Comments on: Airborne Toxic Event Responds To Terrible Pitchfork Review

By: Selective Service » Matt ‘09 Tales

Selective Service » Matt ‘09 Tales — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:29:09 +0000

[...] like this). Case in point, the way I was completely unaware of the whole Airborne / Pitchfork debate until after I’d already loved this song for far too long for any of that ridiculousness to [...]

By: Scenester

Scenester — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:39:03 +0000

I’ve since this band several times in LA and I’m pretty familiar with a lot of bands in the Silverlake/Echo Park scene. I’ve never liked this band because they are just an act. Their music is not very original and there are a lot of bands in LA that deserve the huge crowds more than these frauds. but Mikel and crew have a way with the business side of the industry and that’s what separates the men from the boys. Did they not really pay their dues like most bands do? no. Did they just show up and decide they are “in the scene”? yes. but are they traveling the states to sell out crowds? yes. so they are doing something right. and that’s playing a familiar sound and actually marketing it.

By: Meela

Meela — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:33:26 +0000

As Mikel so honestly puts it, they are artists yes but they are also people who have worked hard to be where they are. Are they entitled to a response? fuck yea!

They also prompt the writer to see them live which is decent of them. They’re a new band and they want to make things right. I say all the power to them.
I saw them live last night, they kicked my ass! They’re talented and genuine musicians.

Congrats on that first album! Now the pressure is to make another just as good =)

By: Kelli

Kelli — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 18:35:42 +0000

Honestly, is there really anyone who sounds original anymore? No. From the dawn of music, people have bored elements of sound from other places. To write a bad review based on “lack of originality” is just like an art teacher criticizing a child for not painting with a color that hasn’t been invented. Seriously, it’s to the point that the most originality you can get is in those brave souls who are boldly UNoriginal. I enjoy TATE very much, even though I listen with a sense of deja vu.
Secondly, there were SEVERAL not-so-good reviews given on that album. Notice that the only one that was responded to was Pitchfork’s. Why? Because that was not a criticism, that was a personal assault. What person really has the right to dump all over another’s self expression? To say that it is not your cup of tea is one thing. To pretty much say that they should’ve never attempted szn album is another. Lame. That’s why the world will see less and less gifted bands, idiot critics can, have, and will scare them all into hiding.

By: It's not White Noise? No, it's "The Airborne Toxic Event"! | Riddled Phantasms Magazine

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:34:23 +0000

[...] took the high road, wrote a rebuttal to this review and did it the right, no trash talking back and forth, just stating their point and [...]

By: Sophie

Sophie — Mon, 11 May 2009 20:17:27 +0000

It bothered them so much because they know it’s true. It’s a put together band of people who are all talented and fit into a mold. They do copy styles of bands that came before them and they just thought they were too smart for anyone to notice. It would have been better to ignore that article. The essay that was written in response only validates it.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:25:55 +0000

I stopped reading the band’s retort after the first paragraph. I’m sure whoever wrote it felt pretty good the moment it was posted. However I’m sure that after they had a chance to absorb the content of the review beyond “It’s a scathingly bad review”, they may have learned to come to terms with it and hopefully make a better next album. After all, at the time of writing this comment, the band has removed the response from their website.

Personally I thought the overall sound of the album is good but the lyrics really detract from some otherwise decent music. Maybe if people who don’t understand English listen to this album they will enjoy it more.

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 21:56:52 +0000

There is absolutely nothing wrong with talking shit right back to someone who talks shit to you. For a lot of people, it really feels good. Some feel that high-minded indifference confers a certain nobility, but when someone trashes your sweat-drenched craftwork in a very public forum, I imagine it could be pretty gratifying to call the ass out. And Cohen was an ass.

Critics should not be immune to countercriticism. And few are in a better position to generate an interesting rebuttal than the artists themselves. I only wish this particular rebuttal had been a little more well-executed.

By: hm

hm — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 05:49:13 +0000

Who pissed in Ian’s Cheerios? He sounds like a jealous bitch that is just looking for someone to bag on. He seems to not even have all his facts straight. Maybe we should have critics for the “critics” ???

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:51:45 +0000

The pitchfork review was way overboard and agreed that ATE should of just let it go.

Plus, they gave the most overrated and overhyped band, tv on the radio, a great review. enough said.