p4k.tv (beta) has launched. first impressions? next up (apparently today), universal's attempt to rustle its own space in the arena (via buzznet's acquisition of stereogum): videogum (likely with qloud stirred into the mix). UPDATE: not.

interesting times; crystal ball, anyone?

         

as otc has noted, no director credits on p4k.tv ain't exactly a great omen...

         

p4k.tv seems boring for me, they are uploading old videos for their database and some new ones, but as mentioned before, you can't get any knowledge of the creatives behind the promo. No director credit, no ProdCo credits, nothing. But it's still beta, so hopefully they are editing their side constantly

and Videogum? nothing to see so far, but feels like the last movements of an too old system

         

wow, congrats to stereogum. They have been doing a lot of creative stuff; like their tribute albums.

I like Pitchfork TV, but am ambivalent about the amount of videos. Too many, and it's just like youtube where you have to know what band you're searching for. Too few, and then it's missing a lot of videos; though the featured ones will get a lot of attention.

But I did call it - much more emphasis on the bands than the cool videos. I guess that makes sense for the site. But it's a shame that a Bumblebeez or Carpark North video won't get shown cause their albums weren't reviewed on the site.

         

I think it's way too early to say that being or not reviewed by p4k is a criteria for the inclusion of a music video on p4k.tv (there's a great video for the non-album Banhart cover of «Don't Look Back In Anger»). I think the selection of videos is quite interesting plus the quality of the webscasting is really outstanding.

I now that's a rookie question but is there a way for me to download the videos in p4f.tv?

         

almo: safari, activity window, spot the .flv, copy&paste into download window, view with vlc or qt+perian (or convert to mp4 with isquint). the quality? vimeo hd it ain't, and some videos have been input at too-low res, but 540x304 vp6 30fps output at 700-odd kbit/s is ok for now, i guess.

         

p4k is looking at including director credits for the next rollout of p4k.tv.

         

There is a hell of a lot more going on with the Pitchfork site than you guys are giving them credit for. Just wait.

What they're doing is great.

"But it's a shame that a Bumblebeez or Carpark North video won't get shown cause their albums weren't reviewed on the site."

I can only hope that Pitchfork focuses on the quality of the music, and not the visuals, when it comes to selecting their content.

         

Most of the complaints you guys have are super easy fixes. I think all it would take to get production credits included would be some friendly industry petitioning. As for hosting quality left-field video choices I could even see that being developed as running feature if someone were ballsy enough to suggest it. Although I'm not sure if the pitchfork staffers are tuned in enough to the MV world to really pick up on this, I think they mainly receive their videos through publicists and video promo companies.

I guess my main skeptical concern is that all of these new video sites are going to lead to a deluge of fair to mediocre location performance videos. I've only seen two performances of the Juan's Basement show and I'm already sick of multi-camera shoots with quick zooms and green-blue lighting. And their Don't Look Down show seems to be the exact same thing, but get this - it's on a roof! The worst part is that it seems to be painfully imitating Le Blogotheque, why didn't they just hire him? They repost his content often enough that they probably owe him some money by now anyways. (Sure he's in France but can't he FTP them some 540x304 QTs). I can only imagine that Videogum will be more of the same - at the Stereogum SXSW party they had like six cameramen climbing in front of the performances at all time. That's another thing that annoys me about the live performance genre, everyone shoots waayyyy too much coverage without really putting any strategy into it. You don't need 8 cameras, you just need several well-placed ones.

Finally my last concern is the awkwardness factor. Did anyone else watch the P4k behind-the-scenes comedy hour video where they tried to "punk" people that they found craigslist? Good god it was horrible, P4k should never attempt comedy and P4k staffers should never host anything. I've been noticing something similar popping up on stereogum - they had a lot of SXSW video coverage where they had "VJs" go around and try to joke with indie rock bands like they were best buds. Here's an example. A) these sites should probably just be steering away from comedy in general and B) they need to find a way to interview bands without the same groan-inducing forced casual dialogue style that MTV and Fuse djs use.

My rant aside though I do like Pitchfork.tv and I think it could grow to be something really good.

         

"I think they mainly receive their videos through publicists and video promo companies."

Hmm. They just don't show a lot of the videos they receive. Similarly, they don't review a lot of the albums and songs that are sent in.

The Pitchfork staffers are plenty tuned in.

         

vincent's not to be had, i believe. question remains: who'll get late-to-launch lana?

         

oh: videogum's live - and it ain't about music videos. It's "a sister blog devoted to visual entertainment -- TV, movies, Web shorts, games", "expect Lindsay and Gabe to cover everything from obscure films to viral videos to popular scripted cable drama The Hills".

right. (stereo)yawn.

         

Quote: «I can only hope that Pitchfork focuses on the quality of the music, and not the visuals, when it comes to selecting their content».

If that happens, then it will be a change. Pitchfork magazine has always featured great videos of songs and bands that didn't received great reviews or weren't reviewed at all.

         

familiar: isn't the whole idea of antville being excited about p4ktv that it might give a shot in the arm to the music video industry? Maybe throw some budgets on more indie bands, maybe raise the budgets of others?

I mean, I don't give a shit about live videos. But I would love to see bands/directors working outside of TV restraints, doing some high concept stuff.

One cool thing about old MTV was that creative videos for lesser known bands could get seen... which is how a lot of director got started.

And personally, I love those Bumblebeez & Carpark North songs. It's just they're not on Pitchfork's cool list.

         

^ love the optimism

As for Videogum and P4k.TV, I tend to disagree with the philosophy.

(see the ABOUT section on P4k.tv for a similar sell. I'd link to it, but it seems as though they have some things to learn)

Woah, I'm asleep.

         

Prog: Just watched the trailer for Lana's show and I'm sold. Good luck to her. Also you're right about Videogum, I thought they were going for some sort of video magazine format but apparently it's just another blog that posts shit they found youtube. And right now there's only one blog that I want to read for posts about The Hills.

I kind of doubt that P4k will be playing any obscure antville video gems right away. I think they have a problem with playing videos for artists whose music 'they' haven't endorsed yet. So yeah no Bumblebeez or Carpark North. And definitely not Audioslave - Doesn't Remind Me, which is a shame. Perhaps they'd be open to a show concept like that in the future - it looks like they're going to need more programming anyways.

Anyways my hopes are that, they'll come up with some slightly more interesting programming than a new group playing the basement every week and that they'll try to pay respect to the video artform as well as the music. I don't see why they can't do both.

         

TLS! TLS! TLS!

         

I think they might become the new distribution hub for not only music videos but content like the lana show. There are all these great little independent shows out there, waiting to be collected. Pitchfork is big enough to encourage them to hop aboard. I know if I was doing some music related, sketch comedy/interview type thing, I would much rather have it on Pitchfork.tv that on my small little blog. They definitely have to be selective about it, but I'm just not sure if Pitchfork is smart enough to do this. They don't see the long term benefit of all that content, or maybe they do. Only time will tell.

         

ok, so whats the difference between pitchfork tv and, say, jambase tv?

         

The difference is that jambase has a ugly interface and no one's heard of it.

         

you did, now that i posted it.

and for all i care both of them are equally vital for one's well-being.

         

pitchfork loves IFC