Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Fight Bite Full Length Reviewed on Pitchfork

Fight Bite, who put out the first seven inch on our very own We Shot J.R. Records (you can even BUY the seven inch by clicking on that link!), received a solid review of their debut full length album on Pitchfork today. Go read it. The following quote probably sums up the review:

"they spackle a hazy wash of Leanne Macomber's wispy, French-pop-star voice over molasses-slow keyboard drones and icily removed synthesized beats. The result is somewhat akin to the sexy somnambulance of Beach House or the eerie ambiance of Julee Cruise, and thus Fight Bite join other members of the freshman class of 2008 (see also: Vivian Girls, Crystal Stilts) who are obsessed with Phil Spector's girl-group pop and aloof shoegazer effects."

Pitchfork homeboy gets a little critical at the end too:

"The main problem, however, with this charming album it's that it is too one-note. With not enough dynamic difference between them, the gauzy songs start to bleed together. But that's a rookie mistake. Fight Bite definitely have more songs in them like "Swissex Lover", and their moderately up-tempo numbers show a lot of promise.

but ends up calling it:

"a perfect hibernation soundtrack-- to keep us cozy during this chilly season."

87 comments:

Anonymous said...

lol

Anonymous said...

hmmm... i wonder if pete freedman will write about this... if theres even a blurb about will johnson taking a shit on pitchfork, there\'s a pete freedman post about it within minutes. something tells me he\'ll overlook this though

Anonymous said...

if you hate pete freedman and the observer so much, why do you even go to their website?

Anonymous said...

Everybody should stop going to that website. Even if it\'s a laughable train-wreck, it\'s just not worth it.

Anonymous said...

By \"everybody\" you mean the two dozen people who might read WSJ on occasion? No way is anyone from this blog NOT going to the Observer\'s page.

Never happen.

Anonymous said...

2:04 (Liles), you\'re very funny. sites like this exist because the observer has fucked up everything for over a decade. By the time the observer becomes web-only, blogs will already have had a huge five-year plus head start. Good luck.

Anonymous said...

and why do you always say these blogs have \"two dozen\" people reading them? If you care to know the ugly truth, I can direct you to some reference sites. You might be a little surprised.

stonedranger said...

You can always smell a comment from Liles coming from a mile away... it stinks of someone who actually gives enough of a shit about the observer to defend it on here.

Anonymous said...

I love the fact that you think I\'m Jeff Liles.

I always thought you were him!

http://widgets.alexa.com/traffic/graph/?r=1m&y=p&z=1&h=300&w=470&c=1&u[]=weshotjr.com&u[]=blogs.dallasobserver.com%2Fdc9&u[]=nightlifeblog.quickdfw.com%2F&x=2009-02-17T21%3A03%3A04.000Z&check=www.alexa.com&signature=YnnUWt8t8VeFfQH2hGaKXXF4BGM%3D said...

You are competing quite nicely with Quick, though.

stonedranger said...

So we get less traffic than all of the Dallas Observer\'s website combined? Is that supposed to be a news flash?

Anonymous said...

maybe you can change the name from WS Jr. to \"Slow\".

Anonymous said...

great numbers guys! dont die.

Anonymous said...

Numbers mean nothing when SR is sitting there hitting the refresh button every five seconds.

and why would it matter anyway? who even cares but you? i could see if you were selling ads or something it might matter... but lets get real - this is all about your fucking ego and this ridiculous and delusional idea that you or Liles or anybody on here might have some influence in our lives.

you dont. get over yourselves.

stonedranger said...

You should google the phrase \"situational irony\" some time.

Anonymous said...

I knew it! You ARE Liles!

Anonymous said...

I love this blog. Informative and helpful. I read it everyday. SR and DL wouldn\'t be such assholes to all of you if you guys weren\'t assholes first.

Not trying to ride SR and DL\'s asses, though. They can get a little pretentious and pompous sometimes, but it\'s easy to look past.

Anonymous said...

I love this blog. Informative and helpful. I read it everyday. SR and DL wouldn\'t be such assholes to all of you if you guys weren\'t assholes first.

Not trying to ride SR and DL\'s asses, though. They can get a little pretentious and pompous sometimes, but it\'s easy to look past.

Anonymous said...

I love this blog. Informative and helpful. I read it everyday. SR and DL wouldn\'t be such assholes to all of you if you guys weren\'t assholes first.

Not trying to ride SR and DL\'s asses, though. They can get a little pretentious and pompous sometimes, but it\'s easy to look past.

Anonymous said...

Kiss their asses**

the real jeff liles said...

For the record, I am not Stoneranger. That should be obvious.

As far as Fight Bite, I have seen them exactly one time... the impression I came away with was more positive than negative. Got no problem with them at all.

However, I am very curious about something. Why is it that every time you guys write about Fight Bite on WSJR, the comments section for the piece always turns into an indictment of me? They are on your label, right? How is this helping your artist? I mean, on one level, it is a sort of conflict of interest for a publication to write about an artist that they have an financial affiliation with, but when you then factor in an effort on your part to assassinate my character as some sort of shameless publicity stunt... I mean, are you serious? I would hope you could come up with something more creative than that.

This is why I hardly ever bother with this blog. One week you are ragging on Wanz Dover, the next week you are dissing John from Parade of Flesh. When they get played out, you go back to me or the Dallas Observer.

What is your problem with me? Is it even real? And is talking shit about me really helping Fight Bite?

Anonymous said...

Liles, you started attacking wsj first, did you not?

stonedranger said...

Hey Liles, don\'t act as if you\'ve never posted anonymously on this blog talking shit to us. We both know you have.

Anonymous said...

I don\'t think this blog has ever attacked Parade Of Flesh or Wanz. If anything the Observer stirred a bunch of shit up about Fight Bite, and has almost always been negative towards this blog.

stonedranger said...

Oh, and if you think YOU could in any way be the catalyst for any kind of publicity stunt, I\'d think again, Don Quixote.

the real jeff liles said...

Do me a favor then, OK? Delete my name whenever it comes up on your blog.

Every. Single. Time.

If you agree to do that, then no worries.

If you will not do that, then we both know you are using my name to promote and maintain heightened traffic to this blog.

Just do it. Your readers could care less about me anyway, right? Right.

Now quit talking about me and get back to promoting your conflict-of-interest deal with Fight Bite.

Anonymous said...

get over yourself, jeff. most people that read this site don\'t know who you are. your name wouldn\'t be worth erasing.

Anonymous said...

oh, and do you think pitchfork would write about FB on account of this site? How powerful do you wsj is?

http://www.dallasobserver.com/bestof/2008/award/best-local-music-web-site-1098891/ said...

haters.

the real jeff liles said...

to 5:35

thank you.

that was my point.

stonedranger said...

538-- I guess I should explain that my above reference wasn\'t an attack on the Observer or its music staff, per se. We have our disagreements and more often then not we don\'t see eye to eye with them on pretty much anything, but my comment was made more to argue the proposition that Americans are NOT passionate about mainstream media anymore. Take a look at results from the General Social Survey or any reputable media research survey conducted over the past five years, and you\'ll find that Americans of all walks of life are beginning to trust corporate controlled media less and less. They don\'t feel any kind of affinity with it, and often regard mainstream news sources as incompetent, bias and inaccurate in their reporting. To me, an every day Joe being passionate about a corporate controlled newspaper like the Observer is about as probable as that same guy passionately defending McDonalds or Microsoft of Viacom or ABC or something. I guess it\'s possible that someone would do that, but I just can\'t imagine who would get on here and spend so much time defending entities that most people don\'t regard very highly at all anymore unless they have some persona connection with said entity. Not that I\'m accusing anyone of anything, just making an observation.

Anonymous said...

You know, after reading this, Jeff Liles comes off as more pretentious than SR or DL. Congratulations Jeff! That is quite a feat!

chris said...

How people come off online and how they are in real life are two different things. Ask DL or SR if they have ever said FUCK YOU to a total stranger in person. They would never do that. The bravery comes from hiding behind a fake name.

As far as your observation that people are not passionate about mainstream news sources, are you really insinuating that there are more people who passionate about this blog than, say, the Observer or Morning News? Sure, both of them are less than ideal, but you guys are a LONG way away from ever having the trust of the public in the same manner they do. It will never happen. Ever. Both of those papers could go away altogether and you guys STILL would not have that trust.

You cannot even bring yourself to attribute your own byline. And the public is supposed to trust you? Please. No offense, but keep dreaming. On the landscape of available media, you barely register as a grain of sand on the beach.

defensive listening said...

I have absolutely told total strangers \"fuck you\" in person. Not the proudest moments of my life, but what the fuck do you know?

brian blur said...

all of yall just need to shut the fuck up

stonedranger said...

Hey \"Chris,\" I\'m guessing you don\'t have much of an education based on your apparent reading comprehension level, so I\'ll explain it very simply to you: I wasn\'t saying anything about this blog. I was talking about mainstream media in general. Are you passionate about the Dallas Morning News or the Observer? What about CNN or Taco Bell? If so, you\'re NOT the average American. Go look it up, Sherlock. This isn\'t my OPINION, it is a fact. People trust generalized, mainstream, corporate controlled media less and less these days, and frankly, they have every reason to do so. Like I said, this has nothing to do with us vs. the Observer music section, but rather with our media culture as a whole.

I would never claim to know how much people care or don\'t care about this blog because I don\'t really talk to people about it. But I will say that more and more people are turning to alternative and more specialized sources online to get their news every day, and this phenomenon transcends political ideology, education level, race, gender, and just about every other demographic variable. So take some time and educate yourself, then go back and re-read my comment SLOWLY and see if you pick up on what I meant.

And if you do in fact happen to be passionate about the Morning News, Observer, Star Telegram, USA Today or any other corporate news media, then please describe that passion to us because I would be genuinely interested to hear about it.

GBZZ said...

Dude, c\'mon, I love USA Today.

GBZZ said...

Dude, c\'mon, I love USA Today.

GBZZ said...

I love it 2x.

Anonymous said...

What the fuck does passionate mean? What is your point? I read the New York Times, Time Magazine, National Geographic and yes, even the Dallas Observer. Jim Schutze, Robert Wilonsky, Josh Alan Friedman, Noah Bailey and Jesse Hughey are all far more interesting writers than you are.

Of course, they are professionals. You guys are just hobbyists.

Passionate hobbyists, but hobbyists nonetheless.

Anonymous said...

Really, Noah Bailey and Jesse Hughey are...\"professionals?\"
So all it takes is working at a corporate paper to be professional?
Schutze and Friedman, I\'ll give you. Wilonsky? Verrry flukey and VERY overrated.

But Bailey and Hughey? Seriously? Those guys would wilt like a fucking flower on fire if they had to hold a real conversation about music with the geeks that populate this place.

You\'re out of your fucking mind.

Gbzz said...

I\'d like to see a real conversation about music that didn\'t devolve into name-calling and needless, ineffective swearing.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, I find it much easier to respect SR and DL than many other music critics, even though I disagree with them about quite a bit. They are passionate and honest in what they write and their pretentiousness seems to be well deserved (for the most part). They know what they are talking about and they have a more expansive taste than most writers these days. Did no one else find that Pitchfork writer to be annoying? (I\'m not one to bash a news outlet just because its cool, but come on!) As much as I want to hate this blog sometimes, I cannot. It\'s better than most other blogs out there and I\'m okay with not always agreeing with the writers, their opinions actually seem valid to me (despite the occasional petty comment here and there. But who really cares?)

Alright I\'m done \"kissing SR and DL\'s asses\" as someone so eloquently put it earlier.

Anonymous said...

what\'s wrong with promoting your own releases?

Anonymous said...

does anyone else feel like the needle is stuck....?

pop.

pop.

pop.

stonedranger said...

aaaaannnnnnd..... scene.

Anonymous said...

does anyone else feel like the needle is stuck....?

pop.

pop.

pop.

Anonymous said...

I can\'t believe someone thinks so highly of Noah Bailey and Jesse Hughey! Hilarious. Have you read \"Dude Food\"?

Judging by the shit DL and SR have to put up with regarding this site (not to mention putting out records) I\'d say they\'re a little beyond \"hobbyists\" at this point. Seems obvious they\'re doing this because they love music and care about supporting the local scene.
I have way more respect for people like them than for some bros who can\'t wait to make it to the top of the D.O. food chain. The D.O. isn\'t about writing anyway. It\'s all about advertising dollars with some shitty writing stuck in here and there.

And Liles, how the hell is it a conflict of interest to write about the bands they put out?

not liles, but............ said...

um, 9:44. are you seriously not aware of what the term \"conflict of interest\" infers. because promoting bands that are on your own label removes the ability to critically judge the creations that they put forth to the masses. not faulting WSJR, but can ya picture this sticker on the front of the next record EVER happening:

\"fite bight\'s new album is a pretty lousy batch of songs compared to emerald eyes. nothing new here. dont\' get us wrong, everyone should still buy it and all, and then tell all of your friends about how groundbreaking it is, but let\'s be honest: nothing will ever top swissseexxx lubbber.\"

stonedranger said...

We haven\'t attempted to publish any \"critical judgments\" of any of the bands on our label at any point after they\'ve signed on with us. Everyone knows who\'s on our label, so you can judge any coverage we give to our bands with full knowledge of our involvement with them.

Anonymous said...

I think a sticker like that would be genius.

In fact, I remember a sticker on the front of a record saying, \"Hey, this is nowhere near as good as our last record, so don\'t get any ideas\" or something like that. The world of selling shit is more complicated than \"Hey! BUY THIS.\" Believe it or not.

Anonymous said...

\"jack of in my eye\" is actually a better name.

Anonymous said...

You know who started off as a publication that discussed music before they put out records? Touch And Go.

Vice Magazine reviews music AND puts out records. Zines used to have order forms for seven inches.

If somebody puts out a record, chances are you know what they think of the music on it. In a perfect world, I\'m sure most people would like to release records by bands they like.

A lot of these comments come largely out of ignorance and a lack of understanding of any music or underground history that occurred before 2001.

Anonymous said...

Let me offer this: if Noah Bailey were to write positively about his own band or their new record in the Dallas Observer, would that be a conflict of interest?

Personally, I think highly of Noah and Jesse because they are really good people. Most people tend to judge others on something a little deeper than their particular taste in hipster bullshit. If you guys can ever get past your adolescent territorial pissing and unsolicited character assassination then maybe somebody outside Dallas would take you guys seriously.

Or, not. Maybe Fight Bite likes being represented by petty assholes who alienate so many potential fans on their behalf.

WSJR has, however small, an interest in the well-being of Fight Bite\'s career. If this were Fight Bite\'s website or blog, then no problem. SR and DL are supposedly offering an objective viewpoint of the DFW music scene. Every time they write about Fight Bite they could be writing about another band in town, but they aren\'t- they are writing about a band on their little record label. Protecting their investment - every time FB gets written up on another blog, it is apparently News on this blog. No conflict of interest there, huh?

Maybe this blog is really just an infomercial.

And, yes, until someone actually sees fit to pay DL and SR for the material they offer on WSJR, they are hobbyists.

Passionate and motivated hobbyists, but hobbyists nonetheless. Lots of people love music and support the scene. Lots of people have blogs and put up with shit from people they don\'t know. They own little indie labels and put out 7 inch singles for bands that nobody will ever hear or care about. A labor of love, not a paycheck. There is a distinct difference.

Professional means doing something for a living. When the WSJR record label pays for SR\'s mortgage (or even buys him a dinner salad at Spiral Diner), then we can call him a professional.

Until then, hobbyist. Aspiring to imagined influence, protecting turf that does not exist.

To SR 12:35 said...

\"We haven\'t attempted to publish any critical judgements of any band on our label after they signed on with us...\"

Dude, you did it YESTERDAY. What the fuck is this reposting of the Pitchfork review?

\"Everyone knows who is on our label, so you can judge any coverage, blah, blah, blah...\"

By \"everyone\" I guess you mean the people who have already been here and have been subjected to your ongoing ad campaign. What about the people who stumble across WSJR for the first time today? How are they supposed to know that?

Anonymous said...

So why did the observer repost the review? Oh, yeah, because when a local band gets on Pitchfork, that is actually news.

None of you dumb fucks have acknowledged that fact that there is a long history of publications putting out records. INCLUDING THE OBSERVER.

Anonymous said...

Hey, 1:19, You\'re a dumb fucking sack of shit. Nobody cares if you know Noah Bailey or Jesse Hughey and you think they\'re \"Good People.\"

They don\'t get paid to be good people. They get paid to write about music. And they do a fucking terrible job. Most people that actually go to a lot of shows and buy a lot of music in the area would agree.

As for alienating potential fans, um... the band was on pitchfork yesterday. You think any of their readers give a shit about a blog putting out a seven inch for them? One lousy seven-inch. Think that\'s a big deal to say, people in the UK or South America that read pitchfork? The world\'s bigger than Dallas, bigger than you\'re stupid fucking friendship with shitty writers, bigger than the pathetic little war you\'re waging here, I hate to break it to you.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone ever noticed that the bands that Observer writers are friends with always get written about? The Observer is just pissed because their days of being a local influence are long gone.

Anonymous said...

reposting a review by another website is not a critical judgement.

Anonymous said...

where\'s the criticism of the band\'s music by SR in the above post? When SR posts about Wax Museums getting press, does he have an interest in that?

It\'s actually the observer that they\'re playing a showcase for.

Oh, wait they did one for we shot jr a fucking year ago.

Anonymous said...

reposting a link to a review is one thing. manipulating the context, i.e. breaking it down intp parts, cutting and pasting elements of the review and then reframing them to the bands advantage is something else altogether (\"ends up calling it...\" what the fuck does that mean? says who? YOU? Somebody who put out one of their records?)

To 1:41 - there is difference between \"putting out records\" (re: giving them away for free as promotional items) like the Observer does, and SELLING them like WSJR does.

To 12:54 - Vice Magazine is owned by a clothing retail conglom. The magazine exists to promote the line. The CDs, the content, etc... all of it exists to brand a lifestyle that aligns with their products. The fact you fell for it hook, line and sinker shows they are very good at what they do.

And why are you people perched so precariously on the PItchfork jock? Why is it even news when they write about one of our bands? News is news now? Jesus Christ. You are just as guilty as the Observer of shamelessly regurgitating hype. Fucking write your own shit.

Anonymous said...

SR has broken down the context of an article or review on multiple occasions. It\'s his writing style. Was it in the interest of his own pocketbook every time he has done it, often for bands he has nothing to do with?

Vice was started by three people with government(!) funding. I have never bought a single piece of clothing because of them or any of their records, but the fact remains that they are a publication that puts out records. And they do actually review albums. Ties to clothing companies do not change this fact. Try again.

Nobody is perched on Pitchfork\'s jock. Obviously, they have a lot of readers. It\'s not very often a band from DFW gets on there, that\'s probably why it\'s news. I didn\'t say Pitchfork doesn\'t suck. Of course it does.

PS-The Observer sold those records. i remember you could buy them at Best Buy. Fuck you.

stonedranger said...

Wow Liles, for a white dude with dreads, you\'re pretty uptight. Anyone who wants to know whether or not we are putting out Fight Bite\'s music can look in our \"Shop\" section and find an order form for Fight Bite right there in front of them.

As far as critically writing about Fight Bite and the other bands on our label, we wrote favorably about all of them BEFORE they were on our label. That\'s why they\'re on our label, you pathetic dipshit-- we liked their music. After every band on our label agreed to put out music with us, we STOPPED WRITING CRITICAL ASESSMENTS OF THEM. Seriously, go find ONE instance in which we tried to critically assess ANY of them. You won\'t. A local band getting a full Pitchfork review IS NEWS, and just because it doesn\'t happen to be one of the pathetic bands you champion doesn\'t mean that it isn\'t newsworthy.

And as for your claims about us being hobbyists or whatever, I don\'t really see your point. We aren\'t paying our bills with WSJR. So what does that prove, exactly? Do you equate financial success with merit? If so, you\'re even dumber than you look (which is pretty dumb). Call it whatever you want, but the fact that we, in our spare time, are competitive with every other music publication in town, which are all run by the \"professionals\" you cherish so much, should tell you something about the work we put into this and the reasons we do it.

I\'m done responding to your childish jealousy, Liles. You\'re, what, in your mid-40\'s or something? And THIS is how you spend your time? Oh yeah, I forgot. You also run a Myspace page that documents 20 years ago when you were young and cool. That\'s awesome man. Regardless of whatever impact we have in this scene or anywhere else for that matter, you have no impact on anything anymore (if you ever even did), and while I\'m sure that bothers you, I can\'t sit here and deal with your emotional problem any longer. You\'ve made your same point 8,000 times you hilariously ignorant never-was. Now... go fuck yourself.

To SR said...

What was your real name again?

stonedranger said...

I thought I already told you-- I\'m Jeff Liles.

And btw, if you look at the actual news item I wrote above, you\'ll find that I also copied and pasted the one and only negative paragraph in the ENTIRE Pitchfork review in order to give a realistic summary of the review itself.

Oh, and \"ends up calling it\" was included because the sentence it was describing was actually the LAST SENTENCE IN THE REVIEW you clown.

to sr said...

I\'ll ask you again. What is your real name, Stonedranger?

Stop dodging the question.

Anonymous said...

Hey idiot. What are you trying to prove? obviously he\'s not going to tell you.

Anonymous said...

and what\'s your name \"to sr?\"

come on, be brave. tell us.

Anonymous said...

did sr really out liles as an anonymous poster?

not a good look for wsjr.

stonedranger said...

We don\'t \"out\" people who post anonymously... we\'ve never done that. However, Liles has made these exact same arguments with the exact same phrasing SO MANY TIMES that I believe he isn\'t really trying to hide his identity.

liquid swords and picate sauce said...

have to agree with 3:52

shockingly boneheaded response too.

stonedranger said...

We don\'t \"out\" people who post anonymously... we\'ve never done that. However, Liles has made these exact same arguments with the exact same phrasing SO MANY TIMES that I believe he isn\'t really trying to hide his identity.

tsk tsk said...

did you ask him? kinda presumptive to assume that someone who posts anonymously would do so on accident. what happens if you decide that something someone else writes reads just like one of my posts, and then you drag my name into some shit that i have nothing to do with?

terrible precedent here. and btw, your personal attack on jeffrey was truly embarrassing. you owe him an apology at the very least.

stonedranger said...

Ok, I\'m done here. I\'m off to do real work for this blog. This is boring. Bye!

most of your longtime anonymous posters said...

BYE!

Anonymous said...

nice apology. at least liles has written for actual real publications and im not talking about the observer.

Anonymous said...

Liles is straight up gangsta.

atchley said...

Just wow. Thats awesome for FB that they got written up in pitchfork. Even if pitchfork is lame, thats a good amount of exposure for them. Good for them! I still have yet to see them play though.

atch2 said...

just to clarify: \"Just wow\" is referring to all the negativity in the comments of this post.

Anonymous said...

i personally LOVE the observer... i mean, that Ask the Mexican weekly- brilliant! who doesnt want stupid fucking idiots asking their stupid fucking questions, only to be answered by a stupid fucking ignorant white boy posing as a mexican who continues to flush this shithole racist state further down the toilet with his racism? i NEED more sterotypical mexican slang fueled by a WHITE MAN, on a weekly basis too, to keep my conservative racist heart blackened, and, frankly, wsjr doesn\'t doesnt do it for me. my only other source is my DVD collection of Carlos Mencia

chad said...

Pitchfork reviews are some of the worst reviews out there, but congrats on the exposure. Fight Bite are the bomb and play the best covers ever.

Anonymous said...

YEAH, CONSERVATIVE = RACIST. ALWAYS, DUDE

Anonymous said...

12:30pm
UM, yeah, what SR said. I have full comprehension of the term \"conflict of interest\", you smug doofus. They wrote about those bands BEFORE they put them out!
Also, I seriously doubt that both WSJR and the bands are profiting form these releases yet. It costs a fucking lot to put vinyl out.

So, yes, it WOULD be a conflict of interest for Noah Bailey or Jesse Hughey wrote about their own bands. What sets that hypothetical situation apart from this scenario is that the WSJR dudes ARE NOT in the bands they release. See?

Anonymous said...

i just googled noah bailey. searched.... noah bailey dallas.
what i got was this cowboy dude writing a bunch of articles on art, some music and some sports. His writing is boring. Must be because he is a cowboy going WITH THE GRAIN in yeehaw texas.

Anonymous said...

this was fun

Anonymous said...

fuck cowboys

dxhsZUpmlUcynpUy said...

VgzzNN kwdbvvcpbwew, [url=http://dbqhgqevfoxe.com/]dbqhgqevfoxe[/url], [link=http://jfmcwcgwcayy.com/]jfmcwcgwcayy[/link], http://dzcaswadokdw.com/