Critics give The Former Site Of a B-Side Breakdown of 76 (C), from 9 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 60 to 81.
The verdict on The Former Site Of
6 of 9 critics liked it. A mixed reception.
- Highest 81 Paste
- Lowest 60 Under the Radar
- Career Tied for #3 of The New Pornographers's 5 albums with a Breakdown
- By the numbers The New Pornographers's best-reviewed album here since Twin Cinema (2005).
| The gist | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paste via Wikipediaby Alex McLevy | B- | 81 | Mar 26, 2026 | “Paste Magazine is your source for the best music, movies, TV, comedy, videogames, books, comics, craft beer, politics and more. Discover your favorite albums and films.” |
| Record Collector via Wikipediaby Kevin Harley | 4/5 | 80 | Mar 11, 2026 | |
| Uncut via Wikipediaby Bud Scoppa | 8/10 | 80 | Mar 11, 2026 | |
| musicOMH via Wikipediaby John Murphy | 4/5 | 80 | Mar 27, 2026 | “A welcome return from AC Newman's power-poppers, a band who deserve to be at the forefront of any Canadian indie music revival” |
| Mojo via Wikipediaby Tom Doyle | 4/5 | 80 | Mar 11, 2026 | |
| Louder via Wikipediaby Mark Beaumont | 8/10 | 80 | Mar 11, 2026 | |
| Exclaim! via Wikipediaby Alex Hudson | 7/10 | 70 | Mar 30, 2026 | |
| AllMusic via Wikipediaby Timothy Monger | 3.5/5 | 70 | Mar 11, 2026 | |
| Under the Radar via Wikipediaby Scotty Dransfield | 6/10 | 60 | Mar 31, 2026 | “The New Pornographers’ 10th album, The Former Site Of, arrives under a heavy shadow.” |
Every Sunday: the week's new albums, scored by the critics. Plus our own reviews when we post them. Free, and one click to leave.
The Former Site Of in The New Pornographers's catalog
How these critics usually treat The New Pornographers
- AllMusic Harsher than usual6 points below the other critics here. Usually 12 points above on The New Pornographers's other albums (4).
More from The New Pornographers
More Indie & Alternative from around 2026
Would you spin it again?
Be the first to answer. Results show once 3 listeners weigh in.
How the Breakdown works
Every outlet’s score is converted to 0–100 (2/5 is 40, 5.9/10 is 59, a B+ is 88) and averaged. Grades follow the B-Side scale: A is 90–100, B 80–89, C 70–79, D 60–69, F below 60. Approval is the share of critics who scored it 75 or higher; the Breakdown shows green at 75 and up, red below. Divisiveness asks a different question: not how many critics liked it, but how close their scores are to each other. Five critics who all give it 50 are Unanimous, even though none of them liked it. The labels run Unanimous, Broad agreement, Some debate, Divided, and Contentious. Replay rate comes from listeners, not critics: yes counts fully, a few tracks counts half, no counts zero. The gist quotes each outlet’s own summary of its review. Published is the date on the review itself, read from the outlet’s page, so you can see whether an album’s reputation came at release or years later. Scores marked est. come from reviews that publish no number. Scores marked via Wikipedia are archive ratings, mostly for older albums, taken from the “Professional ratings” box on the album’s Wikipedia page (published openly through Wikidata); each links to the original review when we can find it online, and to that Wikipedia entry when we can’t. When an outlet reviewed an album twice, years apart (often for a reissue), both scores count, each labeled with its year.
A-Side marks the critics’ top tier. An album earns it automatically, from its numbers alone: a Breakdown of 90 or higher, from at least 5 reviews, with at least 75% approval. Nobody hands it out and nobody can buy it; if new reviews pull an album below the line, it loses the badge.








Leave a Reply