NationStates Jolt Archive

Yep, it's time to argue over a list again (http://www.time.com/time/2006/100albums/). Time magazine has released its list of "the greatest and most influential records ever." It's crap, of course, as is any list of this type, but I think that's due, in part, to the massive copouts in the list.

For starters, the list is done by decades, and includes 9 albums released since the year 2000. Now, let's put aside the idea that any album released a maximum of six years ago could be considered influential--4 of the albums they included are compilations from people who have been dead for quite some time (for longer than many posters on this board have been alive). Sure, Hank Williams, Sam Cooke, Muddy Waters and Elvis Presley were influential, but their 2005 compilations weren't. Their early work was what was influential.

So here's the list. Rip it apart.
2000s

The Essential Hank Williams Collection: Turn Back the Years Hank Williams Mercury, 2005
The College Dropout Kanye West Roc-a-Fella, 2004
Portrait of a Legend 1951 - 1964 Sam Cooke ABKCO Music & Records, 2003
Elvis: 30 No. 1 Hits Elvis Presley BMG/Elvis, 2002
The Anthology, 1947 - 1972 Muddy Waters Chess, 2001
Kid A Radiohead Capitol, 2000
Stankonia Outkast LaFace, 2000
Stories From The City, Stories From The Sea PJ Harvey UMG Recordings, 2000
The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem Interscope, 2000

1990s

Sunrise Elvis Presley BMG / Elvis, 1999
Car Wheels on a Gravel Road Lucinda Williams Universal, 1998
OK Computer Radiohead Capitol, 1997
Time Out of Mind Bob Dylan Sony, 1997
Endtroducing... DJ Shadow Mo' Wax, 1996
(What's the Story) Morning Glory Oasis Sony, 1995
Live Through This Hole Geffen, 1994
My Life Mary J. Blige MCA, 1994
Ready to Die The Notorious B.I.G. Bad Boy, 1994
Slanted and Enchanted Pavement Matador, 1992
The Chronic Dr. Dre Death Row/Interscope, 1992
Achtung Baby U2 Island, 1991
Nevermind Nirvana DGC Records, 1991
Out of Time R.E.M. Warner Brothers, 1991
Phil Spector, Back to Mono (1958 - 1969) Various Artists Abkco, 1991
Ropin' The Wind Garth Brooks Capitol, 1991
Star Time James Brown Polydor, 1991
The Low End Theory A Tribe Called Quest Jive, 1991

1980s

Like a Prayer Madonna Sire/London/Rhino, 1989
Paul's Boutique Beastie Boys Capitol, 1989
The Stone Roses The Stone Roses Jive, 1989
It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back Public Enemy Def Jam/Columbia, 1988
Straight Outta Compton N.W.A Priority, 1988
Document R.E.M. I.R.S. Records, 1987
Paid in Full Eric B. and Rakim Island, 1987
Sign O' The Times Prince Paisley Park, 1987
The Joshua Tree U2 Island, 1987
Graceland Paul Simon Warner Brothers, 1986
Master of Puppets Metallica Elektra/Wea, 1986
Raising Hell Run-DMC Arista Records/Profile, 1986
Legend Bob Marley and the Wailers Island/Tuff Gong, 1984
Purple Rain Prince Warner Brothers, 1984
Stop Making Sense Talking Heads Warner Brothers/Wea, 1984
The Great Twenty-Eight Chuck Berry MCA, 1982
Thriller Michael Jackson Sony, 1982
Back in Black AC/DC Atlantic, 1980

1970s

London Calling The Clash Sony, 1979
One Nation Under a Groove Parliament / Funkadelic Warner Brothers, 1978
Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols The Sex Pistols Warner Brothers/Wea, 1977
Rumours Fleetwood Mac Warner Brothers, 1977
Hotel California The Eagles Elektra/Wea, 1976
Ramones The Ramones Sire, 1976
Songs in the Key of Life Stevie Wonder Motown, 1976
Born to Run Bruce Springsteen Sony, 1975
Horses Patti Smith Arista, 1975
Red Headed Stranger Willie Nelson Sony, 1975
Call Me Al Green The Right Stuff, 1973
Goodbye Yellow Brick Road Elton John MCA, 1973
The Rise And Fall Of Ziggy Stardust David Bowie RCA, 1972
Exile on Main Street The Rolling Stones Virgin, 1972
Talking Book Stevie Wonder UMG Recordings, 1972
The Harder They Come Jimmy Cliff and Various Artists Island, 1972
Blue Joni Mitchell Warner Brothers/Wea, 1971
Coat of Many Colors Dolly Parton RCA, 1971
Hunky Dory David Bowie RCA, 1971
Led Zeppelin IV (a.k.a. Zoso) Led Zeppelin Wea International, 1971
Paranoid Black Sabbath Warner Brothers, 1971
Sticky Fingers The Rolling Stones Virgin, 1971
Tapestry Carole King Ode/A&M, 1971
What's Going On Marvin Gaye Motown, 1971
Who's Next The Who Mobile Fidelity, 1971
After the Gold Rush Neil Young Reprise, 1970
Bridge Over Troubled Water Simon and Garfunkel Columbia, 1970
John Lennon Plastic Ono Band Apple/EMI, 1970
Moondance Van Morrison Warner Brothers/Wea, 1970

1960s

Abbey Road The Beatles Capitol, 1969
Bitches Brew Miles Davis Sony, 1969
Stand! Sly & the Family Stone Epic, 1969
The Band The Band Capitol, 1969
Astral Weeks Van Morrison Warner Brothers/Wea, 1968
At Folsom Prison Johnny Cash Sony, 1968
Lady Soul Aretha Franklin Atlantic, 1968
The Beatles ("The White Album") The Beatles Capitol, 1968
Are You Experienced The Jimi Hendrix Experience Experience Hendrix, 1967
I Never Loved a Man the Way I Love You Aretha Franklin Atlantic, 1967
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band The Beatles Capitol, 1967
The Velvet Underground and Nico The Velvet Underground Polydor/Pgd, 1967
Blonde on Blonde Bob Dylan Columbia, 1966
Pet Sounds The Beach Boys DCC, 1966
Revolver The Beatles Capitol, 1966
Highway 61 Revisited Bob Dylan Columbia, 1965
Otis Blue Otis Redding Atlantic, 1965
Rubber Soul The Beatles Capitol, 1965
A Love Supreme John Coltrane Impulse, 1964
Live at the Apollo (1963) James Brown Polydor, 1963
Modern Sounds in Country and Western Music Ray Charles ABC/Paramount, 1962
King of the Delta Blues Singers Robert Johnson Columbia, 1961

1950s

Kind of Blue Miles Davis Sony, 1959
Here's Little Richard Little Richard Specialty, 1957
Songs for Swingin' Lovers Frank Sinatra Capitol, 1955
In the Wee Small Hours Frank Sinatra Capitol, 1954

whatev.

Now THAT, my friends, is a shitty list. I usually keep TIME Magazine in good regards, but this? Ouch. Thier music credibility is almost completely shot... Saved only by the inclusion of the Ramones and the Sex Pistols. I know that The Who are listed, but Who's Next over Tommy? Ehh.

And, the fact that they TOTALLY skipped 1981 so they could leave out Rush completely and then fill the rest of the list with ridiculous collections is absolutely disgusting.

I read the first line of the list and decided it sucks.

The people at Time don't know anything about music anyway. It's all just pop.

I'm deeply offended that Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layla_and_Other_Assorted_Love_Songs) is not on that list. :P

The vast majority of that list doesn't deserve to be there.

Especially Kanye West *projectile vomit*

I read the first line of the list and decided it sucks.

The people at Time don't know anything about music anyway. It's all just pop.

It's true that the magazine doesn't know shit about music. The Music editor for the magazine even said, during an interview on national-fucking-news, that "musicians start to lose all of their creativity as they age".

I shit you not.

Add Yeah Yeah Yeahs - Fever to Tell to the 2000s

It's true that the magazine doesn't know shit about music. The Music editor for the magazine even said, during an interview on national-fucking-news, that "musicians start to lose all of their creativity as they age".

I shit you not.Well, there is a legitimate argument to be made there. It happens to writers a lot, too--it's a struggle to keep finding fresh ways of creating material instead of falling back on what's been successful in the past. I mean, has Sting ever done anything as original as he did during The Police years, or at least since Dream of the Blue Turtles? Has Dylan ever topped Blonde on Blonde? Hell, the Stones haven't made a good album since 1977, and even that paled in comparison to their earlier stuff. It's the rare artist that can continue to stay fresh as they age.

Not a single entry in that list is in any other language than English.

"The greatest and most influential records ever" my ass!

Not a single entry in that list is in any other language than English.

"The greatest and most influential records ever" my ass!
It's Time Magazine. It's surprising there's anyone outside the US included.

A big part of the problem is that they want to split the difference between getting influential musicians on the chart, noting massive-selling albums, and get influential albums on the list. Unfortunately, you can't have it all three ways . . . as one Texas lawmaker used to put it, there ain't nothin' in the middle of that road but dead armadillos. If you want to cite, for instance, rising musical influence, then you really can't mention the 90's without mentioning Garth Brooks and Faith Hill. Granted, their albums are crap even by country standards, but those two were the two who mainstreamed country music to suburbia, hence they are pretty influential in that their way of doing country is the way country is now done, right or wrong. Similarly, you can't even talk about 90's music without talking about the Pixies in the 80's, as the Pixies were the group that laid the sound popularized by Nirvana and Smashing Pumpkins, but it was Nirvana who went platinum, hence they're on the list and the Pixies aren't. By contrast, Thriller was a huge album, but I've never heard a single singer cite it as a musical influence.

Any writer is going to suffer this kind of problem until they decide exactly what the hell they're trying to measure: influence, cash-making, or value of the album in itself.

It's Time Magazine. It's surprising there's anyone outside the US included.

But seriously, no Piaf? No Brel?

No fucking ABBA?!?

Travesty!

No Pink Floyd on the list = utter failure

Well, there is a legitimate argument to be made there. It happens to writers a lot, too--it's a struggle to keep finding fresh ways of creating material instead of falling back on what's been successful in the past. I mean, has Sting ever done anything as original as he did during The Police years, or at least since Dream of the Blue Turtles? Has Dylan ever topped Blonde on Blonde? Hell, the Stones haven't made a good album since 1977, and even that paled in comparison to their earlier stuff. It's the rare artist that can continue to stay fresh as they age.

This isn't so much because of a loss of creativity as it is because of the fact that they aren't doing anything new, and so people are get used (how the hell do you spell that?) to their sound.

But seriously, no Piaf? No Brel?

No fucking ABBA?!?

Travesty!

hey, elvis is only great and influential in a stupid collection from '02, not in his own time.

its not a great list.

is elvis influential in the '00s?

that abba thing is just a travesty

Where's Phil Ochs? He practically defines an era of political activism in folk music.

Where's Rites of Spring? Without them the whole Emo thing would have never happened.

Where's Mudhoney? Without them, Nirvana would have just been two stoned out losers and a harDCore drummer.

All of those bands belong on that list before some of the nonsense pop acts on there. As much as The Clash are a fun band, I don't think they influenced anything musically. Same for the Ramones. Their sounds really never went past the bands who played them.

Magazines only run 'Top 100 greatest...' or similar lists to sell copies. People will want to buy the magazine precisely so they can disagree with what the list's compilers put in it.

It wouldn't surprise me if someone at Time decided they'd run this list then wandered around the office asking people to name their favourite albums from each decade since the 50s.

This isn't so much because of a loss of creativity as it is because of the fact that they aren't doing anything new, and so people are get used (how the hell do you spell that?) to their sound.

But why aren't they doing anything new? Maybe it's because 1) they stopped trying or 2) they shot their load and don't have anything new. Personally, I think if you get three really innovative albums out of a band, they've done something special. If you get more, you're the Beatles. ;)

But why aren't they doing anything new? Maybe it's because 1) they stopped trying or 2) they shot their load and don't have anything new. Personally, I think if you get three really innovative albums out of a band, they've done something special. If you get more, you're the Beatles. ;)

Bands are, unfortunately, very unchanging things. Big change happens when you leave your band and go to a new one. That's why all the best punk bands produced an album and then quit.

Where's Mudhoney? Without them, Nirvana would have just been two stoned out losers and a harDCore drummer.



Nirvana was just stoned out losers, &c...

that abba thing is just a travesty

It is. Sure, they might be a bit corny today, but there's no denying the impact they've had on pop.

It is. Sure, they might be a bit corny today, but there's no denying the impact they've had on pop.
When I was a kid, there was an apparently serious discussion whether or not they'd surpassed the Beatles as the world's greatest band--they'd sold more albums at that point, certainly.

It's a pretty pathetic 'best-of' list when 4 of their "best" albums for this decade are anthologies of decades-old music!
How can anyone say that's the best album of a year?

Reminds me of an Alan Partridge clip, where he's interviewing someone and asks them their favourite Beatles Album. Then interupts them to say his favourite by far is their 'Best of' CD.


TOOL Aemnia should be in the list for the 1990s. I couldn't be bothered looking any further back, but I expect there's far more great albums missing.





Best of's being included. Jeez!

This list, like all "100 Greatest" lists regarding music, is absolute garbage. It is an embarassment to real music fans. This sort of drivel is what we get whenever any publication creates a "100 Greatest" list. The editors and writers needlessly promote the music of their own youth while decrying and debasing everything that has come since as derivative. It's a symptom of the attitude that pervades musical opinion on a societal level. Every generation holds up the music of the previous generation as infallable, and utterly dismisses everything from their own generation. Every generation believes that there will never be music like the music that came before them, and every generation ignores the greatness of their own music. Ask almost anyone, and I assure you that they will say that the music of their parents' generation is the pinnacle of musical achievement. Of course, their parents felt that music was garbage. And their kids will elevate the music of their generation to legendary status.

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

When I was a kid, there was an apparently serious discussion whether or not they'd surpassed the Beatles as the world's greatest band--they'd sold more albums at that point, certainly.

Well, I've always been of the opinion that The Beatles were a bit overrated, but then again I was born in the 80s and never lived through whatever it was that made them special.

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

Well, for Sweden I'd be fairly certain The Hives, Moneybrother, Marit Bergman and, above all, Kent will be praised for quite some time to come.

Edit: Oh, and The Knife.

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?
The only one I can think of is Radiohead. Maybe Tool as well.

Sadly, it's far more likely to be Oasis and Nirvana that are held in the same esteem. Not that I have anything against Nirvana (I have a lot against Oasis), but I don't consider them to be anywhere near as good as Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, etc. Influential, perhaps, but not as good.

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

No.

They all suck.

Well, for Sweden I'd be fairly certain The Hives, Moneybrother, Marit Bergman and, above all, Kent will be praised for quite some time to come.

As you have clearly demonstrated repeatedly, you are far from the normal "masses". As a rule, you and I are not regular people when it comes to our artistic tastes. While I certainly would view The Hives, Moneybrother, and Kent as absolute excellence (I must admit ignorance on Marit Bergman), I sincerely doubt that the normal person would ever consider them as musical equals of the "greats" that I mentioned previously.

No.

They all suck.

And what artists do you consider to be "great"?

As you have clearly demonstrated repeatedly, you are far from the normal "masses".

Why, thank you.

As a rule, you and I are not regular people when it comes to our artistic tastes. While I certainly would view The Hives, Moneybrother, and Kent as absolute excellence (I must admit ignorance on Marit Bergman), I sincerely doubt that the normal person would ever consider them as musical equals of the "greats" that I mentioned previously.

Taste of Marit. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOtS7rIHMIQ)

I also think you gravely underestimate the popularity of Kent in Sweden. They have been the band for the last ten years.

Another thing to bitch about--if it's not Coltrane or Miles Davis, there's no jazz on the list. No Thelonius Monk, Charles Mingus, Charlie Parker, Dizzy Gillespie, Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong, Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald.

For that matter, there are precious few women on the list as well.

Edit: 8 women (if you include Fleetwood Mac for having female lead singers on at least half the songs) and nine albums, with Aretha Franklin named twice.

And what artists do you consider to be "great"?

Eh...

Minor Threat
Sham 69
Stiff Little Fingers
Embrace (not the shitty UK band)
Fugazi
The Queers
Husker Du
Good Clean Fun

I guess. I have no desire for "greatness" when greatness just seems to mean lyrical irrelevance and musical uncreativity.

Taste of Marit. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOtS7rIHMIQ)

I also think you gravely underestimate the popularity of Kent in Sweden. They have been the band for the last ten years.

Yes, it is true that my knowledge of Swedish pop culture is sorely lacking. I suppose I am allowing myself to have a US-centric bias. Still, the biggest bands out now I do not think will ever be compared on a serious level to the biggest bands of years past. Maybe I am too cynical.

Miles Davis only gets 2 albums in there.
No Buddy Holly.
No Jerry Lee Lewis.
Only two jazz albums on the list.
Chuck Berry doesn't make it as an 'influential' musician until 1982 (with a best of).
Elvis Presley doesn't make it until 1999(!).
No classical music there.
No Lee 'Scratch' Perry.

I've had enough. Someone else can finish this list.

Just further proof that Time is far removed from reality.

Yes, it is true that my knowledge of Swedish pop culture is sorely lacking. I suppose I am allowing myself to have a US-centric bias.

Well, I did say "for Sweden"...

Still, the biggest bands out now I do not think will ever be compared on a serious level to the biggest bands of years past. Maybe I am too cynical.

Maybe you're realist because hopefully we won't grow up to need such affirmation by proxy of our idols.

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

Yup.

Well, I did say "for Sweden"...

I seem to remember that.

Maybe you're realist because hopefully we won't grow up to need such affirmation by proxy of our idols.

Perhaps. I don't think it's so much that I need such affirmation by proxy, but that I'd like to see more objectivity in the discussion of musical greatness. I tire of people holding the Beatles up on this ridiculous pedastal.

Yup.

Don't elaborate on what bands or anything.

Perhaps. I don't think it's so much that I need such affirmation by proxy, but that I'd like to see more objectivity in the discussion of musical greatness.

Perhaps you'd like world peace as well while you're at it?

Don't elaborate on what bands or anything.

OK.


:p

Perhaps you'd like world peace as well while you're at it?

Ideally? Of course. But practically? Not a chance in hell. Same with musical objectivity. Of course I'd like to see it, but there's not a chance that people will ever act rationally enough for it to occur. Doesn't that make me cynical by definition?

Perhaps. I don't think it's so much that I need such affirmation by proxy, but that I'd like to see more objectivity in the discussion of musical greatness. I tire of people holding the Beatles up on this ridiculous pedastal.
Never gonna happen though. Like Citizen Kane in the film world, one is simply not allowed to question, nor compare, The Beatles to any other band.
Is Citizen Kane a great movie? Definitely.
Was it an influential movie? Definitely.
Is the greatest movie of all-time? Definitely not. That's entirely subjective and, as well, completely asinine to even make that suggestion. As an action movie, for example, it sucks. No-one could say it's better than 'Terminator' or 'Aliens' in the action movie genre.
Not particularly good as a horror movie, either.
Movies have far too many genres in which to be able pick an overall 'best'.

But it's become so ingrained that Citizen Kane is the best ever, that everyone feels obliged to parrot this pointless phrase without ever bothering to think about what they're saying.
It's just a convenient soundbite to avoid having to do any serious thinking.

Same with The Beatles:
Incredibly influential, talented, melodic, popular.
As a Death metal band for example, they suck though.

Ideally? Of course. But practically? Not a chance in hell. Same with musical objectivity. Of course I'd like to see it, but there's not a chance that people will ever act rationally enough for it to occur. Doesn't that make me cynical by definition?

What is rational when it comes to music?

It's just noise, Sdaeriji. If you want objectivity, that's it. The objective reply to music is: Ok, it's noise. That's nice.

What is rational when it comes to music?

It's just noise, Sdaeriji. If you want objectivity, that's it. The objective reply to music is: Ok, it's noise. That's nice.

An objective evaluation of the merits of an artist's work, without the bias inherent in personal opinion on the artist. It is possible to evaluate the talent of an artist while being disconnected from your personal preference.

An objective evaluation of the merits of an artist's work, without the bias inherent in personal opinion on the artist. It is possible to evaluate the talent of an artist while being disconnected from your personal preference.

Talent? What is talent? It's just a subjective concept.

There's no such thing as talent, merely perception of talent.

Ideally? Of course. But practically? Not a chance in hell. Same with musical objectivity. Of course I'd like to see it, but there's not a chance that people will ever act rationally enough for it to occur. Doesn't that make me cynical by definition?

"The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it. "

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?Aside from Nirvana and R.E.M.? Not really.
Perhaps if Metallica hadn't done their last 3 albums, or if the Billy Corgan hadn't gone techno with the Smashing Pumpkins, those two bands could make it.

The vast majority of that list doesn't deserve to be there.

Especially Kanye West *projectile vomit*
That Foo' did back up for U2, i can't understand why they'd have him with music that doesnt even compare to theirs in any way save in the department of shit(U2 at times) and just the thought of people liking his music(if you can call it that is a WTF moment.

This list is worse than the The RollingStone list which sucked something mighty!

Oh noes. Another bad top 100 list. This has never happened before. The tragedy of it all.

Oh noes. Another bad top 100 list. This has never happened before. The tragedy of it all.
Quickly Kanabia, ammuse yourself with this (http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~kaznao/kamikousaku/orijinal/color/domokun.jpeg).
*flees*

Oh noes. Another bad top 100 list. This has never happened before. The tragedy of it all.
All that is required for jackassery to triumph is for sane men to do nothing just because someone else got there to be a jackass first.

do any serious thinking.

Same with The Beatles:
Incredibly influential, talented, melodic, popular.
As a Death metal band for example, they suck though.



Thats a totally unreal and unfair comparison.

The Beatles never played Death Metal.

There WAS no such thing back then, so applying such a term to them isnt even ..well, applicable.

Same thing for Citizen Kane.

Its NOT an action movie, so why would you say that as one, it sucks?

Its a bad porno, too, but that was would be equally ridicuous to assign to it.


Kane is renown for what it was.
A good film that targets a real-life media mogul, and his corruption.

To be "as good" as the Beatles, a band would have to accomplish something that no other band has ever done.
It would have to be something so big, that it would have to change the history of music forever.

Because the Beatles already did that.

Regardless of what anyone says about thier music, its what they did that really makes them "the greatest band ever".

No Pink Floyd on the list = utter failure
Seconded!!

Seconded!!

Thirded.

Heh..i said "thirded".

Not a single entry in that list is in any other language than English.

"The greatest and most influential records ever" my ass!
You mean that there are popular records in languages other than English?

Now THAT, my friends, is a shitty list. I usually keep TIME Magazine in good regards, but this? Ouch. Thier music credibility is almost completely shot... Saved only by the inclusion of the Ramones and the Sex Pistols. I know that The Who are listed, but Who's Next over Tommy? Ehh.

And, the fact that they TOTALLY skipped 1981 so they could leave out Rush completely and then fill the rest of the list with ridiculous collections is absolutely disgusting.

I'd give them at least some marks for ignoring Rush:p .....but seriously why have complation albums from the 2000's made the list?

It's funny how when people on this thread disagree with the list, they assume that it's Time magazines taste which is terrible or atorcious.

Thats a totally unreal and unfair comparison.

The Beatles never played Death Metal.

There WAS no such thing back then, so applying such a term to them isnt even ..well, applicable.

Same thing for Citizen Kane.

Its NOT an action movie, so why would you say that as one, it sucks?
Its a bad porno, too, but that was would be equally ridicuous to assign to it.
My point exactly.
There's too many genres in music and film to be able to point one specific band/album/movie out and say, "This is the best ever".
It's a totally asinine and pointless exercise.
If the only type of movie you like to watch is bad porn or action, then Citizen Kane is going to suck in your opinion. So someone telling - nay basically demanding - that you agree 'Kane is the best film of all time is just dumb.

Likewise with saying The Beatles are the best ever. Best ever only if you like their sort of music. Obviously you can agree they were (like 'Kane was for the film industry) incredibly influential, but if you just don't like 60's Britpop, then you won't agree with the idea of The Beatles being the best.

Why can't ppl just leave it at that?

It's funny how when people on this thread disagree with the list, they assume that it's Time magazines taste which is terrible or atorcious.

It's not so much their taste I have a quibble with--there can be legitimate differences of taste--it's their shitty methodology. Hank Williams was undeniably infuential--in the 50s. Not in 2005. And so on.

It's funny how when people on this thread disagree with the list, they assume that it's Time magazines taste which is terrible or atorcious.

It's funny how Time put greatest hits albums on a "most influential" album list. If the albums that originally contained those songs were not influential enough, how do the greatest hits albums forty years later suddenly have impact?

Time Magazine's taste in regards to this list is terrible and atrocious, not to mention insulting. Of this there is no argument.

Bands are, unfortunately, very unchanging things. Big change happens when you leave your band and go to a new one. That's why all the best punk bands produced an album and then quit.
Counter-example:

Deep Purple

Deep Purple (which rather appallingly isn't on the list) was always a 5-piece band, but since their first release in 1968 there have been 14 different guys filling those 5 spots since then, and the sound of the band has changed considerably over its history.

For completeness:

Don Airey - organ
Ritchie Blackmore - guitar
Tommy Bolin - guitar
David Coverdale - vocals
Rod Evans - vocals
Ian Gillan - vocals
Roger Glover - bass
Glenn Hughes - bass & vocals
Jon Lord - organ
Steve Morse - guitar
Ian Paice - drums
Joe Satriani - guitar
Nicky Simper - bass
Joe Lynn Turner - vocals

Yeah-its a crappy list.

They DID include AC/DC Back in Black though.

Off the top of my head- Meatloaf's "Bat Out of Hell" ought to be on there.

There's nothing from the Doors on it either.

Or the Kinks. Not that I could listen to it now, but how about Def Leppard? They were damn popular and had a style for a while.

I'm sure I could think of 20 more.... The Cars "Candy-O"-that was a whole new sound.

Nothing from Queen ? Cheap Trick? Iron Maiden? Billy Idol ?
Judas Priest? Tom Petty?

I can agree on ABBA too...


What about freaking KISS ? Not influential enough?

I agree with a lot but they completely skipped nirvana unless I missed it

ITs not like grundge was a small movement and they were and are the public face to grundge

Yeah-its a crappy list.

They DID include AC/DC Back in Black though.

Off the top of my head- Meatloaf's "Bat Out of Hell" ought to be on there.

There's nothing from the Doors on it either.

Or the Kinks. Not that I could listen to it now, but how about Def Leppard? They were damn popular and had a style for a while.

I'm sure I could think of 20 more.... The Cars "Candy-O"-that was a whole new sound.

Nothing from Queen ? Cheap Trick? Iron Maiden? Billy Idol ?
Judas Priest? Tom Petty?

I can agree on ABBA too...


What about freaking KISS ? Not influential enough?

Agreed KISS and Priest for sure as well as queen should be in that list

I agree with a lot but they completely skipped nirvana unless I missed it

ITs not like grundge was a small movement and they were and are the public face to grundge

Could have sworn they had Nevermind in the list.

Even if In Utero is better.

Could have sworn they had Nevermind in the list.

Even if In Utero is better.

I did read it wrong you are right ...

Fuck me. Looking to TIME magazine for music ciriticism is like looking to the NME for politics.

Fuck me. Looking to TIME magazine for music ciriticism is like looking to the NME for politics.

Or music criticism, for that matter.

Or music criticism, for that matter.

Hey, a couple of pints, y'know? Consider yourself lucky, when I first typed 'criticism' it somehow had an 'x' in it.

Hey, a couple of pints, y'know? Consider yourself lucky, when I first typed 'criticism' it somehow had an 'x' in it.

Oh no, I was more pointing out that you wouldn't go to the NME for music criticism, either...

No Pink Floyd on the list = utter failure

Exactly!!

"The Dark Side of the Moon is one of the best-selling albums of all time worldwide, and the 20th-best-selling album in the United States. It peaked at #1 on The Billboard 200 dethroning Alice Cooper's Billion Dollar Babies from the top spot. Though it held the #1 spot for only one week (it was displaced by Elvis Presley's Aloha from Hawaii), it spent a record total of 741 consecutive weeks (over 14 years) on that list. It was on the chart from its release until leaving the chart on April 23, 1988. To this day, it occupies a prominent spot on Billboard's Pop Catalog Chart, reaching #1 when the 2003 hybrid CD/SACD edition was released and sold 800,000 copies in the U.S. alone. On the week of May 5, 2006, Dark Side of the Moon achieved a combined total of 1500 weeks on the Billboard 200 and Pop Catalog charts."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Side_of_the_Moon#Charts

That should be worthy of a mention.

But as the intial poster said, just another shit list to argue about :D

No Pink Floyd on the list = utter failure

i must agree... it is akwardly surprising to not see pink floyd on this list.

leave it to a popular magazine to determine the top 100 whatevers of our time...

NOTE: i am wearing a Dark Side of the Moon hoodie right now, so influencial that, Time.

Exactly!!

"The Dark Side of the Moon is one of the best-selling albums of all time worldwide, and the 20th-best-selling album in the United States..."

That should be worthy of a mention.

Sales != influence.

Remember that story about the VU, and how only a few thousand people bought their record, but every one of them went out and started a band? Apocryphal, no doubt, but it illustrates the point.

Sales != influence.

Remember that story about the VU, and how only a few thousand people bought their record, but every one of them went out and started a band? Apocryphal, no doubt, but it illustrates the point.

this is Time Magazine... i honestly wouldnt put that past them.

Oh no, I was more pointing out that you wouldn't go to the NME for music criticism, either...

Ah, right.

Yes, personally I wouldn't go to the NME for music criticism, but then I'm hardly their target market - I'm old enough to remember XTC and the Gang Of Four first time round, so I don't need some fuckwitted pup-hack straight out of a journalism course telling me about this hot new sound.*

Personally I still mourn the passing of Sounds and Melody Maker. If nothing else you could at least hold sweepstakes on how many pages before the term 'sonic cathedrals' was used in any given issue.


* speaking of which... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxZ-n4Is684

Or music criticism, for that matter.

Yeah, I wouldn't much trust a bunch of loons who actually called Rush "fascists".


...Getting back on topic, I didn't even notice that there was no Queen on the list. What's up with that? You can't tell me that A Night At The Opera isn't even worth noting.

Even if In Utero is better.

Correct. *nods*

Correct. *nods*

Bleach is better, too.

Bleach is better, too.

I'd put it on par with Nevermind (even though it's the album that got me into them), but since it's a totally different album stylistically and otherwise, I can't listen to both albums back to back.

Bleach is better, too.

Nah...Bleach is good (mainly, for me, for Blew, About a Girl, and Floyd The Barber), but it's not as good as Nevermind.

I'd put it on par with Nevermind (even though it's the album that got me into them), but since it's a totally different album stylistically and otherwise, I can't listen to both albums back to back.

I think it's better simply because of the raw production. It just has a bite to it that Nevermind doesn't. It's like the difference between Husker Du's Flip Your Wig and Candy Apple Grey, except in that case, the latter is the better of the two.

Bleach is better, too.

Agreed. Though, I will admit my favorite Nirvana song is off of Nevermind.

I think it's better simply because of the raw production. It just has a bite to it that Nevermind doesn't. It's like the difference between Husker Du's Flip Your Wig and Candy Apple Grey, except in that case, the latter is the better of the two.

Which is why, in my opinion, In Utero tops both Nevermind and Bleach, because it features much improved (albeit chaotic) songwriting and lyrics mixed with a raw, uncommercial sound.


Agreed. Though, I will admit my favorite Nirvana song is off of Nevermind.

Which one?

Agreed. Though, I will admit my favorite Nirvana song is off of Nevermind.

Which one?If I were to guess, I'd say "Lounge Act".

Which is why, in my opinion, In Utero tops both Nevermind and Bleach, because it features much improved (albeit chaotic) songwriting and lyrics mixed with a raw, uncommercial sound.
That's the Steve Albini influence coming through. I prefered In Utero as well - it sounds like a cross between Big Black and Nirvana (unsurprisingly).

Which one?
If I were to guess, I'd say "Lounge Act".

In Bloom.

In Bloom.

There are a few great songs on Nevermind...Lounge Act, On a Plain, Territorial Pissings, Drain You, Stay Away...

There are a few great songs on Nevermind...Lounge Act, On a Plain, Territorial Pissings, Drain You, Stay Away...

I think Nevermind was a great album. I don't agree with people who think that Nevermind sucked. I just think it was their weakest album. Much of the album is formulaic.

I think Nevermind was a great album. I don't agree with people who think that Nevermind sucked. I just think it was their weakest album. Much of the album is formulaic.

Oh, it's definitely a good album, but you're right, it's their weakest.

I think Nevermind was a great album. I don't agree with people who think that Nevermind sucked. I just think it was their weakest album. Much of the album is formulaic.You don't think Bleach was repetative? Especially the lyrics to "School"?

If I were to guess, I'd say "Lounge Act".

Hm. I think that's one of their more average tracks.

That's the Steve Albini influence coming through. I prefered In Utero as well - it sounds like a cross between Big Black and Nirvana (unsurprisingly).

Probably in part. I've been meaning to get into Big Black but their albums are pretty hard to find.

In Bloom.

Cool, that's one of my favourites on it too.

Oh, it's definitely a good album, but you're right, it's their weakest.

If you don't count Incesticide as an album anyway.

Hm. I think that's one of their more average tracks.Hm. I'd say it's the most underrated song, on the 3 albums and 1 comp. (They have more underrated songs on B-sides and on the Box Set).

Probably in part. I've been meaning to get into Big Black but their albums are pretty hard to find.Their best song, by far, is a cover.

Hm. I'd say it's the most underrated song, on the 3 albums and 1 comp. (They have more underrated songs on B-sides and on the Box Set).

It's not a bad song, but not really that special in comparision with what else they could do. Their B-sides and rare tracks are great, though. There's an album worth of great songs out there, like "Blandest", "Sappy" (or "Laundry Room", whatever the correct title is), and "Even in his Youth".

Their best song, by far, is a cover.

Hm. I'll probably buy an album anyway if I do manage to stumble upon it (has to happen one day).

If you don't count Incesticide as an album anyway.

Well...it's just a collection of 'rarities' and radio appearances. I was thinking more along the lines of studio albums (although Incesticide has some cool songs on it)

Well...it's just a collection of 'rarities' and radio appearances. I was thinking more along the lines of studio albums (although Incesticide has some cool songs on it)

Some people count it as a full album. And it does. "Aneurysm" is probably my favourite Nirvana track. It also has some pretty average songs, though. :p

It's not a bad song, but not really that special in comparision with what else they could do. Their B-sides and rare tracks are great, though. There's an album worth of great songs out there, like "Blandest", "Sappy" (or "Laundry Room", whatever the correct title is), and "Even in his Youth". Yep, and "Old Age" and "Moist Vagina" or "Oh, the Guilt"...we could go on for a while, here...lol.

Hm. I'll probably buy an album anyway if I do manage to stumble upon it (has to happen one day).They're worth getting; I was just disappointed to find out "He's a Whore" was originally done by Cheap Trick, even though Cheap Trick rules.

Some people count it as a full album. And it does. "Aneurysm" is probably my favourite Nirvana track. It also has some pretty average songs, though. :p

Aneurysm, Sliver, Been a Son, Dive and Turnaround (although a cover, it's a good cover) are probably the stand-out tracks for me, but the rest is, yea, fairly average.

Yep, and "Old Age" and "Moist Vagina" or "Oh, the Guilt"...we could go on for a while, here...lol.

Yeah. :p I suspect that we'll be seeing a re-release in a couple of years packaged up like a proper album...I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) to see a lot of next-to-unknown tracks missing from the box set.

They're worth getting; I was just disappointed to find out "He's a Whore" was originally done by Cheap Trick, even though Cheap Trick rules.

Oh, okay. I've heard one of Steve Albini's other bands, though (Rapeman), but didn't think too much of them.

Aneurysm, Sliver, Been a Son, Dive and Turnaround (although a cover, it's a good cover) are probably the stand-out tracks for me, but the rest is, yea, fairly average.

Those are the exact ones i'd pick. :)

Yeah. :p I suspect that we'll be seeing a re-release in a couple of years packaged up like a proper album...I was surprised (and a bit disappointed) to see a lot of next-to-unknown tracks missing from the box set.Probably. That would be nice to see, especially if they release singles from it.

Oh, okay. I've heard one of Steve Albini's other bands, though (Rapeman), but didn't think too much of them.Rapeman sounds like a cross between Big Black and the Jesus Lizard. (Which is fitting, since a member of the Jesus Lizard was in Rapeman.)

Probably. That would be nice to see, especially if they release singles from it.

Yeah, and then I can be the annoying grizzled guy who goes "Yeah, I heard it about 10 years ago" when some one asks me "omg have u herd the new nirvana song? its kool." It'll be awesome.

Although maybe not. I'm wondering what other studio outtakes are hidden away and haven't been heard by anyone except the band and their closest associates. The only other version of "You Know You're Right" that was in circulation was a crappy and incomplete audience recording from a live show, and Hole's version.

Rapeman sounds like a cross between Big Black and the Jesus Lizard. (Which is fitting, since a member of the Jesus Lizard was in Rapeman.)

Hmm. I like the Jesus Lizard a lot. Maybe I should give Rapeman another go.

Those are the exact ones i'd pick. :)

:)

Yeah, and then I can be the annoying grizzled guy who goes "Yeah, I heard it about 10 years ago" when some one asks me "omg have u herd the new nirvana song? its kool." It'll be awesome.Lol. Yeah, that would be, especially if it's one that isn't in the Box Set. ("In His Hands", I'm looking at you.)

Hmm. I like the Jesus Lizard a lot. Maybe I should give Rapeman another go.It might be worth it.
Shellac is Steve Albini's newest band, you might like them better.

Lol. Yeah, that would be, especially if it's one that isn't in the Box Set. ("In His Hands", I'm looking at you.)

Is there a studio version of "In His Hands"? I only have a live version...

It might be worth it.
Shellac is Steve Albini's newest band, you might like them better.

I'll give them a look. :)

Hm. I'd say it's the most underrated song, on the 3 albums and 1 comp. (They have more underrated songs on B-sides and on the Box Set).

Their best song, by far, is a cover.
Which one is that?
I really dig 'Kerosene' myself, and I'm pretty sure that's not a cover.
Also 'Stinking Drunk' is pretty cool. Perhaps the best song to psych oneself up on a Friday night for a binge sess.

Probably in part. I've been meaning to get into Big Black but their albums are pretty hard to find.
Go for 'Poor Man's eight track'. It's still in print (or whatever you call it for CDs). It's their 'Best of' and damn good!

Shellac is easier to get hold of. All those albums are still around (I bought 2 off Amazon). Best album (imo) was their first 'At Action Park'. Then there was 1000Hurts and 'Terraform' (or maybe the other way round). Also a John Peel session.
They're just a 3 piece, with a kick-ass bassiest, Albini on lead and a totally derranged drummer.
They also did an awesome version of AC/DC's 'Jailbreak' (ahem, found accidently on-line) but I've no idea what album it's on. None of the three I've got.
Shellac are fantastic live, btw.

Is there a studio version of "In His Hands"? I only have a live version...Yes, it's on the Outcesticide V bootleg. (As is the original version of "You Know You're Right") The recording quality is fairly good, it's a little bit weird at the beginning, but I suppose they could cut it off if they wanted to.

I'll give them a look. :)Oh, and if you like the Jesus Lizard, you'd like Scratch Acid (the band that sorta became the Jesus Lizard).

Oh, and if you like the Jesus Lizard, you'd like Scratch Acid (the band that sorta became the Jesus Lizard).
"Greatest Gift" - kick-ass album!

Go for 'Poor Man's eight track'. It's still in print (or whatever you call it for CDs). It's their 'Best of' and damn good!It's really not a best of, it's a compilation CD like their others, but it does have some of their best songs on it.

("He's a Whore" is the cover I was referring to, by the way.)

"Greatest Gift" - kick-ass album!Yep, I agree. I'd have loved to have been at the Touch and Go Records 25th anniversary celebration thingy. Scratch Acid reunited (once) to play there, then.

It's really not a best of, it's a compilation CD like their others, but it does have some of their best songs on it.

("He's a Whore" is the cover I was referring to, by the way.)

Yep, I agree. I'd have loved to have been at the Touch and Go Records 25th anniversary celebration thingy. Scratch Acid reunited (once) to play there, then.
Really? That would have been uber-cool.
I saw Jesus Lizard a few years back and they rocked.

Wow... I found exactly 7 albums out of that list of 100, that i enjoyed

Really? That would have been uber-cool.Yep. Here was the schedule for the event:
Friday, September 8
9:00pm - !!!
8:00pm - Ted Leo + Pharmacists
7:00pm - Girls Against Boys
6:00pm - Supersystem
5:00pm - The Shipping News

Saturday, September 9
9:00pm - Shellac
8:40pm - Big Black
7:45pm - Man…or Astroman?
6:50pm - Scratch Acid
6:30pm - Sally Timms
6:00pm - Negative Approach
5:40pm - PW Long
4:55pm - Didjits
4:35pm - Jon & Kat (Mekons/The Ex)
3:50pm - Killdozer
2:55pm - The Ex
2:35pm - Tim & Andy (Silkworm)
1:50pm - Pegboy
12:55pm - Uzeda
12:00pm - The New Year

Sunday, September 10
9:00pm - Calexico
8:00pm - Pinback
7:00pm - CocoRosie
6:05pm - The Black Heart Procession
5:45pm - Brick Layer Cake
5:00pm - Seam
4:40pm - Tara Jane O’Neil
3:55pm - Three Mile Pilot
3:00pm - Enon
2:00pm - The Monorchid
1:00pm - Quasi
12:00pm - Arcwelder

I saw Jesus Lizard a few years back and they rocked.<Jealous.> Damn them, why'd they break up?

Has Dylan ever topped Blonde on Blonde?

Yes, the album that was released a year before it was better - Highway 61 Revisited:D

Think about it like this. To anyone currently in their teens to late 20s, are there any bands from our generation that you think will one day be held up in the same echelon as bands like Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones or the Beatles?

Radiohead

Yes, the album that was released a year before it was better - Highway 61 Revisited:D

Maybe, though I have my doubts, but he certainly hasn't done anything since Blonde on Blonde that's topped it. Now, he's Dylan, so even a Dylan in decline is better than 90% of the crap out there, but there's no doubting the decline.

Maybe, though I have my doubts, but he certainly hasn't done anything since Blonde on Blonde that's topped it. Now, he's Dylan, so even a Dylan in decline is better than 90% of the crap out there, but there's no doubting the decline.

I don't know about that. I got a CD from a daughter last year -- Dyan with the Grateful Dead. He was awful. I listened to it once to be polite, then threw it out.

RadioheadPossibly in Britain, I could see that.

Yep. Here was the schedule for the event:
Friday, September 8
9:00pm - !!!
8:00pm - Ted Leo + Pharmacists
7:00pm - Girls Against Boys
6:00pm - Supersystem
5:00pm - The Shipping News

Saturday, September 9
9:00pm - Shellac
8:40pm - Big Black
7:45pm - Man…or Astroman?
6:50pm - Scratch Acid
6:30pm - Sally Timms
6:00pm - Negative Approach
5:40pm - PW Long
4:55pm - Didjits
4:35pm - Jon & Kat (Mekons/The Ex)
3:50pm - Killdozer
2:55pm - The Ex
2:35pm - Tim & Andy (Silkworm)
1:50pm - Pegboy
12:55pm - Uzeda
12:00pm - The New Year

Sunday, September 10
9:00pm - Calexico
8:00pm - Pinback
7:00pm - CocoRosie
6:05pm - The Black Heart Procession
5:45pm - Brick Layer Cake
5:00pm - Seam
4:40pm - Tara Jane O’Neil
3:55pm - Three Mile Pilot
3:00pm - Enon
2:00pm - The Monorchid
1:00pm - Quasi
12:00pm - Arcwelder
DAmn, that's a great line-up. Wonder if there's any live recordings of the show?

Possibly in Britain, I could see that.

Radiohead not big in the US?

They seem to be fairly huge everywhere but there...

Philosophy of the World, by The Shaggs

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that list neglected to mention Pink Floyd.

Philosophy of the World, by The Shaggs

:D

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that list neglected to mention Pink Floyd.

Nope-you're right. Its a poor list and most of us agree on that.

:D

They use it at Guantanamo...

Good. My mouse is being a prick, and I couldn't be bothered TABing my way through all of the responses, so thanks for the update.

I'm of the opinion that list is made of fail and AIDS.

Radiohead not big in the US?

They seem to be fairly huge everywhere but there...Kid A did hit #1 the first week it was released, but then dropped off the charts quickly. Pretty much the only song you can hear on the radio here (in my city) is "Creep".

They use it at Guantanamo...

I wouldn't be surprised if they actually did.

I wouldn't be surprised if they actually did.

I hear that they have a lot of respect for one prisoner who was able to listen to "My Pal Foot Foot" two and a half times before begging to talk.

No Pink Floyd on the list = utter failure

I agree. This list is filth. The nineties section makes me vomit. The only album on that part that deserves it is nevermind. Where's Ten? Dirt? Mellon Collie? Dookie? And as stated before, the ultimate insult. NO DARKSIDE OF THE MOON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Or Metallica!

that list gave me cancer of the anus, Kanye West but no canadian love with Rush? W-T-F???



i mean Kanye West