Chicagoist: Pitchfork Day 3: Bringing It to a Close

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:33:18 -0600

i agree with those citing too many posts. and i was there both years. too many pseudo music critics on board with the same taste? i now remember why my chicagoist readership has dropped from daily to whenever i'm completely bored at work.

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:57:53 -0600

hating hipsters is so ironic; now if you'll excuse me i have to go wax my mustache

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:41:15 -0600

great article ad... I was in attendance this Saturday and have to say I enjoyed myself. Subtract the too close for comfort crowd watching (or rather staring at an empty stage) Dan Deacon, the wait for Girl Talk was well worth it... I love reviews of concerts... There never seems to be enough (or any at all). And I appreciate the coverage..

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:41:19 -0600

Interesting article about the "hipster-hating hispters" phenomenon and the whole hipster-hating backlash in general. http://www.avclub.com/content/blog/white_noise_superficial

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:55:24 -0600

This guest just enjoys ragging on anything chicagist does that is even slightly "hipster."

monkey

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:54:59 -0600

as a fan of both Pitchfork's festivals and this site, I might actually have to admit that it was a little overdone. Sure it warranted a little more coverage just cuz Pitchfork is from Chicago, but if you aren't a fan of music it was a little overkill. sorry kids.

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:07:51 -0600

Guest is not shy to admit that Guest likes complaining. Although Guest prefers the term "bitching".

jeffp

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:36:54 -0600

Didn't anyone here watch NOMO!!! If not, you missed the best set of the day. Keep the funk coming. Great addition to the lineup.

guest

Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:02:23 -0600

i too appreciate the coverage. I worked at the festival, so i missed a lot of the acts and would have loved to see how the audience enjoyed the weekend. As for international attention, I have first hand knowledge of at least 250 different press outlets represented at the festival-national, local, international... Seriously...what good does it do to complain? If you're so bitter about this website, maybe it's time to stop reading blogs, pick up a book, and read something else. or try one of the four billion other websites out there. or admit that you like complaining better than not complaining.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 19:23:49 -0600

re: international attention. I happen to know, for a fact, that Pitchfork attracted international attention, because my roommate's new Australian friend definitely woke me up at 4:30 on Saturday night. That said, Pitchfork really isn't that big of a deal. It attracts attention from Chicago media, but the only other coverage it gets is from the Cobrasnake and music blogs. It doesn't require 43 posts over 3 days, all of which basically say "I know more about music than you do." What about Old Town's folk festival this weekend? Since I had to work, I know I would have gladly exchanged one of these posts for a review of the Knitters.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:06:03 -0600

Whiners whining about whiners that whine. Now if I may... Tankboy's impetus for defending the bloated Pitchfork coverage is an attempt to safeguard his precious "cred" as a music writer. -anonymous hater

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:03:46 -0600

I hate Gawker. Anyone aspiring for this site to be more like Gawker is nuts. At least the comments section here has the semblance of civilty, not a bunch of 20-something post-suburbanites affecting urban calousness by seeing who can be the nastiest.

Spook

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:00:41 -0600

Guest 34, What position did you take on the issue as a student council member? Were you just "above it all" but able to get every body on the same page by wearing your special school spirit sweater? Did you serve all four years on The Council and do you like the Mighty Young Verp Verps?

doppler

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:00:23 -0600

Pitchfork Festival was a great time. Cheers to Chicagoist for covering it in (appropriate) detail.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:47:38 -0600

This comment thread reminds me of student council arguing about whether they argue too much.

Spook

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:38:20 -0600

I liked the Mighty Young Verp Verps, I mean the sound was awesome! They Rawked!

fishunderice

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:00:26 -0600

to babe and other 'pitchfork is a god-send' people who don't want negative comments about it; why does Chicagoist have comments then? I thought making comments; be it negative or positive, creates a better sense of community- remember Chicagoist's pitch for people to register? Stop bitching about people pointing out the extravagant pitchfork posts- thats what a blog is for- to inform, enlighten, debate, and comment!

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:41:05 -0600

Its great if you went to pitchfork. For the other 8,983,000 people in the Chicago area, at least we got that funny Rich Hill clip to watch, and that other story about gene wilder to read.

uremindmeofthebabe

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:37:35 -0600

Suck it haters. Pitchfork Music Fest is a very cool addition to Chicago music. This complaining thing is seriously out of hand. It's not so very hard to have one's own blog, if you can do it better I suggest embarking on your own write up of the world. Chicagoist should 1. make you register with a name 2. cut the whiny jerks off when their comments are boring like gawker does.

jm

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:13:51 -0600

I thought the pitchfork coverage on here was great. Well done guys.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:12:56 -0600

Poster 23, lol I actually ended up going to day three alone since my buddy decided to sell her Sunday ticket last minute because of Saturdays bomb. I think it turned out for the best. i got to see way more acts and had a great time laughing at the kids in there get ups. i couldent agree more with poster 11 on the fact that it was a fest and not a house party. c'mon you retards, but i guess they think they're being "hip". anyway, i was perfectly comfortable in my flips shorts and tank as well. I cought the end of the Junior Boys which i thought was really great. the crowd was into it and i was actually able to hear the sound. Jamie Lidell was next on that stage and from what i gathered, he gained a couple hundred new fans. he had an energetic set with a sense of humor and an amazing soulful voice. props to Jamie. New Pornographers were good but some people sounded upset that neko wasn't up there. Then Of Montreal came on. I thought they also put on a great show. Then I had some greasy food and watched 3 songs by the Klaxons. Left the worst stage (yes they should've made it a tent like last year) enjoyed De La Soul and went home happy. You won me back, maybe I will go next year... depending on if they allow re-entry. Oh and yes, Flagstock was great too. I nagged a great poster. Put your hands up for flagstock!

Spook

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:04:08 -0600

People are spending all this time writing about this,you know, all these posts by Chicagoist and the Red Eye coverage because its like really important for my generation! I mean Wow. Totally different,I mean, like to the culture and all like cool sideburns. Our voice as one,Speaking Unity. It was very spiritual man. It was more than, like just music. It puts like the war, and like Peace in perspective man. My favorite bands that played? Hand down, "Where’re The Red Gaazopp Zzzzopp Rain Drops keep Falling on Your Shaggy Bed Head and Its So Cute!", "The Dead from Head Freez", and "Now just Stop!"

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:57:46 -0600

As much as I want to vomit everytime see a shoelace tied around someone's head, or a mustache from 1983, I haven't seen that look? Are shoelace's the new headbands?

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:49:41 -0600

""drew international attention" In what nation? I watched the news just this morning and didn't hear a damn word about it. " there were over 200 media passes issued. sounds like a lot of attention to me.

HeaveMediaLisa

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:44:01 -0600

If you don't want to hear about Pitchfork, don't read the post about it. It takes a few seconds to scroll up or down and away from the Pitchfork story. And in the community that the music is based in, it is a huge story. And for the people that were there (including myself) I like to see what others thought, and to read a detailed recap. Also, the first day I was dressed pretty normal, but on Sunday I said fuck it, and totally dressed like a fool. And had fun doing it. People take things too seriously. I had a blast! Thanks for the awesome coverage Chicagoist! I linked you guys at Heave, and it was great reading your post and comparing what everyone thought. Thanks again!

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:35:22 -0600

I was having a great time yesterday until I crapped my pants. I decided to stick around for the last five hours anyway. I got some strange looks from people and heard a few "what the f--- stinks?!" but all was cool.

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:34:20 -0600

Both the sun times' and the trib's music critics have posted blog articles in multi-part format regarding the festival. Believe it or not, this was big news to many of us here--including regular readers of this blog. The majority of people who attended the show were not of the "tight jean-hipster-punk underground" variety. Like me, they just wanted to be outside and listen to some pretty damn good music. I say keep up the good work guys. I, for one, look forward to the wrap up tomorrow.

starcrunch

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:33:19 -0600

I'm going to have to agree with those saying it's just too much coverage on this topic. I've counted 9 posts in the last week that are directly related to Pitchfork. I didn't go (but thought about going) and I'm just not interested in reading about it from every viewpoint, every day. I think one post summarizing each day would have been sufficient. If this was a Chicago MUSIC site, then I think the amount of coverage would be appropriate.

skaterina

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:32:36 -0600

Wanna know what's more tiresome than reading multiple Pitchfork posts? Reading numerous, repititve, whiny comments from the haters who never have anything good to say, yet still go out of their way not only to read the site but take the additional time to leave meaningless, nasty comments. Maybe the chicagoists aren't just writing to fill in those who didn't go - maybe they are trying to start a conversation among those who did go as well. I went and I am still enjoying the dialogue concerning the festival and getting other people's perspectives. Chicagoist has plenty of posts on other topics today - maybe people that are bored with Pitchfork should skip to those.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:29:24 -0600

Jesus! If you don't care about Pitchfork don't read about it. I don't read any of the sports entries because I don't care, I skip the baby-friendly restaurant reviews because I don't have a kid, and I don't click through the cut if an article doesn't grab me from the main page. Absolutely none of this makes me ANGRY. Utilize that scroll function, skip the posts that don't interest you, and take a deep breath. I appreciate the Pitchfork coverage.

Julene McCoy

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:25:52 -0600

I got not one, but two articles emailed from Billboard regarding Pitchfork - that's about the same amount of coverage they had regarding Coachella (they might have actually emailed three for that). So if the mainstream industry magazines are interested, it makes sense that there would be more local coverage for the festival. That said, I have truly enjoyed all the posts, since I couldn't make it this year and enjoy everyone's different takes on the event. Thanks Tankboy, Lizz, Kevin & Shannon!

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:21:15 -0600

It is harder to write a short than long. Consider condensing.

Bill V

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:15:45 -0600

Day 3 was my favorite. Loved the early sets of Menomena, Junior Boys, Ponys, Jamie Lidell. Of Montreal was great, caught some of Klaxons too. BTW I wore a t-shirt and jeans and gym shoes and have no idea where any of it was purchased. I'm happy to see the few posts divided into days. If you don't care for the post, skip it. Nobody is making you read it and/or comment.

fishunderice

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:13:53 -0600

"drew international attention" In what nation? I watched the news just this morning and didn't hear a damn word about it. Maybe in the 'tight jean-hipster-punk underground' email world of "check out this sick show I'm going to" to your friend in England, type of international attention. Then yeah, I could see your infatuation with posting such life altering, fascinating articles dedicated to the world of 'feel sorry for me I'm in a struggling band' world. For that Tankboy, we thank you.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:11:19 -0600

I'm sorry, I should have said "PBR swilling ironic douchebag" instead of hipster.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:05:52 -0600

So basically, Chicagoist is saying "Fuck you all, we'll write what we want regardless of what readers think." way to be.

JoeM500

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:03:58 -0600

The cevapcici was amazing.

glamabella

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:55:46 -0600

I'm so sick of this whole "anti-hipster" thing. Although I understand it, I found far more people just wearing jeans and a t-shirt than any Urban Outfitters/American Apparel hipster garb. With that said, I couldn't help laughing at the girls wearing thick leggings and boots. It's a festival not a house party.

Tankboy

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:55:40 -0600

It's a very high profile music event that drew international attention. As a hometown media source I feel our coverage has been right in line with what it should be. And again, it's not like there's no other content on the site, or that the Pitchfork coverage has come at the expense of anything else our readers might enjoy. And each post is meant to cover a different aspect of Pitchfork, which we purposely did so that we wouldn't have coverage identical to every single other blog also following the event. And I'm pleased with, and proud of, all the writers' contributions.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:54:51 -0600

I have to agree: the Pitchfork coverage is indulgent. What's wrong with one preshow post and a short recap post of each day? Same thing when Lolla rolls around; it hijacks the site. Brevity is beautiful.

fishunderice

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:49:44 -0600

In other news, the world continues to turn, and as of now, the moon is scheduled to rise as well as the sun scheduled to set. Although, I'm not sure what the staff of Chicagoist will do now that Pitchfork is over(hopefully). Welcome to the WORLD Chicagoist!

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:47:20 -0600

#4, you must think the bible is a "bit of discussion" about God. I agree that it's worth covering, but between the endless promotional posts before the event, to all the extraneous detail, and now to find out it's even going to be stretched into *tomorrow*, it feels less like a discussion and more like Chicagoist got a cut of the ticket sales. If attendance is related to coverage, then why did the Taste get a fraction of the posts as Pitchfork? Seriously, do you believe a large part of the Chicagoist audience was so distraught at not being able to attend that they are pining away to hear about every little bit?

Kevin Robinson

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:43:48 -0600

As much as I want to vomit everytime see a shoelace tied around someone's head, or a mustache from 1983, I had a pretty good time this weekend. I thought De la Soul should have spent more time busting the rhymes and less time hyping up the crowd. Like I get it, you think you're old; stop telling us that you're the real deal and prove it. I know that they can bust it out, that's why I went. Overall, I thought the music was a nice balance. I felt like Of Montreal wouldn't need the big crazy stage show if their music was better. And I loved the New Pornographers, but I'm getting kind of sick of bands showing up with a laptop, especially when I can't even hear it, you know? Hopefully next year will have more dance music, and a tent for it - I really had the most fun when the bands were pushing it over the top and the crowd was responding.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:39:44 -0600

Sure you can guys can go ahead and review the festival. But what's wrong with just one posting on it?? We don't need 5-10 posts all basically saying the same thing about the same music festival.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:14:53 -0600

I think when 17,000 people a day gather in a Chicago park for three days straight it merits a bit of discussion, don't you? As for people that denounce pitchfork as simply a hipster gathering, grow up. While quite a few people there obvious rely on Vice magazine, Urban Outfitters, and Threadless for the majority of their fashion sense (to their collective detriment I might add), there was no attitude or ill-will towards those of us who felt most comfortable in a t-shirt , a pair of shorts and flip-flops. Oh, and by the way, De la rocked!!! Don't worry, I'm sure I left a typo or grammatical error or two in here so the first two posters can respond with something uninteligent and useless, which I'm sure is par for the course.

Tankboy

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:01:44 -0600

#1, I plan on addressing this tomorrow with the whole overview of the festival as a whole, but I think it's incredibly unfair to call it a "hipster" festival anymore. There were lots of parents with their kids, and while there were a number of kids in what I would consider silly attire, I'm also grounded enough to remember what it was like to be 18-24, and overly intellectual, and into making a "statement." Guess what though, those kids are everywhere now; always have been, always will! And if a music festival booking acts that aren't in heavy rotation on the radio makes it a "hipster" festival, well then I guess that all those jam bands that are touring, and all those metal bands that are touring, and 99% of the bands out there that are touring are hipster bands. Wow, that's a whole lotta hipster.

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 13:01:00 -0600

so did you guys see any shows this weekend?

guest

Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:54:38 -0600

Make it stop hipsters.