The 20 Best Songs of the Last 10 Years (According to Pitchfork)

LOL! Oh Buffy you make me laugh.. Yeah I love crappy pop music but not one of these songs would be on my list. I feel like this entire list was created by Selena Gomez or something haha.
 
Buffy Summers
Buffy Summers
OMG LMAO!
There are a couple good songs on there, but overall I totally do not agree with these being the "BEST" in the last 10 years... And LMFAO@'created by Selena Gomez'
 
It's not perfect, but I do think it's a fair summary of the last ten years in music. All 500 songs are arguably "important" songs, but the real arguing, for me, comes in putting them in an order.

Looking at the top 20 again:
Revolver said:
20. The Walkmen - The Rat
19. R. Kelly - Ignition (Remix)
18. Hercules and the Love Affair - Blind
17. Annie - Heartbeat
16. The Rapture - House of Jealous Lovers
15. The Knife - Heartbeats
14. JAY-Z - 99 Problems
13. LCD Soundsystem - Losing My Edge
12. Outkast - Hey Ya
11. Gnarls Barkley - Crazy
10. Arcade Fire - Neighborhood #1 (Tunnels)
9. Animal Collective - My Girls
8. Radiohead - Idioteque
7. Missy Elliott - Get Ur Freak On
6. Yeah Yeah Yeahs - Maps
5. Daft Punk - One More Time
4. Beyonce - Crazy in Love
3. M.I.A. - Paper Planes (Diplo Remix)
2. LCD Soundsystem - All My Friends
1. Outkast - B.O.B.
Click to expand...

A lot of those songs were either extremely influential in their genre, or else serve as a reasonable representation of them. A few are just plain great songs, and a few just represent the best moment of a notable band of the time. I think most or all of them certainly deserve to be in the top 500. Top 20 maybe not, but that's always the tricky bit.

Bearing that in mind, put up or shut up. 😛

What would be your twenty? Not necessarily your favourite twenty songs; but the twenty best songs to stand for last ten years. What would you call the twenty key songs of the last ten years...?
 
Brandon said:
LOL! Oh Buffy you make me laugh.. Yeah I love crappy pop music but not one of these songs would be on my list. I feel like this entire list was created by Selena Gomez or something haha.
Click to expand...

Ah, I don't know. She's always struck me as more of a Jonas Brothers fan:

nick-jonas-selena-gomez-rolling-sto.jpg
 
Revolver said:
So thoughts on this list?
Click to expand...

Before i even look at any response in this thread...I'm not sure I would have put any song from that list in the top 20. But then, I think the whole idea of these lists are stupid. They list the mass produced trollop without the personality that goes into choosing your favourite songs.

Music isn't about a one-size-fits-all attitude and so I never pay attention to such lists anyway. By their very nature they are ludicrous. In fact, all I think they are, are an attempt to publicise the list-maker. ..In this case Pitchfork... who?
 
J
Jersh
Who the hell is this guy?
What the hell?
OutKast is on there twice!
They shouldn't even be on there once.
 
Joshua Underpants agrees: Who the hell is this guy?

Who me or pitchfork? If you're on about me, well...eh, not sure I have to explain much beyond what I said, it wasn't controversial so ill assume you mean pitchfork; in which case i'm right there with ya.
 
Silum said:
Music isn't about a one-size-fits-all attitude and so I never pay attention to such lists anyway. By their very nature they are ludicrous. In fact, all I think they are, are an attempt to publicise the list-maker. ..In this case Pitchfork... who?
Click to expand...

Pitchfork accompanied the list with quick little write ups along with each song explaining why they reckon they deserved their place, and for the most part, I thought they were fairly convincing.

You're right of course, such lists are ludicrous in the sense that music is art, and therefore subjective. But then surely the point of art and music is to provoke a bit of thought, a bit of discussion. For me, that's the value of ranking stuff like that, the actual conversation it generates.

Of course there'll never be a definitive list like this, one that's absolutely scientifically agreed upon. But for me they're still useful as a kind of springboard - I mean, everybody's going to disagree with the list generally, but I see it as kind of a challenge to come up with something better.

I mean, it's easy to go "X shouldn't be on the list" for whatever reason, but it's a lot harder to say what should.
 
Jill_Valentine said:
You're right of course, such lists are ludicrous in the sense that music is art, and therefore subjective. But then surely the point of art and music is to provoke a bit of thought, a bit of discussion.
Click to expand...
Why does music need to be 'ranked' to provoke thought?

Jill_Valentine said:
I mean, it's easy to go "X shouldn't be on the list" for whatever reason, but it's a lot harder to say what should.
Click to expand...

Thats why we don't need these lists. They're for publicity, not for the good of music, or sharing tastes, or provoking interest... why? Well the only thoughts they EVER provoke is what didn't make the list or why somthing did. I can only speak for myself but that bores me.
 
Silum said:
Why does music need to be 'ranked' to provoke thought?

Thats why we don't need these lists. They're for publicity, not for the good of music, or sharing tastes, or provoking interest... why? Well the only thoughts they EVER provoke is what didn't make the list or why somthing did. I can only speak for myself but that bores me.
Click to expand...

I like music a lot. I like listening to it and reading about it, and then I like arguing with my friends about it like a big tragic nerd, because that's just the way I roll.

It doesn't need to be ranked, it's just another way to look at the subject. Gives me an excuse to talk about bands I'm interested in with like-minded types, is all.
 
I enjoy lists, but it's rare that I find one that I don't raise an eyebrow at. These lists would be a lot better if each publication would just consult me and learn which of their choices are crap.
 
Jill_Valentine said:
I like music a lot. I like listening to it and reading about it, and then I like arguing with my friends about it like a big tragic nerd, because that's just the way I roll.

It doesn't need to be ranked, it's just another way to look at the subject. Gives me an excuse to talk about bands I'm interested in with like-minded types, is all.
Click to expand...

Well see I understand all that. But if your looking at lists compiled with only the most popular of bands (I know nothing of Pitchfork but a simple google search gave me some interesting articles on their lack of independent support and pop thinking)...and thats the problem...these lists are made to be represented by a large audience, if you want the music the sheep listen to, look at the charts, i'm not really sure there's much to discuss there.

Then, you could read an independent eccletic list, it still doesn't really give you much insight into good music. I'm all for discussion, that I enjoy 😉 Just not lists....and to use your example, I wouldn't list art in a ranking either. Its funny, art is never considered in this way and yet music is...I dare say i would be shunned by the artistic community for ranking the various pieces of popular artwork around the world... what a discredit to their creativity!
 
Silum said:
Well see I understand all that. But if your looking at lists compiled with only the most popular of bands (I know nothing of Pitchfork but a simple google search gave me some interesting articles on their lack of independent support and pop thinking)...and thats the problem...these lists are made to be represented by a large audience, if you want the music the sheep listen to, look at the charts, i'm not really sure there's much to discuss there.
Click to expand...

I read Pitchfork, and it's got a very particular audience that actually isn't entirely reflected by this list. Among them, the pop inclusions caused quite a stir indeed.

Pitchfork's area of interest is actually a bit left of mainstream, back in it's heyday it was the word on bands to look out for. It made it's name as an indie/alt hitspotter. A good review from Pitchfork could make or break a new indie band, and often did.

Over time, it's become - to my mind - unfairly maligned as a hipster bible, something people read to be told what they're supposed to like, as opposed to what might be worth listening to. It's gotten kind of popular to bash Pitchfork for not being indie enough often just because people want to prove how indie they are in comparison. People accuse it of selling out because it's started covering more and more mainstream bands, but I think that's a little unfair. Since Pitchfork started out, the genres it covers just happened to become more and more mainstream themselves. Due in no small part to Pitchfork's influence, I might add.

For me, Pitchfork is still handy. They're still a useful tool for keeping an eye out for bands I haven't heard before, and news on bands I already know. It's not the only online music site I read, but it is one of the primary ones. Hits a decent balance between mainstream and wilfully obscure, for my tastes.
 
I know some people who swear by Pitchfork to a crazy extent, and basically won't venture forth an opinion on a band or album until Pitchfork approves it and validates it for them. Kind of sad, really.
 
Revolver said:
I know some people who swear by Pitchfork to a crazy extent, and basically won't venture forth an opinion on a band or album until Pitchfork approves it and validates it for them. Kind of sad, really.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is a bit weird. Rarer and rarer, but you do still see it.

You see plenty of the opposite extreme too now, though - people who won't give a band a chance if Pitchfork liked them, for fear they might be accused of being Pitchfork sheep. Kind of a post-hipster hipster backlash.
 
I've never heard of Pitchfork in my life, or at least until this topic. And I'm of the personal opinion that music has been so bad for the past ten years that they could pretty much put anything up there, as music standards don't rise above mediocre(unless your name is Thom, and you play with a band called radiohead) In which case my list would probebly consist of 10 radiohead songs.

Which I actually find pathetic in many ways.


I also think idioteque, whilst great, isn't the best sing they've released in the passed decade.
 
I'd take the last ten years over the ten preceding them. Any day.

IMHO, there's plenty of phenomenal bands out there making music right now. But there, I suppose that's a matter of taste, right? :tongue:

I'd agree about Idioteque, although it is one of my favourites. Like I say, There There should have been there, by God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom