katherinestasaph: rubyvroom: nmemagazine: This record store in Chicago has a ‘do not buy’ list of albums to avoid at all costs. What would make yours? Let us know on NME.COM. I don’t actually disagree with this list from a musical perspective, but I would like to point out that there’s a pretty disproportionate number of lady singers being singled out here. Be more subtle, record store dudes. Also: what year is this? Somebody is very bitter about the 90’s, lol. And although it could be nothing, that doesn’t mean I’m not side-eyeing the fuck out of k.d. lang and Melissa Etheridge being highlighted. On the one hand, I’m guessing the context of this isn’t so much a music-snob jerkoff jamboree as it is the fact that used record stores tend to get a lot of the same artists/titles that they eventually get overloaded with and subsequently have a hard time selling because it’s both omnipresent and out-of-favor. (The mid-late ’90s had a sort of Unholy Trinity: Monster, Dookie and Cracked Rear View.) The prevalence of ’90s artists says a lot in that context — aging X’ers/Y’ers who tend to move a lot, need extra spending money and/or tend to go digital more readily have to constitute the vast majority of this glut, and when supply outweighs demand this sort of rule set tends to be handy. If this was posted in a used LP store in 1982 you’d best believe Herb Alpert and Vaughn Meader would be all over this. That said, who gets to define “2nd tier hip-hop” or “anything Pitchforky”? Why the aforementioned suspicious highlighter usage? How are the Eagles on there twice? (I know it is every music snob’s sworn duty to hate the Eagles, but seriously.) And if you’re so inundated with Boz Scaggs and Macy Gray CDs, wouldn’t you have learned how to spell their names by now?
Pop-upView Separately

katherinestasaph:

rubyvroom:

nmemagazine:

This record store in Chicago has a ‘do not buy’ list of albums to avoid at all costs. What would make yours? Let us know on NME.COM.

I don’t actually disagree with this list from a musical perspective, but I would like to point out that there’s a pretty disproportionate number of lady singers being singled out here. Be more subtle, record store dudes.

Also: what year is this? Somebody is very bitter about the 90’s, lol.

And although it could be nothing, that doesn’t mean I’m not side-eyeing the fuck out of k.d. lang and Melissa Etheridge being highlighted.

On the one hand, I’m guessing the context of this isn’t so much a music-snob jerkoff jamboree as it is the fact that used record stores tend to get a lot of the same artists/titles that they eventually get overloaded with and subsequently have a hard time selling because it’s both omnipresent and out-of-favor. (The mid-late ’90s had a sort of Unholy Trinity: Monster, Dookie and Cracked Rear View.) The prevalence of ’90s artists says a lot in that context — aging X’ers/Y’ers who tend to move a lot, need extra spending money and/or tend to go digital more readily have to constitute the vast majority of this glut, and when supply outweighs demand this sort of rule set tends to be handy. If this was posted in a used LP store in 1982 you’d best believe Herb Alpert and Vaughn Meader would be all over this.

That said, who gets to define “2nd tier hip-hop” or “anything Pitchforky”? Why the aforementioned suspicious highlighter usage? How are the Eagles on there twice? (I know it is every music snob’s sworn duty to hate the Eagles, but seriously.) And if you’re so inundated with Boz Scaggs and Macy Gray CDs, wouldn’t you have learned how to spell their names by now?

Source: nmemagazine

140 Notes/ Hide

  1. magpie--eye reblogged this from the-last-shadow-puppies
  2. halvingthetimeofmylife reblogged this from texasshaped
  3. vaquerovaquero reblogged this from nmemagazine
  4. kdawgmusic reblogged this from nmemagazine
  5. skullsinheaven reblogged this from nmemagazine
  6. keepupwiththemodernage reblogged this from nmemagazine
  7. musicissound reblogged this from nmemagazine
  8. lastdayofmagic reblogged this from nmemagazine and added:
    Okay, but why is Shampoo on that list? WHY
  9. jsuiscarlos reblogged this from nmemagazine
  10. sarasyp reblogged this from nmemagazine
  11. imathers said: Students. Poor people. Old people. Hipsters. Etc. At least when I worked in one a few years ago (when I drop by the store it doesn’t appear to have changed).
  12. allerleirauhhh reblogged this from nmemagazine
  13. liveontheusdollar reblogged this from nmemagazine
  14. cavesofaltamira reblogged this from kittensandscience and added:
    They hate the Eagles so much they had to put them on twice.
  15. kikil0u reblogged this from nmemagazine
  16. kittensandscience reblogged this from hidden-agender and added:
    A lot of those bands I’ve never heard of, so I can’t comment on them, but there are some really good ones in here.
  17. davebloom reblogged this from everygreatsongever and added:
    Yeah, I keep seeing friends picking this list over for taste policing, sexism*, age-ism, etc., on the part of the store...
  18. maggiebruk reblogged this from nmemagazine
  19. oceansoverallofus reblogged this from meltyrbrain and added:
    Hey now, I find great stuff in the 99 cent bin all the time.
  20. everygreatsongever reblogged this from markrichardson and added:
    Piling in behind Mark and Nate here, with the exception of the “everything Pitchforky” (seems like that would be stuff...
  21. meltyrbrain reblogged this from judyxberman and added:
    What’s Samiam doing on there? Or is that a band called Samian? Who the hell are they?
  22. melissabrightside reblogged this from nmemagazine and added:
    Hahahahahaha LOVE IT
  23. fiftyftqueenie reblogged this from rubyvroom and added:
    ohhh that’s a little better, then.
  24. rubyvroom reblogged this from leorizanzel and added:
    That certainly makes the 90’s inundation make more sense - there was such a glut of terrible one-hit CDs being produced...
  25. teen-punk-princess reblogged this from 420elijahwood