The Austin music scene through the eyes of a programmer/music enthusiast/show-goer

Thursday, May 04, 2006

The Original 10,000 Days Pitchfork Review

Now I know I don't post much anymore, but this discovery was just too good in my eyes not to share with the rest of you. So, anyway, at this point you're probably asking yourself what the hell is "10,000 Days"?! Don't worry, as a pretentious indie kid it is by no means your fault for not knowing the title of the latest release by Tool. Yes, that's right, Tool. "Wait, doesn't that break rules 1, 3, 26, and 30 of the hipster code of good taste", you ask? Oh, go to hell!

Anyhow, if you realize Tool's greatness like I do, you might have noticed the crummy 5.9 review the fork gave them two days ago (not to mention the 5.5 the new Peal Jam received, which is equally shameful). Well, don't feel too bad about it, since it looks as if the original review was a full 1.0 points higher. How do I know this? It's called site search folks. Check this out:

http://pitchforkmedia.com/cgi-bin/search2/search.cgi?terms=tool

Yep, that's right, two reviews for the same album. Oh Pitchfork, you're so great at belittling quality music, yet you can't even manage the content of your own website.

Anyhow, the more favorable review looks to be the original, unedited version and is dated 1 day earlier than the one published to their homepage. It looks like good ol' Schreiber or one of his cronies got a hold of the original and decided to dock it a full point seeing as Tool couldn't possibly be deserving of a rating in the respectable 6.0-7.0 range. I mean, that might come off as an endoresement of the band. God forbid, such an uncalculated move could compromise years of hard-earned street cred!