Declan McManus

Wed, 05 Jul 2006 17:40:42 -0600

I don't think the end result of the Pitchfork review -- the 3.7 out of 10 -- is horrendously off. Using the Rolling Stone/Austin Chronicle scale of 5 stars, I would have given it a 2 after listening to it a few times. I haven't figured out that alleged hype around this band or Voxtrot; They're both doing something very derivative that's been done a lot before (and argurably better, but that's not for me to claim, because I think they both do it fairly well). I think it works well live, because they're relatively unique in the local Austin community and they (I repeat) do it fairly well. But, that falls apart on a larger scale where more and more people have heard their influences and are exposed to way more bands similar to them. Same thing goes for when it gets committed to CD. I don't get there where and why of the hype. Anyway, if I was in SOUNDteam, I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch (and I doubt they did) -- their band puts on a very fun show that a healthy sized crowd in their hometown always enjoys. Whether or not they make it to the next level will matter less on Pitchfork and more on their ability to writes songs that people like outside of Austin.

ultra8201

Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:37:47 -0600

I was able to interview Bill from SOUNDteam, check it out.

matt wright

Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:56:00 -0600

blech, that snooty, name-dropping review reminds me why i don't read pitchfork. it's never a good sign when the reviewer starts off talking about what other people think of the album as a way to buff up his contrarianism bonafides.

Austinist: Sound Team Responds to Pitchfork Review

Declan McManus

ultra8201

matt wright