.

The only artistss you post about are brit-indie type deal, which i like fine, but it's not like you appear super open-minded yourself.

don't take this the wrong way Pete, but quite a few of the bands that you have posted about that are "underground" are also absolute shit. unlistenable, and just dead crap. not everything, but a handful of them i've checked out after seeing your request. i sure hope that these aren't the "fucking great new bands" you're referring too.

as for Pitchfork, they have their place. i've come to realize that many people don't have the time or patience to search out new music like i [you] do, so Pitchfork is a good option for them. i don't agree with them 100% of the time, but there are many releases that they've reviewed and IMO have been dead on about.

at the end of the day, these mags and radio stations are good for people. sure, sometimes they shop some ridiculous shit, but fuck it, you can't please everyone.

those that are looking for something innovative and different, will find it.

agreed. i almost ALWAYS post up MP3's of albums weeks if not months before they hit mags. others on here do the same. we have time to decide if we want to check out certain releases by hearing them, well before they're reviewed.

yeah - i agree...one of my good sources for new music is the "almighty dalen"