Pitchfork and The Needle Drop are two highly respected and highly popular music reviewers. Pitchfork is a website that gives reviews on a scale of 0 to 10, including decimals (ex. 8.3.) They also give news and even have videos, including a segment "Over/Under" where they ask singers and bands about anything from other artists to doughnut holes if they're overrated or underrated.

The Needle Drop is a YouTube channel run by Anthony Fantano. He is a one-man show, although his wife and his alter ego Cal Chuchesta make appearances, along with other critics during reviews. He gives reviews as well on a 0 to 10 scale, but instead of decimals uses "light,", "decent" and "strong" within the margins of the numbers (ex. light 8.) Fantano also has a channel called "That Is The Plan" where he talks more in depth about music as well as other pop culture.

These two music reviewers often go quality over hype, reviewing artists who are only critically favored, regardless of their popularity. For example, neither has reviewed a Taylor Swift album, but both have reviewed every Vampire Weekend album that has come out within each reviewer's respective existence (The Needle Drop has only existed since 2010.) Also, on a grand scale, there is probably a common thread as per which albums are given which score. As "subjective" as many claim art to be, there is more evidence to back up some claims than others. Despite this, I have seen a dichotomy not just on not just what scores are given in the reviews but the reviews themselves, and what I've found can be seen as a testament to critique, something that I think should be studied by prospective critics as much as the reviews themselves.

Playing Favorites

Despite the claim for objectivity, it was inevitable that these reviewers would have their own respective favorites. For Pitchfork, I've found the most noticeable are Kanye West, Arcade Fire, and Vampire Weekend.

*Published before release of "The Life of Pablo" which was given a 9.0.

As seen above, Kanye has consistently given "Best New Music" reviews, eclipsing 8 every review except for his fourth album "808s And Heartbreak." Also, Pitchfork gave "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy" a 10, the only one given to this day to an album since Wilco's 2002 "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot." I'll discuss the mythos of the 10 later.

In Arcade Fire's four full lengths, Pitchfork has given their albums, in chronological order, 9.7, 8.4, 8.6, and 9.2. For Vampire Weekend, it's 8.8, 8.6, and 9.3.

The Needle Drop, on the other hand, usually reviews highly albums from Death Grips, Swans, and Kendrick Lamar:

Death Grips: Decent 8, 10, 8, Decent 8, Light 9, 6, Strong 9

Swans: Strong 6, Decent 8, 10, Strong 9

Kendrick Lamar: Light 8, Decent 9, 10, Decent 8

When you compare these artists against each other, it's apparent that Pitchfork seems to be riding the wave of both other critics and other fans. Within their respective areas, Kanye West, Arcade Fire, and Vampire Weekend are both very popular and critically favored. On the other hand, only Kendrick Lamar is popular as apposed to Swans and Death Grips, and while all three are critically favored, Swans and Death Grips are polarizing because of their respective styles.

Scores Based on Consensus and Popularity

I think that the difference here is based on the set-up of each reviewing platform. Pitchfork is all based on consensus while The Needle Drop is one person. Albums that are immensely popular in hardcore music fans' discography are also the ones that will get the high ratings in Pitchfork. In Pitchfork's The 100 Best Albums of the Decade So Far (2010-2014) review, some albums that are in the top 10 include "Yeezus", "Lonerism", "Modern Vampires of the City", "Teen Dream", "Channel Orange", "Good Kid, M.A.A.D. City", and "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy." I think this is why several albums are often in the lukewarm low 8s area, seen as great to some but incomprehensible to others.

Again, Anthony is independent of the hype, and, if a hypothetical "best of" video coincided with his reviews at the time, Swans, Death Grips, and Kendrick Lamar would be given the top three spots, given that their the only albums to be given a 10 by Anthony.

Reviews Based on Grander Statements

Speaking of which, the 10s are interesting, specifically with Pitchfork, as, in the past 13 years, they've only given out one 10 ("My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy." While some albums have been close, none have coveted that title since 2010. This begs the question: has the "10" become more as a stunt than an actual review? If you look back, four albums released between 2000 and 2002 were given 10s, but only one since then has been awarded one? Either the best of best music has been diminished, or Pitchfork is giving us something. The 10, now, is not if an album is "perfect" or even near perfect but instead a grand statement of the time. It has become so unreachable that the 10 is not just a review but a game-changer of sorts.

And it does seem like that for Pitchfork. Oftentimes, I feel that they give reviews for the context of the albums other than the album itself. In the "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy" review, writer Ryan Dombal talks at length about the build-up to the album. However, that pales in comparison to Brent S. Sirota's opening paragraph to his 10 point review of "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot":

"Myth, it has been said, is the buried part of every story. On April 23rd, Yankee Hotel Foxtrot finally emerges into the light of day, having spent the last year interred in its own cluttered mythology: a hermetic studio gestation, with the inscrutable guidance of Chicago ex-pat/kindly wizard, Jim O'Rourke; internecine squabbles; conflict and resolution with American media behemoth AOL Time Warner; the release portentously slated for September 11th, but mysteriously delayed; the indecipherable short-wave radio prophecies; and, eventually, the hero's welcome, with the first stirrings of spring. It's all there: the miracle birth; the unlikely hero; the, um, benevolent mentor; the primordial menace; good over evil. Joseph Campbell would be pissing himself if he weren't dead."

Anthony Fantano, on the other hand, is all about the technical aspects of the album. You'll often catch him saying "rattling high hats", and he breaks down each aspect, if not song, specifically. For example, his reservation about Tame Impala's "Currents" was that frontman Kevin Parker's voice was too nasal and passive throughout the whole album. The only time Anthony talks about the context is at the beginning of the review, and this can only be interpreted not as a part of the review but instead as a background, kind of like how some drama show episodes start with "previously, on ____", followed by a summary of the previous episode.

While Pitchfork makes statements on the high end of the spectrum, they have also made some on the low end as well. The best example here is Ian Cohen's scathing review of The Airborne Toxic Event's debut eponymous debut, which he gave a 1.6. Cohen talks at length about how Los Angeles "lacks a flagship upstart indie band and wants one in the worst way." This band had gained popularity, and Pitchfork was self-aware enough to know that a positive review would cement their place. Knowing this, the review was given, again a harsh 1.6, but not as harsh as the review itself, as The Airborne Toxic Event was called out for demagoguery and unoriginality, throwing out that they "stole" from highly beloved bands like Arcade Fire, Bright Eyes, and The Strokes. The review bluntly ends with "Congrats, Pitchfork reader — the Airborne Toxic Event thinks you're a demographic."

It seemed as though it worked, as now, in 2016, nine years after the review, The Airborne Toxic Event has dwindled into obscurity. The review has grown to be almost as famous as the band, shown by claiming a spot on the astute article Dummy Magazine article "Pitchfork's 15 Most Significant Reviews."

In comparison, Anthony's poorest reviews again have to do with the album alone. His infamous review of Kid Cudi's "Speeding Bullet 2 Heaven" was given a 0, and it was expressly about the music, comparing the album to walking across hot coals (a lot of metaphors in general in his reviews.)

Quantity vs. Quality

I think something that's so distinctive about Anthony's reviews is that they lack distinction because he has not hard-set rules that PItchfork might have. In the review for The Vaccines' debut "What Did You Expect From The Vaccines" he has said "something being completely original doesn't necessarily make music great, and something being kind of unoriginal, or just really influenced by other things, doesn't necessarily make an album bad." Although The Needle Drop was not existing in 2007, when "The Airborne Toxic Event" was release, one can deduce that he would not give as poor and especially as harsh of a review as Pitchfork did.

On the flip side, there is proof that The Needle Drop's album reviews are independent from any evolution that a band has created, changing themselves at all. In Anthony's review of Bon Iver's eponymous album, he calls Justin Vernon's adding of dense instrumentation something that does "distract from the song more than add from the song." He ended up giving that album a light six. In Pitchfork's case, they mentioned in their 9.5 reviewthat "Justin's Vernon's project started out low-key and largely solo but has grown into an expansive and ambitious full-band affair with brilliant results." The same could be said for their respective reviews of Arcade Fire's "Reflektor" or even the "returning to form" style such as Sufjan Stevens' "Carrie and Lowell."

Platform

The biggest difference between Pitchfork and The Needle Drop is clearly that Pitchfork is text while The Needle Drop is video. Because of this, each reviewer diverges. The video allows more digressions from Anthony, which is mostly apparent in the existence of Cal Chuchesta, Anthony's "roommate" who looks suspiciously like Anthony. Although Cal usually pops up in bits throughout videos occasionally, Cal has had his own videos, a running thread during reviews where he descends to hell and then comes back, and an entire mixtape. In addition, Anthony's other channel That Is The Plan is a lot more laid back and is currently more of a review of memes than anything else. Also, with The Needle Drop, I can feel more of a narrative taking place, specifically because it's one person we're following than a group of them.

Other than the reviews, Pitchfork is big for news, and, because of the pairing, it does seem like the more serious of the two. Fantano constantly imbeds humor in his videos, often laughing at the beginning of them, and oftentimes in the description he will write "y'all know this is my opinion, right?"

So which is better?

It depends what you mean by that. If it's by the music that gets reviewed, they're almost identical. Based on style, it depends who you are, I think. If you are a singer or in a band, I think The Needle Drop is for you because of Anthony's technical, nuts-and-bolts thoughts that can be helpful for someone making music of his or her own. If you are more casual or maybe an internet buff, Pitchfork will give you everything you need to know. As a writer, I prefer Pitchfork because of how well-written its reviews are. Also, I find Anthony's reviews to be too academic (which, in terms of weaknesses, is not bad at all), and, while I do enjoy a Swans or a Death Grips or even a Kendrick Lamar (specifically "To Pimp A Butterfly"), I can't find myself just playing a song casually or even listening to the album a second time. This opinion only goes so far, though.

Well, that's what I thought. What did you think of this article? Did you like it? Did you hate it? What would you rate it? You the best, You the best. What should I review next? Brent Leoni, Pitchfork, The Needle Drop forever.