Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:58 pm

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists ... e-20130322

1. Beastie Boys, 'Licensed to Ill'
2. The Ramones, 'The Ramones'
3. Jimi Hendrix Experience, 'Are You Experienced'
4. Guns N' Roses. 'Appetite for Destruction'
5. The Velvet Underground, 'The Velvet Underground and Nico'
6. N.W.A., 'Straight Outta Compton'
7. The Sex Pistols, 'Never Mind the Bollocks'
8. The Strokes, 'Is This It'
9. The Band, 'Music From Big Pink'
10. Patti Smith, 'Horses'
11. Nas, 'Illmatic'
12. The Clash, 'The Clash'
13. The Pretenders, 'Pretenders'
14. Jay-Z, 'Reasonable Doubt'
15. Arcade Fire, Funeral
16. The Cars, The Cars
17. The Beatles, 'Please Please Me'
18. R.E.M., 'Murmur'
19. Kanye West, 'The College Dropout'
20. Joy Division, 'Unknown Pleasures'
21. Elvis Costello, 'My Aim Is True'
22. Violent Femmes, 'Violent Femmes'
23. The Notorious B.I.G., 'Ready to Die'
24. Vampire Weekend, 'Vampire Weekend'
25. Pavement, 'Slanted and Enchanted'
26. Run-D.M.C., 'Run-DMC'
27. Van Halen, 'Van Halen'
28. The B-52's, 'B-52s'
29. Wu-Tang Clan, 'Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers)'
30. Arctic Monkeys, 'Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not'
31. Portishead, 'Dummy'
32. De La Soul, 'Three Feet High And Rising'
33. The Killers, 'Hot Fuss'
34. The Doors, 'The Doors'
35. Weezer, Weezer
36. The Postal Service, 'Give Up'
37. Bruce Springsteen, 'Greetings From Asbury, Park N.J.'
38. The Police, 'Outlandos d’Amour'
39. Lynyrd Skynyrd, '(Pronounced 'Lĕh-'nérd 'Skin-'nérd)'
40. Television, 'Marquee Moon'
41. Boston, 'Boston'
42. Oasis, 'Definitely Maybe'
43. Jeff Buckley, 'Grace'
44. Black Sabbath, 'Black Sabbath'
45. The Jesus & Mary Chain, 'Psychocandy'
46. Pearl Jam, 'Ten'
47. Pink Floyd, 'Piper At the Gates of Dawn'
48. Modern Lovers, 'Modern Lovers'
49. Franz Ferdinand, 'Franz Ferdinand'
50. X, 'Los Angeles'
51. The Smiths, 'The Smiths'
52. U2, 'Boy'
53. New York Dolls, 'New York Dolls'
54. Metallica, 'Kill 'Em All'
55. Missy "Misdemeanor" Elliot, 'Supa Dupa Fly'
56. Bon Iver, 'For Emma, Forever Ago'
57. MGMT, 'Oracular Spectacular'
58. Nine Inch Nails, 'Pretty Hate Machine'
59. Yeah Yeah Yeahs, 'Fever to Tell'
60. Fiona Apple, 'Tidal'
61. The Libertines, 'Up the Bracket'
62. Roxy Music, 'Roxy Music'
63. Cyndi Lauper, 'She’s So Unusual'
64. The English Beat, 'I Just Can’t Stop It'
65. Liz Phair, 'Exile In Guyville'
66. The Stooges, The Stooges
67. 50 Cent, 'Get Rich or Die Tryin’
68. Talking Heads, ‘Talking Heads: 77'
69. Wire, 'Pink Flag'
70. PJ Harvey, 'Dry'
71. Mary J. Blige, 'What’s the 411'
72. Led Zeppelin, 'Led Zeppelin'
73. Norah Jones, 'Come Away with Me'
74. The xx, 'xx'
75. The Go-Gos, 'Beauty and the Beat'
76. Devo, 'Are We Not Men? We Are Devo!'
77. Drake, 'Thank Me Later'
78. The Stone Roses, 'The Stone Roses'
79. Elvis Presley, 'Elvis Presley'
80. The Byrds, 'Mr. Tambourine Man'
81. Gang of Four, 'Entertainment!'
82. The Congos, 'Heart of the Congos'
83. Erik B. and Rakim, 'Paid In Full'
84. Whitney Houston, 'Whitney Houston'
85. Rage Against the Machine, 'Rage Against the Machine'
86. Kendrick Lamar, 'good kid, m.A.A.d city'
87. The New Pornographgers, 'Mass Romantic'
88. Daft Punk, 'Homework'
89. Yaz, 'Upstairs at Eric's'
90. Big Star, '#1 Record'
91. M.I.A., 'Arular'
92. Moby Grape, 'Moby Grape'
93. The Hold Steady, 'Almost Killed Me'
94. The Who, 'The Who Sings My Generation'
95. Little Richard, 'Here’s Little Richard'
96. Madonna, 'Madonna'
97. DJ Shadoww, 'Entroducing....'
98. Joe Jackson, 'Look Sharp!'
99. The Flying Burrito Brothers,'The Gilded Palace of Sin'
100. Lady Gaga, 'The Fame'

jamieW
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:19 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby jamieW » Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:48 pm

The order may be a little out-of-whack; but for a Rolling Stone list, this one doesn't look too bad.

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:12 pm

Would it be Rolling Stone without a little bit of something to drive you nuts?

A note on how we made the list: Albums got docked points if the artist went on to far greater achievements (which is why Please, Please Me and Greetings from Asbury Park, great as they are, didn't made the top ten); conversely, we gave a little extra recognition to great debut albums that the artist never matched (hello, Is This It and Illmatic!). We also skipped solo debuts by artists who were already in well-known bands, which is why you won’t see John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band or Paul Simon. We focused, instead, on debuts that gave you the thrill of an act arriving fully-formed, ready to reinvent the world in its own image.


Why downgrade Please Please Me on this list because of OTHER ALBUMS THAT ARE NOT THIS ALBUM by the Beatles? (Conversely, "far greater achievements" would seem to sink the Beastie Boys, and other people who were not a one-album wonder.) I think a list can take care of itself without helping or hobbling some people, is all.
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

jamieW
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:19 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby jamieW » Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:35 pm

Live in Phoenix wrote:Would it be Rolling Stone without a little bit of something to drive you nuts?

A note on how we made the list: Albums got docked points if the artist went on to far greater achievements (which is why Please, Please Me and Greetings from Asbury Park, great as they are, didn't made the top ten); conversely, we gave a little extra recognition to great debut albums that the artist never matched (hello, Is This It and Illmatic!). We also skipped solo debuts by artists who were already in well-known bands, which is why you won’t see John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band or Paul Simon. We focused, instead, on debuts that gave you the thrill of an act arriving fully-formed, ready to reinvent the world in its own image.


Why downgrade Please Please Me on this list because of OTHER ALBUMS THAT ARE NOT THIS ALBUM by the Beatles? (Conversely, "far greater achievements" would seem to sink the Beastie Boys, and other people who were not a one-album wonder.) I think a list can take care of itself without helping or hobbling some people, is all.


I didn't view the Rolling Stone link when I made my original post. This certainly explains why the rankings seemed so "out of whack," as I put it. I agree, though: it seems to be a ridiculous (and highly arbitrary) way to rank a list. It is a great example of recent Rolling Stone history, however, since it seems like they found a way to get it wrong, even when they appeared to get it right.

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:25 am

Comparing a magazine's different lists is perhaps just a parlor game, but still the funny thing is that RS published a 500 Greatest Albums of All Time book (and have gone to the trouble of revising it twice instead of scrapping it), and the debut albums by Led Zeppelin and the Beatles easily make the top ten debuts in that case. Whereas on the list above, Zeppelin is hanging out with debuts by the Go-Gos and Norah Jones, not really in the same class IMO.

They posted this list in honor of Please Please Me, in fact, and its placing isn't a huge deal, it doesn't HAVE to be top ten; but it's just weird for them to essentially say stuff like, other albums by Nas are lousy, therefore Illmatic is an extra-great debut album. Wha?
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

jamieW
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:19 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby jamieW » Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:40 am

Even after looking at the list again, and trying to view it through their eyes, it still seems odd. If they were "penalizing" artists that had future success, then it seems strange to have "Are You Experienced?" all the way up at #3, since "Electric Ladyland" and "Axis: Bold of Love" were highly acclaimed, as well. (Not to mention that this is implying that everything the Beastie Boys did after their debut was a complete bust, and that certainly isn't true, either.) It is funny, though, to have a publication pay tribute to arguably the greatest band of all-time by placing them 17th on a list!

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:08 am

I guess Madonna's debut was penalized, too (RS had it in the top 100 80s albums list when the decade closed), as she had better albums after the debut (though that one arguably is her most influential album).

Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Tue Mar 26, 2013 2:39 pm

The number 86 album on this list, Kendrick Lamar's "Good Kid, M.A.A.D City", isn't even his debut album. His debut album is 2011's "Section.80".

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:09 pm

"Fully-formed" explains a lot of the placings in the top 10, but it can still be a tricky definition. Please Please Me and Led Zeppelin I were hit, classic albums, so it's not like we had to wait for either group to get good, or something. Please Please Me places fairly weakly in the main AM listings, so you could say that Rolling Stone literally docking points for not coming out the gate in 1963 with Sgt. Pepper's is entirely unnecessary. Using "fully-formed" as your main priority gets more tricky when the artist runs away from their debut album, like the Beastie Boys, or their "masterpiece" still lies ahead (Run-D.M.C.'s Raising Hell, Jay-Z's The Blueprint).
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

User avatar
Henrik
Site Admin
Posts: 4207
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:09 am
Location: Älvsjö, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Henrik » Tue Mar 26, 2013 10:04 pm

"Albums got docked points if the artist went on to far greater achievements"
This is silly, but IMO this outweights Rolling Stone's bias for "classic artists", so that the order becomes pretty good.

"We focused on debuts that gave you the thrill of an act arriving fully-formed, ready to reinvent the world in its own image."
Yeah, why not? That's pretty much the definition of a great debut album for me. For once, Rolling Stone didn't put Beatles, Stones and Dylan in the top and you're complaining? Please Please Me not higher than 17th is a good thing. It has great singles but just because it's The Beatles doesn't mean it has to be a great album.
Everyone you meet fights a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:27 am

But I love complaining! :D I'd like it better if they'd just thrown the exact same list out there, with no extra rules, no asterisks, just said the Beastie Boys is tops with us; I enjoy some "blasphemy," as long as they own up to it.

I wonder if one of the younger guys on staff over there is coming up with extra rules to trip up the old geezers...

[Please Please Me is a little funky but I've always loved it. If not for A Hard Day's Night, it'd be my favorite early Beatles record. Out of the top 10 AM Artists of All Time, for me it beats most everyone else's debut, not Jimi's of course. The only Beatles album I don't care for much is Beatles for Sale.]
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:38 pm


User avatar
Henrik
Site Admin
Posts: 4207
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:09 am
Location: Älvsjö, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Henrik » Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:56 pm

SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html

Dummy, the greatest album of all time (debut or not) is not there though.
Everyone you meet fights a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:30 am

Henrik wrote:
SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html

Dummy, the greatest album of all time (debut or not) is not there though.


I ran it by the editor of the list, Brett Alan and told him it was #70 of all time here, and his reply:

Well, saying it's the greatest album of all time is pretty silly, and of course acclaim isn't a factor on this list. Taking a look at it, it's definitely got influence, a fair amount of impact, and some lasting popularity. Probably worth a placement in the next revision.

Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:05 am

SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html


"100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums"? Because Mariah Carey, The Notorious B.I.G., Lady Gaga, and C&C Music Factory are totally "rock".

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:09 am

SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html


:angry-banghead: Please Please Me at #17, eh? :-p
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:10 am

Nick wrote:
SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html


"100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums"? Because Mariah Carey, The Notorious B.I.G., Lady Gaga, and C&C Music Factory are totally "rock".


Of course they are.

Don't tell me you're one of these schmucks who thinks that rock is just about "White Guys With Guitars?"

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:12 am

Live in Phoenix wrote:
SavoyBG wrote:This list is much better:

http://digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_albums-debut.html


:angry-banghead: Please Please Me at #17, eh? :-p


Even a blind squirrel (RS) finds an acorn once in a while.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:15 am

7. The Sex Pistols, 'Never Mind the Bollocks'


This is way too high considering that 7 of the 12 tracks had been previously released on singles, a few like a year before the album came out.

peteevans
Start Me Up
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 11:34 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby peteevans » Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:31 pm

We focused, instead, on debuts that gave you the thrill of an act arriving fully-formed, ready to reinvent the world in its own image.

Absolutely unbelievable !! if that is the case where the effing hell is Cant Buy A Thrill by steely Dan, THE greatest rock band America has ever produced by a country mile. Rolling Stone, moreso than ever, must be populated by kids with sawdust in their brains !!

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Tue Apr 02, 2013 6:24 pm

peteevans wrote:We focused, instead, on debuts that gave you the thrill of an act arriving fully-formed, ready to reinvent the world in its own image.

Absolutely unbelievable !! if that is the case where the effing hell is Cant Buy A Thrill by steely Dan, THE greatest rock band America has ever produced by a country mile. Rolling Stone, moreso than ever, must be populated by kids with sawdust in their brains !!


It's #49 on the (much better) Digital Dream Door list.

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:14 pm

Not all acts have to be "rock" (even the R&R Hall of Fame isn't about only rock), but when you open voting to the public, there's bound to be some acclaimed-challenged acts that make their way onto the list. Like, I enjoy C&C Music Factory, but its album isn't exactly an acclaimed smash. Same for Mariah Carey's album (which, incidentally, I enjoy a lot).

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:29 am

JR wrote:Not all acts have to be "rock" (even the R&R Hall of Fame isn't about only rock), but when you open voting to the public, there's bound to be some acclaimed-challenged acts that make their way onto the list. Like, I enjoy C&C Music Factory, but its album isn't exactly an acclaimed smash. Same for Mariah Carey's album (which, incidentally, I enjoy a lot).


It's acclaimed by the public. Who gives a shit what a few dozen critics think? These Guys are mainly jounalism majors who don;t know shit about music. That's why they mainly just analyze and write about lyrics.

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:31 pm

Who gives a shit? You're on a site that deals with that very thing. :mrgreen:

Plus- that's sometimes an excuse some throw out there when their favorites don't fare well, critically. Not all, but some, for sure.

Everyone has different tastes, but when a bunch of people who earn their living at critiquing music/artists give a title/track great notices, it's probably worth listening to and has some value. And there's no denying that the public often gets into and loves disposable, in-the-end forgettable music. I enjoy it myself at times. But does that make it "great"?

Pitbull and Flo Rida would be two examples of that, today. Fun, catchy music- but they are not great artists, in the acclaimed sense. Big fans of those acts, probably, would say they are (as would big fans of any act) but you'll get that with anyone who enjoys a certain level of popularity.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:42 pm

JR wrote:Who gives a shit? You're on a site that deals with that very thing. :mrgreen:



I use the site to help me to not forget important records on lists I make, but to me, the lasting popularity of a song with the public is infinitely more significant than critical acclaim. Critics shit out of their asshole just like everybody else, and most are trained in journalism, very few of them actually know anything about music. Could they tell us what key a song is done in, or what time it is played in?

I mean, Dave Marsh's top 1001 singles book was used for this site. According to Marsh "Good Vibrations" was not one of the top 1,001 rock or soul singles of all time. Do you want to use HIS musical taste to decide what is great?

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:05 pm

Part of why I don’t especially like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is because of Dave Marsh having been in charge (along with a handful of other guys) of what is great music or not. Not that I hate the guy, exactly, but he’s an opinionated bastard, as the back of his own book says. I don’t really like the idea of some borderline acts getting in, or not getting in, because of how it rubs a few guys from Rolling Stone or something.

Having said all that, without writing a long essay on critical vs. public acclaim, if I had never picked up an album guide or read a review in my life, I would be spared a lot of overrated albums on one hand, but my musical enjoyment would be poorer by a good measure.
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:14 am

Live in Phoenix wrote:Part of why I don’t especially like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is because of Dave Marsh having been in charge (along with a handful of other guys) of what is great music or not. Not that I hate the guy, exactly, but he’s an opinionated bastard, as the back of his own book says. I don’t really like the idea of some borderline acts getting in, or not getting in, because of how it rubs a few guys from Rolling Stone or something.

Having said all that, without writing a long essay on critical vs. public acclaim, if I had never picked up an album guide or read a review in my life, I would be spared a lot of overrated albums on one hand, but my musical enjoyment would be poorer by a good measure.


If you're a Marsh hater you should enjoy this project that I helped with:

http://rateyourmusic.com/list/goldwax317/factual_errors_in_dave_marshs_the_heart_of_rock_and_soul

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:40 pm

The point is, that if a title has amassed a good amount of acclaim, it's probably worthy of it. Everyone will have their personal tastes, but, aside from pointing out the very best in music (or whatever the discipline), these lists exist fort a reason- to generate discussion. And they are successful in that goal. :)

Some of the most popular acts have been acclaimed-challenged- look at Journey. The band has not even made it as a nominee for the Hall of Fame- its popularity should not be a factor in that, and, apparently, it hasn't. I like some Journey songs, but there's nothing special about what the band has done musically or in anything related to the music. And that goes for a number of other popular acts, as well (especially ones with similarities to that act).

Anyhoo...

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:54 pm

JR wrote:Some of the most popular acts have been acclaimed-challenged- look at Journey. The band has not even made it as a nominee for the Hall of Fame- its popularity should not be a factor in that,


I totally disagree. Popularity is certainly one part of a band's objective accomplishments.

Whether or not the music is good is entirely subjective. If you ask me, the Velvet Underground's music is atrocious.

It's insane that Chicago has not even been nominated for the hall of fame but Laura Nyro is in.

I undertook a project recently where we ranked the hall of famers in order based on their worthiness. Just the main performers and the early influences. Here's what we came up with.

MOST DESERVING HALL OF FAMERS

1 - Beatles
2 - Elvis Presley
3 - Chuck Berry
4 - Little Richard
5 - James Brown and the Famous Flames
6 - Bob Dylan
7 - Ray Charles
8 - Rolling Stones
9 - Beach Boys
10 - Aretha Franklin
11 - Stevie Wonder
12 - Bo Diddley
13 - Fats Domino
14 - The Who
15 - Buddy Holly and the Crickets
16 - Michael Jackson
17 - Sam Cooke
18 - Marvin Gaye
19 - Temptations
20 - Led Zeppelin
21 - Smokey Robinson and the Miracles
22 - Everly Brothers
23 - Jimi Hendrix Experience
24 - Louis Jordan
25 - Otis Redding
26 - Bruce Springsteen
27 - Jerry Lee Lewis
28 - Prince
29 - Madonna
30 - Run-D.M.C.
31 - Pink Floyd
32 - Supremes
33 - Drifters
34 - U2
35 - Muddy Waters
36 - Elton John
37 - Jackie Wilson
38 - Bill Haley and His Comets
39 - David Bowie
40 - Bob Marley
41 - Queen
42 - Roy Orbison
43 - Sly and the Family Stone
44 - Kinks
45 - Doors
46 - Byrds
47 - Neil Young
48 - Isley Brothers
49 - Howlin' Wolf
50 - Creedence Clearwater Revival
51 - Impressions
52 - Clyde McPhatter
53 - Simon & Garfunkel
54 - The Clash
55 - Black Sabbath
56 - Grateful Dead
57 - Carl Perkins
58 - R.E.M.
59 - Bee Gees
60 - Platters
61 - Four Tops
62 - Hank Williams
63 - B.B. King
64 - Eagles
65 - Shirelles
66 - Grand Master Flash and the Furious Five
67 - Parliament / Funkadelic
68 - Four Seasons
69 - Cream
70 - Van Halen
71 - Wilson Pickett
72 - Big Joe Turner
73 - Ramones
74 - Ruth Brown
75 - Fleetwood Mac
76 - Yardbirds
77 - Willie Dixon
78 - Paul McCartney
79 - Dion
80 - Public Enemy
81 - Ike & Tina Turner
82 - Leadbelly
83 - Metallica
84 - Crosby, Stiils & Nash
85 - John Lennon
86 - Aerosmith
87 - Billy Joel
88 - Eddie Cochran
89 - Rod Stewart
90 - Hank Ballard and the Midnighters
91 - Dells
92 - Coasters
93 - Louis Armstrong
94 - Eric Clapton
95 - Johnny Cash
96 - Lloyd Price
97 - Donna Summer
98 - AC/DC
99 - Les Paul
100 - Woody Guthrie
101 - Earth, Wind & Fire
102 - Robert Johnson
103 - Sonny Til & the Orioles
104 - Elvis Costello & the Attractions
105 - Van Morrison
106 - T-Bone Walker
107 - Gene Vincent and His Blue Caps
108 - Beastie Boys
109 - Al Green
110 - Paul Simon
111 - Gladys Knight & the Pips
112 - Allman Brothers Band
113 - Joni Mitchell
114 - The Police
115 - Martha & the Vandellas
116 - Velvet Underground
117 - Janis Joplin
118 - Ricky Nelson
119 - Etta James
120 - Jackson 5
121 - Sam & Dave
122 - Guns N' Roses
123 - Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers
124 - Red Hot Chili Peppers
125 - Curtis Mayfield
126 - Abba
127 - Ink Spots
128 - Talking Heads
129 - Santana
130 - John Lee Hooker
131 - Frank Zappa
132 - The Band
133 - Genesis
134 - Isaac Hayes
135 - Sex Pistols
136 - Jefferson Airplane
137 - Frankie Lymon & Teenagers
138 - Jimmy Reed
139 - Bobby "Blue" Bland
140 - O'Jays
141 - Solomon Burke
142 - LaVerne Baker
143 - Professor Longhair
144 - Alice Cooper
145 - Lynyrd Skynyrd
146 - Animals
147 - James Taylor
148 - Charles Brown
149 - Ventures
150 - Booker T. & MG's
151 - Blondie
152 - Bob Seger
153 - Steely Dan
154 - Stooges
155 - Rush
156 - Hollies
157 - Soul Stirrers
158 - Neil Diamond
159 - Billie Holiday
160 - Mamas & Papas
161 - ZZ Top
162 - Elmore James
163 - George Harrison
164 - Little Willie John
165 - Jimmie Rodgers
166 - Bob Wills & the Texas Playboys
167 - Duane Eddy
168 - Mahalia Jackson
169 - Jackson Browne
170 - Brenda Lee
171 - Rascals
172 - Lovin’ Spoonful
173 - Bobby Darin
174 - Heart
175 - John Cougar Mellencamp
176 - Flamingos
177 - Patti Smith
178 - Righteous Brothers
179 - Bessie Smith
180 - Dinah Washington
181 - Moonglows
182 - Del Shannon
183 - Bill Monroe
184 - Donovan
185 - Dave Clark 5
186 - Nat King Cole
187 - The Pretenders
188 - Buffalo Springfield
189 - Charlie Christian
190 - Little Anthony and the Imperials
191 - Jimmy Yancey
192 - Ronettes
193 - Pete Seeger
194 - Jelly Roll Morton
195 - Dusty Springfield
196 - Staple Singers
197 - Bobby Womack
198 - Gene Pitney
199 - Ma Rainey
200 - Traffic
201 - Leonard Cohen
202 - Tom Waits
203 - Jeff Beck
204 - Darlene Love
205 - Randy Newman
206 - Albert King
207 - Jimmy Cliff
208 - Bonnie Raitt
209 - The Small Faces/The Faces
210 - Dr. John
211 - Miles Davis
212 - Wanda Jackson
213 - Freddie King
214 - Buddy Guy
215 - Percy Sledge
216 - Ritchie Valens
217 - Laura Nyro

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:02 pm

We are also voting on acts that are eligible and are not inducted yet. Here's who we have inducted so far:

INDUCTEES SO FAR

EARLY INFLUENCES:
(acts that had their first release before 1950)
Big Maybelle
Tiny Bradshaw
Roy Brown
Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup
Delta Rhythm Boys
Dixie Hummingbirds
Lionel Hampton
Wynonie Harris
Ivory Joe Hunter
Bull Moose Jackson
Julia Lee
Joe Liggins
Big Jay McNeely
Amos Milburn
Lucky Millinder
Mills Brothers
Roy Milton
Charley Patton
Ravens
Sister Rosetta Tharpe


MAIN PERFORMERS:
Johnny Ace
Jesse Belvin
Bon Jovi
Boogie Down Productions
Jerry Butler
Cars
Gene Chandler
Chantels
Chubby Checker
Chic
Chicago
Clovers
The Cure
Deep Purple
Def Leppard
Depeche Mode
Doobie Bothers
Lee Dorsey
Electric Light Orchestra
Eric B. & Rakim
Five Keys
Five Royales
Hall & Oates
Iron Maiden
Janet Jackson
Tommy James & the Shondells
Jethro Tull
KC and the Sunshine Band
Carole King
Kiss
Kool and the Gang
Kraftwerk
LL Cool J
Marvelettes
Steve Miller Band
Monkees
Moody Blues
NWA
Pointer Sisters
Paul Revere & the Raiders
Cliff Richard
Linda Ronstadt
Salt-N-Pepa
Huey "Piano" Smith
Smiths
Sonic Youth
Spinners
Stlyistics
Joe Tex
Jr. Walker & the All-Stars
War
Billy Ward and the Dominoes
Mary Wells
Barry White
Chuck Willis
Yes

User avatar
Live in Phoenix
Rust Never Sleeps
Posts: 681
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:50 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Live in Phoenix » Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:42 pm

The eligible non-inductees seem like they're in the same class as a lot of the people who made it in. Now that the Beatles and the Chuck Berrys of the world have already made it in, we're stuck at the part of the story where the focus is on who hasn't made it in and why not. The whole thing starts out with fanfare and good intentions, and then kind of loses its luster...
Original Soundtrack - Bambi. 5 stars/5.
The music, as with the movie, is gorgeous and like a dream. "April Showers" and "I Bring You a Song" in particular are recommended. You likely won't hear or see its like again.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:51 pm

Live in Phoenix wrote:The eligible non-inductees seem like they're in the same class as a lot of the people who made it in. Now that the Beatles and the Chuck Berrys of the world have already made it in, we're stuck at the part of the story where the focus is on who hasn't made it in and why not. The whole thing starts out with fanfare and good intentions, and then kind of loses its luster...


There'a some politics involed, including some decades old feud between Chicago and Rolling Stone where Chicago has never even been nominated despite being among the top 25 selling acts in USA rock history.

Chubby Checker is being snubbed because many of his hits were done first by other artists, but he was the first rock artist who was widely popular with older adults, and he still is the only act to ever have 5 albums in the top 12 on Billboard's album chart during the same week. The craze he started in the early 60s had a huge effect on the industry with everyone from Sinatra to John Lee Hooker releasing Twist songs and/or twist albums. Chubby was also a sensational live performer. He's never even been nominated. Too much emphasis from critics on artists having to write their own songs. According to them Sinatra and Bing Crosby were no good because thy didn't write songs.

peteevans
Start Me Up
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 11:34 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby peteevans » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:13 pm

I undertook a project recently where we ranked the hall of famers in order based on their worthiness. Just the main performers and the early influences. Here's what we came up with.

I would be interested who the 'we' are and what you consider 'worthiness' ! I think the general consensus amongst music critics and musicians would be that Steely Dan ( my favourite artists 0 deserve to be a hell of a lot higher than 153, especially if the likes of Genesis and Blondie were above them !!

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:40 pm

peteevans wrote:I undertook a project recently where we ranked the hall of famers in order based on their worthiness. Just the main performers and the early influences. Here's what we came up with.

I would be interested who the 'we' are and what you consider 'worthiness' ! I think the general consensus amongst music critics and musicians would be that Steely Dan ( my favourite artists 0 deserve to be a hell of a lot higher than 153, especially if the likes of Genesis and Blondie were above them !!


Just some pretty knowledgable people, and most of us think that objective achievements are important in determining a hall of famer, rather than just going by our own personal taste. Blondie had several #1 singles in the USA and were huge in the UK with ten top 10 hits including 5 number one singles. They were pioneers in punk and also in having one of the first rap hits by a white rock group. Genesis had a very long and versatile career and were huge in other countries aside from the USA. Steely Dan was not every big outside of the US. They never had a top ten single in the UK and their albums charted over there, but not very high. And before you say that chart hits are not important in determining a hall of famer, if you read the bios of each artist on the Hall of Fame's site,

http://rockhall.com/

You'll see that they mention chart positions all the time. I should know because a while back the hall paid me to fact check the bios. I found over 500 errors and had them all corrected. There were some insanely bad mistakes there, such as the Marvin Gaye bio saying that he produced Mary Wells hits.

JR
Unquestionable Presence
Posts: 599
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:54 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby JR » Fri Apr 05, 2013 3:00 pm

Obviously, many acts who have been inducted were commercially successful, to varying degrees. But it is not a main/primary factor in induction. There's go to be more "under the hood."

Chicago, I think, hurt its rep some when it started producing that slicker, glossy music in the 80s and beyond. But, Heart did that as well, and it's now being inducted. So, who know- Chicago may get its time. For a lot of acts, it's just a matter of when they get in. Look how long it took Neil Diamond, Rush, etc. The first-year-eligible inductees, of course, are most impressive- though some you'd think were even have had to wait a year or more after their eligibility.

Anyhow, how did this topic move away from from a list of the best debut albums to Hall of Fame induction? :P

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:46 pm

JR wrote:Obviously, many acts who have been inducted were commercially successful, to varying degrees. But it is not a main/primary factor in induction. There's go to be more "under the hood."



To me it is a primary factor. Anybody inducted as a main performer should at least have been somewhat popular with the public.

peteevans
Start Me Up
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 11:34 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby peteevans » Sun Apr 07, 2013 7:57 pm

Savoy. I understand the point you are making and of course everyone is entitle to their own personal opinion. However, if we are going on record sales alone are we saying hit singles are more important than album sales ? Personally I think most critics and musicians would state that album sales are more of a sign of worthiness than hit singles. look at this site as an example, ABBA have had numerous UK number one and top ten singles, but overall they are ranked way below my favourite act Steely Dan, for example. And if, as i believe, album sales are more important then Steely Dan would rank far higher than Blondie or probably Genesis and may others, as they have sold in excess of 50 million albums worldwide. However, critical and musical industry opinion must also be of huge significance to any debate about the greatest artists of all time and in that respect there is no doubt whatsoever that Steely Dan are held in far greater esteem than the likes of Genesis or Blondie !!

User avatar
Henrik
Site Admin
Posts: 4207
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:09 am
Location: Älvsjö, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Henrik » Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:33 pm

peteevans wrote:look at this site as an example, ABBA have had numerous UK number one and top ten singles, but overall they are ranked way below my favourite act Steely Dan, for example.

I've said several times that I will add a comment on the artist lists page about the artist ranking, and peteevans your comment finally made me do it. Here's what I have added.

"The artist ranking is a summary of the positions of the artists' most acclaimed albums and songs. Album positions are weighted higher since there are more critics' lists for albums than songs. Other aspects (e.g. live performances) are not counted for, so this artist ranking should not be taken too seriously."

Music is a subjective world. There's no objective way to rank artist according to their quality or greatness, and the importance of albums relative to singles, or whether it's up to critics or record buyers to judge the artists, are things that don't have answers. What artists that are included in the Hall of fame is up to the Rock Hall. We can discuss it, but we should only do it for the fun of it. We should not try to define the true rights and wrongs because they don't exist.
Everyone you meet fights a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:50 pm

peteevans wrote:Savoy. I understand the point you are making and of course everyone is entitle to their own personal opinion. However, if we are going on record sales alone are we saying hit singles are more important than album sales ?


Yes I am. That's why most radio and other outlets play hit singles instead of album tracks. Most of the general public knows the hit singles, and never heard of the album tracks. I have over 100,000 MP3s and I mainly know only the hit singles.

Have you ever read the intro to Dave Marsh's book, "The Heart of Rock N Soul," about the top 1001 singles of all time. He explains why singles are where it's at.

But rather than singles, what I say is that individual songs are where it's at., whether they were on singles or not.

As for Steely Dan being greater than Abba, that is total hogwash. When Steely Dan turns down 1 billion dollars for a reunion tour like Abba did, let us know.

EVERYBODY listens to songs, but a lot of people do not listen to albums much, or at all.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:06 pm

Henrik wrote:
peteevans wrote:look at this site as an example, ABBA have had numerous UK number one and top ten singles, but overall they are ranked way below my favourite act Steely Dan, for example.

I've said several times that I will add a comment on the artist lists page about the artist ranking, and peteevans your comment finally made me do it. Here's what I have added.

"The artist ranking is a summary of the positions of the artists' most acclaimed albums and songs. Album positions are weighted higher since there are more critics' lists for albums than songs. Other aspects (e.g. live performances) are not counted for, so this artist ranking should not be taken too seriously."



Singles artists get screwed doubly because they normally have monstrous greatest hits albums, which are not included in any of the "albums" rankings. Abba's Greatest Hits, and the Eagles Greatest hits are among the most popular "albums" of all time.

Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:46 pm

SavoyBG wrote:
As for Steely Dan being greater than Abba, that is total hogwash. When Steely Dan turns down 1 billion dollars for a reunion tour like Abba did, let us know.



Greatness =/= popularity. If popularity factored into greatness, then Huey Lewis and The News would be better than the Pixies, and Nickelback would be better than the Arcade Fire.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Mon Apr 08, 2013 12:52 am

Nick wrote:
SavoyBG wrote:
As for Steely Dan being greater than Abba, that is total hogwash. When Steely Dan turns down 1 billion dollars for a reunion tour like Abba did, let us know.



Greatness =/= popularity. If popularity factored into greatness, then Huey Lewis and The News would be better than the Pixies, and Nickelback would be better than the Arcade Fire.


Huey Lewis and the News are WAY better than the Pixies, and I couldn't comment on Nickelback or Arcade Fire, I've never heard anything by either of them.

Achieving popularity is CERTAINLY one portion of what makes an act great. That's the main thing that all acts want, is to become popular and succesful.

Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:08 am

SavoyBG wrote:
Huey Lewis and the News are WAY better than the Pixies

Achieving popularity is CERTAINLY one portion of what makes an act great.

That's the main thing that all acts want, is to become popular and succesful.


All 3 of these claims are highly debatable, to say the least. If Elvis Presley, Fats Domino, and Buddy Holly never became popular because the masses decided that the popular music of the 50's should be the sound of people banging trashcans together would that make this new form of "trashcan banging" music great solely on the factor that it's popular? Would it make rock and roll a lesser form of music due to it being unpopular?

Furthermore, I know this might sound crazy, but some acts don't care too much about being popular or successful. Some acts are pretty content with just making the music they love.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:35 am

Nick wrote:Furthermore, I know this might sound crazy, but some acts don't care too much about being popular or successful. Some acts are pretty content with just making the music they love.


You're insane if you believe that.

I've been involved with hundreds of musicians in my day and every single one of them talks about how they did not get paid what they should have, and how certain records should have been hits but werem't promoted right, I've never heard one of them sasy that they were not interested in being popular.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Mon Apr 08, 2013 1:38 am

Nick wrote:All 3 of these claims are highly debatable, to say the least. If Elvis Presley, Fats Domino, and Buddy Holly never became popular because the masses decided that the popular music of the 50's should be the sound of people banging trashcans together would that make this new form of "trashcan banging" music great solely on the factor that it's popular? Would it make rock and roll a lesser form of music due to it being unpopular?



If rock and roll had not become popular in the 50s, this site would not exist. Henrik would have grown up listening to chamber music, or something and there would never had been any rock critics.


Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:01 am

SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:Furthermore, I know this might sound crazy, but some acts don't care too much about being popular or successful. Some acts are pretty content with just making the music they love.


You're insane if you believe that.

I've been involved with hundreds of musicians in my day and every single one of them talks about how they did not get paid what they should have, and how certain records should have been hits but werem't promoted right, I've never heard one of them sasy that they were not interested in being popular.


There's nothing wrong with wanting a level of popularity or success, but if that's your primary motivating factor when it comes to making music, then you're making music for the wrong reasons.

SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:All 3 of these claims are highly debatable, to say the least. If Elvis Presley, Fats Domino, and Buddy Holly never became popular because the masses decided that the popular music of the 50's should be the sound of people banging trashcans together would that make this new form of "trashcan banging" music great solely on the factor that it's popular? Would it make rock and roll a lesser form of music due to it being unpopular?



If rock and roll had not become popular in the 50s, this site would not exist. Henrik would have grown up listening to chamber music, or something and there would never had been any rock critics.



You've missed my point. What if the popular music in the 1950's was something totally unlistenable, like the sound of trashcans being randomly banged together? If popularity is a requirement for greatness, or at the very least, a large factor in determining greatness, would that make this new genre ("trashcan noise" or whatever you want to call it) great solely due to the fact that it's popular? Furthermore, would lessen the greatness of music by artists like Elvis Presley if rock and roll was very unpopular? This is meant to be a hypothetical scenario.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:36 am

Nick wrote:There's nothing wrong with wanting a level of popularity or success, but if that's your primary motivating factor when it comes to making music, then you're making music for the wrong reasons.


Tell that to the guys who took risks and invested their money in owning record companies.


Nick wrote:You've missed my point. What if the popular music in the 1950's was something totally unlistenable, like the sound of trashcans being randomly banged together? If popularity is a requirement for greatness, or at the very least, a large factor in determining greatness, would that make this new genre ("trashcan noise" or whatever you want to call it) great solely due to the fact that it's popular? Furthermore, would lessen the greatness of music by artists like Elvis Presley if rock and roll was very unpopular? This is meant to be a hypothetical scenario.


Your point is specious. I might as well answer you by saying that what if people started to prefer perfume that smelled like dogshit, would that mean that dogshit smelled good. Lots of popular music is totally unlistenable IMO. There are lots of popular acts whose music is worse than garbage cans being banged together IMO. And unfortunately, yes, if it's popular that has something to do with it being good.

If Elvis had never made it big and all we had were his 5 Sun singles he'd be a cult legend like Charlie Feathers or the Johnny Burnette Trio. There are lots of records that never sold that I personally think are great, but they are not "objectively great."

This is one of my favorite records of the 60s.




But I would not list it on an objective list of great records. Personal taste does not make a record great. Rock critics have no better (or worse) taste than anybody else.

Nick
Die Mensch Maschine
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:28 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby Nick » Mon Apr 08, 2013 3:09 am

SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:There's nothing wrong with wanting a level of popularity or success, but if that's your primary motivating factor when it comes to making music, then you're making music for the wrong reasons.


Tell that to the guys who took risks and invested their money in owning record companies.


I flat out refuse to buy this. If you're a musician and you care more about making money than the quality and art behind your music, then I feel nothing but pity for you.

SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:You've missed my point. What if the popular music in the 1950's was something totally unlistenable, like the sound of trashcans being randomly banged together? If popularity is a requirement for greatness, or at the very least, a large factor in determining greatness, would that make this new genre ("trashcan noise" or whatever you want to call it) great solely due to the fact that it's popular? Furthermore, would lessen the greatness of music by artists like Elvis Presley if rock and roll was very unpopular? This is meant to be a hypothetical scenario.


Your point is specious. I might as well answer you by saying that what if people started to prefer perfume that smlled like dogshit, would that mean that dogshit smelled good. Lots of popular music is totally unlistenable IMO. There are lots of popular acts whose music is worse than garbage cans being banged together IMO. And unfortunately, yes, if it's popular that has something to do with it being good.



So if I'm understanding you right, you believe that there is an abundance of popular music that is total shit, but nevertheless, that music must be good since it's popular? Huh? Perhaps you and I have different definitions of the word "good".

SavoyBG wrote:If Elvis had never made it big and all we had were his 5 Sun singles he'd be a cult legend like Charlie Feathers or the Johnny Burnette Trio. There are lots of records that never sold that I personally think are great, but they are not "objectively great."

This is one of my favorite records of the 60s.




But I would not list it on an objective list of great records. Personal taste does not make a record great. Rock critics have no better (or worse) taste than anybody else.


This is where we disagree. I don't believe that quality of a piece of music can be judged objectively. There is no scientific or mathematical law that defines what is "good" or "bad", the entire thing is a matter of opinion. In my opinion, personal taste is ALL that makes a record great. If you think Huey Lewis and the News are better than the Pixies I'm going to strongly disagree with you, but neither of us is objectively right or wrong about the matter. It's all subjective. A "great" record shouldn't be considered "great" simply because it is really popular or influential. You said it yourself- tons of popular music is shit.

User avatar
SavoyBG
Different Class
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:35 pm

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby SavoyBG » Mon Apr 08, 2013 3:30 am

Nick wrote:
SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:There's nothing wrong with wanting a level of popularity or success, but if that's your primary motivating factor when it comes to making music, then you're making music for the wrong reasons.


Tell that to the guys who took risks and invested their money in owning record companies.


I flat out refuse to buy this. If you're a musician and you care more about making money than the quality and art behind your music, then I feel nothing but pity for you.


One man's quality is another man's shit. What you (or I) think is quality music, there will be plenty of musicians who think that it's shit.


SavoyBG wrote:
Nick wrote:You've missed my point. What if the popular music in the 1950's was something totally unlistenable, like the sound of trashcans being randomly banged together? If popularity is a requirement for greatness, or at the very least, a large factor in determining greatness, would that make this new genre ("trashcan noise" or whatever you want to call it) great solely due to the fact that it's popular? Furthermore, would lessen the greatness of music by artists like Elvis Presley if rock and roll was very unpopular? This is meant to be a hypothetical scenario.


Your point is specious. I might as well answer you by saying that what if people started to prefer perfume that smlled like dogshit, would that mean that dogshit smelled good. Lots of popular music is totally unlistenable IMO. There are lots of popular acts whose music is worse than garbage cans being banged together IMO. And unfortunately, yes, if it's popular that has something to do with it being good.


Nick wrote:So if I'm understanding you right, you believe that there is an abundance of popular music that is total shit, but nevertheless, that music must be good since it's popular? Huh? Perhaps you and I have different definitions of the word "good".


That's right. I may hate Mariah Carey's music, but her phenomonel success proves that her music is "good" according to popular opinion.

SavoyBG wrote:If Elvis had never made it big and all we had were his 5 Sun singles he'd be a cult legend like Charlie Feathers or the Johnny Burnette Trio. There are lots of records that never sold that I personally think are great, but they are not "objectively great."

This is one of my favorite records of the 60s.




But I would not list it on an objective list of great records. Personal taste does not make a record great. Rock critics have no better (or worse) taste than anybody else.

Nick wrote:This is where we disagree. I don't believe that quality of a piece of music can be judged objectively. There is no scientific or mathematical law that defines what is "good" or "bad", the entire thing is a matter of opinion. In my opinion, personal taste is ALL that makes a record great. If you think Huey Lewis and the News are better than the Pixies I'm going to strongly disagree with you, but neither of us is objectively right or wrong about the matter. It's all subjective. A "great" record shouldn't be considered "great" simply because it is really popular or influential. You said it yourself- tons of popular music is shit.


There are criteria that can be used for judging the objective achievements of songs and/or recording artists. One of those criteria is popularity of their music, both initially and over time. Then there's influence, whether or not their music was influential on other artists. Then there is the cultural influence of the song and/or artist. I may not like the fact that many people experimented with drugs in the 60s but undoubtedly the fact that the Beatles experimented with drugs had a big cultural inpact on other people doing so.

To me, the music of the Velvet Underground is horrendous. I'd rather listen to chalk on the blackboard than their shit. But I have to objectively acknowledge that their music was highly influential, even if I think that the artists that they influenced were mostly shit too.

peteevans
Start Me Up
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 11:34 am

Re: Rolling Stone: The 100 Greatest Debut Albums of All Time

Postby peteevans » Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:56 am

As for Steely Dan being greater than Abba, that is total hogwash. When Steely Dan turns down 1 billion dollars for a reunion tour like Abba did, let us know.

Savoy, you must be living in a parallel universe to every one else ! If hit single commercial success were the sole arbiter of 'greatness' then why aren't the likes of The Bay City Rollers, Mud, Sweet, Gary Glitter, Slade, Hall and Oates,Take That ( one of the best selling artists of all time ),etc, etc anywhere near the top 100 popular music artists list that Henrik has so brilliantly compiled ? Not just Henrik by the way, take virtually any list of the top 100 popuar music acts of all time and Steely Dan would be higher in virtually all of them, which is why they are positioned much higher ( though not high enough in my opinion ) than ABBA!! By the way, I personally love ABBAs music.

Your comment about Steely Dan is an absolute joke. If you took any random sample of 1000 music critics and musicians and asked them which was the greater act, made better records, were better songwriters,better musicians and had far more influence on popular music there would only be one winner. Critical approval is of course a crucial aspect of greatness overall. Take sport, for example, at the end of the season in England footballers vote for their player of the season as do the football writers. These industry opinions are valued and highly respected because they are the people in the know. If you were having a gas boiler fitted in your house you would not ask an accountant to do it you would ask a qualified engineer because he knows what he is talking about ! Same with music, critics and musicians know far more about the subject than the general public, although we form our own tastes. So i would value their opinion more than anyone elses.


Return to “Critics' lists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests