http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/r/rouse_josh/subtitulo.shtml

Pretty much his entire existence called into question. Oof.

i haven't heard this yet but wow, that was brutal.
kinda like opa reviewing a spade kitty release.

I just heard Josh Rouse for the fist time over the weekend. I enjoyed the 2 or 3 songs I heard.

Ouch.

Whatever. Nashville is still pretty damn good.

Not really surprising. I haven't heard the album but dude just makes harmless melodic guitar pop. I dug Nashville last year. His best and most consistent effort IMO.

His other stuff is hit or miss but they always have a gem or 3 on each album.

I have heard that the guy can be a prententious prick who thinks he's god's gift to songwriting. Harry? Didn't you say something about this? After a show you went to maybe?

For a site with the pull (unfortunate or not) in the music industry as pf, this is a hit for the label and Rouse. I plan on still checking this out, although the one thing from the review that swayed my opinion already--the 33 min. length. Grrr. I hate short albums that I pay full-price for.

Sister in law just saw him here, and was very positive in her review of it. Said the beginning was the best (Nashville-era), then it got mellow, and went back up at the end. She's not Superfan #1, but she likes him.

I don't really agree. I haven't heard Subtitulo but I'd find it hard to argue with the reviewers' criticisms of Rouse in general and at the same time suspect that 3.7 is probably overly harsh. As Derris says, Rouse puts out pretty harmless melodic guitar pop. I don't really think its the sort of stuff Pitchfork writers ever go for so if you already like him enough to think about buying the new one, I doubt a pitchfork negative review would dissuade you.

i agree with the rating...i am not a fan of this album.......

I agree with your last statement, although my point is that many people check out that site and hold it in high regard. Arcade Fire's success has been well-documented as being much attributed to a favorable review in pfm as have other albums. A bad review in such a forum as pfm could drive some sales away. I wholeheartedly agree that if you like his stuff prior you'd probably want to check this out either way--as is my case. Whether I agree with PFM or not, you have to agree it has become sort of a staple of the underground music scene, if not the borderline edge of it.

i think that with rouse, he's alreay established career and his place in music -- like billy said, non offensive guitar pop. its not like this is his first album and pfm went out of its way to poop on it.

arcade fire and cyhsy are bands that had no prior record, so i don't know if rouse is as make-or-break as those, i don't see the two "groups" as completely similar.

that being said, the new josh rouse really is boring.

true, and partially I'm playing devil's advocate with my second post. Oddly enough, I've read prior to this review rather positive writings about it.

plus marc hogan is traditionally a hater.

I know PFM gets a good deal of traffic and is one of the bigger purely online zines but in the larger scheme of things, I don't really know how influential it is. I doubt I have any friends outside this board who have ever read it or that would recognize it by name. I know Arcade Fire got an early good review from PFM but I always figured the props they got from David Byrne and David Bowie was much more instrumental in building their buzz.

Besides I think a really good review from PFM helps a band more than a bad review hurts 'em. PFM kinda has a reputation for being harsh at times and I tend not to really pay much attention to any of their negative reviews.

But what do I know, they seem to have no problem signing bands up for their festival so they must have a decent amount of respect from the industry.

"props they got from David Byrne and David Bowie was much more instrumental in building their buzz. "

BINGO..and BOWIE really hyped that shit.

Josh needs to shoot for that Curious George money.

I guess it's hard to determine what a effect a bad review on PFM does. I'm sure Josh would be more than happy to not have an audience of the indie-scenti.

Frankly I never read Pitchfork. I could care less what they say about an artist.

And I seriously doubt Josh Rouse is quivering in a corner somewhere because of what Pitchfork has to say about his latest album.

I happen to love his previous albums, and though this new one isn't perfect, it's a grower and I happen to listen to it all the time lately.

Yeah, I'm not much into the P-fork these days either, and I rather enjoy some of the songs on the new album.

Dang, you mean people actually read these posts?

Yeah, I saw him on the Nashville tour at Bimbo's in SF, a relatively small club...close enough to see every nuance of facial expression and it was indeed my perception that he was an arrogant wanna-be star who couldn't understand why he had to play in these small venues to these uninformed, declasse audiences.

I both assume the PF review is on the mark and I also just ordered subtitulo... go figure. He's def the "easiest listening" pop I will buy...

Parliament Forkadelic ?