Reviews (page 6 of 7)
Didn’t grab me like I thought it would. Nothing there to keep my attention, bug I feel I should listen again
Meh. This album is very meh.
Every song reminded me of a better band I could have been listening to instead. Whiskey Woman was the only song I wasn't disappointed by.
Very much "We have The Rolling Stones at home." It's competent blues-inflected rock, but if I only kind of like it when the Stones do it, why would I want the Stones-lite version. It's inoffensive, but there's nothing interesting to say about it. I have no idea why this Asylum Films version of Sticky Fingers is on the 1001 Albums list, it's just so inessential. Just listen to the actual Sticky Fingers instead.
(54/100)
Ooh mer San Franscisco, men fan. Ett album med sån här musik kan inte vara en timme långt. Har inte energi för det
whiskey woman!
Not my cup of tea
old school rocknroll mit Rolling Stones Einfluss. Fand ich nicht gut gemacht, nicht mein Ding.
Mediocre stones cover band
2.5 I think they included the wrong Teenage Head in the book
Not a sound that I'm ever going to get excited about Can't really say anything more than that. I'll forget that this even exists in a couple of days
Трохи дефолтний гаражний рок. Черговий випадок, коли я не викупаю чому цей альбом є тут.
Сильно не моє. Хоча кавер на shakin' all over мені подобається!
Country_aah_type_shit_beat.mp4. Nan plus sérieusement, l'album est correct, avec un mélange de sonorités alternant entre Country, le Blues et le Garage rock. Cela se retranscrit d'ailleurs dans les différentes reprises de l'album, avec à la fois les Rolling Stones avec "Carol", mais aussi les Sonics avec "Walk the Dog". On ressent donc énormément les différentes inspirations qui abreuvent le projet, apportant donc d'une part un répertoire plutôt propre mélangeant reprises, compositions originales et même instrumental, mais aussi un aspect très démodé pour l'année 71, qui a énormément de retard par rapport à la période. En effet, l'album reste composé de sonorités certes stables, mais très datées et vraiment répétitifs, avec une guitare très sale qui construit une seconde mélodie sur la base de licks de blues, avec une voix presque hurlée et une batterie qui comble le tout. En résumé, l'album est un plutôt bon projet, mais beaucoup trop homogène et dépassé à mon goût.
Enjoyed the covers
Sounded like a cover band, I read they were on the outskirts of the psychedelic SF sound bc their manager didn’t get along with -Bill Graham. They went to UK and did a British Invasion. Huh!
pas aimé
Another album that I absolutely did not need to hear before I die. Generic bluesy rock is not my jam.
pretty dull, not doing much for me yet
I liked the tracks until the vocals kicked in.
OK bluesy rock
Didn’t hate Whiskey Woman
Generic 70's rock sound.
It was just fine. I have nothing to say which in a way says a lot.
Didn’t grab my attention
so once again if i wanted to listen to this kinda music i’d just listen to the beach boys… not enjoyable but whatever it’s not offensive
Sounds dated and generic.
Gillade inte set här
Didn’t land with me at all.
Rolling Stonesesque old fashioned blues rock - I don't much care for the stones and I don't much care for this
я не буду слушать этих мужчин. одной песни хватило
I always hope that when an album or band appear that I haven’t heard of before that it’s gonna be good and I will discover something new and awesome that I will start listening to more of. Unfortunately, for me this is not one of those records.
Seemed like this would be kinda fun and different but then it just ended up sounding like generic 70's white guy blues rock. I listened to Mojo Nixon after and I'd give him 10/10 though
This is not an album you absolutely have to listen to before you die because there is many albums out there that sound exactly the same. I am not knocking the band tho the songs are okay.
Found this quite unremarkable tbh
I'm a bit confused...how is this any different than listening to the artists these guys are imitating? Nothing but a lazy rolling stones rip off and a little jab at Elvis? What is the point of this? If I wanted the stones I'll listen to the stones why the hell am I wasting my time on this?? Just because Mick Jagger gave a nod to this the same year STICKY FUCKING FINGERS came out!??! "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" alone dog walks this entire album by a mile. Come on now. How the hell is this siting at a 3/5 ranking when its all shit we've heard before from people with actual talent and longevity? I find it frustrating how often this generator focuses SOOO MUCH on this era of music, primarily rock n roll. I know its iconic and in some instances fundamental to modern music but MY GOD!!! Theres a point where it becomes exhausting,rehashed,and LAZY and this album is the perfect example of that. If all the reviews are saying this sounds like the stones, that isnt a compliment btw. Shows a lack of talent from the group and boredom from the listener. Just a serving of crumbs from someone else's plate.
All a bit cliched really, I remember picking up a Flamin’ Groovies album at Woolworths once and thinking they were shit, this one isn’t that bad but the stand out tracks are the covers and Horslips did a better cover of Shakin’ All Over
Overall a 2. Some catchy songs here but nothing I'm too excited about.
Second side was better than the first.. but overall, just another of a similar kind
Really didn’t enjoy not my thing.
Se me hizo eteeeerno. Capaz es porque dura una hora y entre una cancion y otra tenés apenas una pequeñísima variación. En un punto ya no podía escuchar ese riff, se me hizo insoportable en algunas canciones. No descarto que tenga canciones buenas, pero como álbum se pierden en el montón. La canción que más destaco es Whiskey Woman. Sumado a esto, tampoco siento que tenga algo muy especial que me obligue a tener que escucharlo. Un álbum que tranquilamente podría no haber escuchado y no cambiaría absolutamente nada en mi vida.
I'd say 2.5 I like the country twang and almost wolf mother sound, but I think there are better options
When I saw this band name and album title I assumed it was yet more 90s Britpop that didn't need to be remembered. Instead it was more late 60s psychedelic SF rock that didn't need to be remembered. There's some good entries in both of these genres but most of the ones on this list are not. Thank you 1001 for helping me focus in on what I really don't care for.
Tönt eif s meist nach generischem Rock and Roll
Gsehn kein grund warum das uf dere liste sii muess. S album isch kein classic oder irgendwie revolutionär sondern eif es avg rock album.
Probably the worst white boy blues album on the list that I've listened to.
It started out sounding like the Rolling Stones, at some point near the middle it drifted into sounding like an Elvis tribute band, and by the end it was starting to sound like Vic Reeves club singer in Shooting Stars. It wasn't bad, but there was nothing on there that was amazing. There wasn't even one standout track, like a lot of albums seem to have. It's only 2 stars for me.
I really like the instruments and production, however, at times I really hate the singer, especially in "Teenage Head" and "High Flyin' Baby". How did we go from the vocals on those songs to the Elvis impression on "Evil Hearted Ada"..... Songs I would maybe go back to: - Yesterday's Numbers
Not horrible but not something I'd chose to listen to
A '71 album emulating the 60s... it could have been cool with the right execution, but no, this just sounds bland and uninspired. And my god....... the Elvis impression, it's atrocious...... 🥀🥀
On second listen I was actually able to appreciate some of the country, bluesy, honky tonk style stuff at the beginning of the album but it falls apart so fast.
Fine. Not better than the stones.
Never heard of this group. Probably overshadowed by the plethora of hard rock and UK rock bands from the time. It's an OK album, bluesy rock reminiscent of the Rolling Stones (but not close to the quality of the Stones) with some garage rock elements in the production. Nothing special at the end of the day, however, which can be said for roughly 1/3 of this list.
Best Track - "Yesterday's Numbers"
Not sure how albums like this make it into such a list. Guessing they've skipped a lot of genres to keep stuff like this in
I think as a millennial I'm in a position that I don't enjoy that much these classic rock sound nor the music for the new kids (kids here being "born after 1995").
I was between 2 and 3 on this one. To help break the tie, I recalled that I gave Sticky Fingers a 3, and decided this album can’t be better. Mick Jagger may claim that this album was better than that, but I don’t agree.
Every fiber of my being should love this & some of it, I like. BUT all of this has been before, better, by a ton of other people. Is it on The List because Mick Jagger likes it & it sounds like him? Is it because they are playing songs that The Who played? Or the not so lovely homage to Elvis? Or Oooo a cover of Johnny B Goode re-written to Carol? It's all so derivative. It makes my blood boil to know that this mediocre cover band is on The List but Stevie Ray Vaughn isn't! The Groovies even shoehorned nursery rhymes like Vaughn. I know the Groovies came first but whatever. Not giving this 1 because I like it if I can turn off my brain & pretend I know nothing about music. BUT I can't. 2
Gives some early Stones vibes. Nothing bad about it, but doesn't feel like it stands out in anyway.
I guess this was alright, but theres so many other albums from this era I would sooner recommend. For early 70s rock/blues/rockabilly it was fine, not a fan of the lead singer, too weird and out there. Idk, maybe I'm not a fan of this style of music. I'm surprised to hear Mick Jagger thought this album was better than Sticky Fingers. Whiskey Woman is great. I think you can skip the rest of this album though.
Okay, I would call this very inessential. Not sure what it's doing on the list. Not very interesting and I am not blown away by the sound. I was only vaguely aware of them before, and don't expect to revisit.
Didn't hate it, but didn't really like it much either.
ok :D
I can't think of one single reason why I had to listen to this before I die.
No private session used for Spotify. Definitely hear the Stones is this album, but I have no love for the Stones.
evil hearted ada just completely took me out just what the hell 💀 don't think I'd ever go back to this album, just not super memorable to me
Most of this just feels derivative of Elvis to me. Liked Whiskey Woman at least
It was OK
𝘛𝘦𝘦𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘏𝘦𝘢𝘥 is easy to appreciate historically but harder for me to enjoy. Its raw, Rolling-Stones-styled blend of garage rock and blues just isn’t a sound I connect with, even though the band plays it with real grit and conviction. Still, the album has genuine interest as an overlooked piece of rock history — one of those records that quietly shaped later punk and garage scenes even if it never broke through at the time. Worth hearing once for context, but not something I’d return to.
Boring and unoriginal
The Flamin’ Groovies sound like a band you’d hear at a backyard party with the local kid who thinks he could be a star singing lead vocals. Jokes on me, I guess he did kind of did become one.
Early 70s hipsters. Band was okay, bluesy, nothing special but good enough. The singer, well, I have never heard such a punchable voice.
A souciant of the Rolling Stones in the vocals. Detuned guitar. If I was alive in the 70s and into the stones and zz top I might have this in my music library, assuming I wasn't skeezed out by the album title, which I am now because I'm a dad. Boy these guys are all over the place. I heard a Beatles riff and now the vocals on this song are an Elvis rip off. Louie Louie. Cover band?
If you had told me that this was your friend’s pub band, I would easily believe you. Nothing about this album sounds like something I have to listen to before I die.
Don’t think I ever heard this before. Wouldn’t have missed it.
Not for me, sounds like a lot of the stuff I heard on this list before and honestly i dont think this is a must listening to, my life has been exactly the same before I listen to this record, this is a good stuff if you like this kind of music but nothing revolutionary if you’re looking to expand your music taste. Im sure my dad would have liked it tho.
At it's best I guess it's almost sub-sub(-sub) 'Get off my cloud'-era Rolling Stones. The rest feels a bit covers band, bit dad's in their garage.
Quite unoriginal but not awful, some of the guitar tones were quite nice
70's classic rock - similar to the Rolling Stones. Pitchfork: n/a Rolling Stone: n/a Best Songs
Had its charm but v dated and I won’t listen again.
I was tempted to give this a one as it went on for ages and ended with a load of bad covers. However, I realised that, like so many albums on this list, the version of the of Teenage Head on Spotify was twice as long as the original. As a result, I can't hate it enough to give it a one. Two it is.
I was surprised to see that this is Flamin' Groovies third studio album as it still sounds really garage-y to me. It's a handful of early blues rock songs, some of which aren't bad. Mick Jagger hit the nail on the head in citing the similarity between this album and other early Rolling Stones blues rock. Never heard of Flamin' Groovies and don't expect I'll run into them again in the future. 2.42 stars
I have no idea why this is on this list. There is nothing unique or outstanding about this.
It's just mediocre, simple blues rock and I guess a bit of embryonic punk. Along with the constant comparisons to the Stones, I'll add this. Stones albums usually have 2 great songs, 1 pretty good song, and 6 crappy "white boy blues" songs that are just garbage/filler. This album is all of those discards without any of the experimental or interesting nuggets that the Stones came up with occasionally. I almost turned it off a couple of times, but I'm in for the ride, so let's have it all. At 1 hour long, it's about 45 minutes too long. Sadly none of the good 15 minutes are in the same songs. Although I've bagged on this pretty hard, I'm not giving it a 1. The musicianship is ok. I don't find the singing Annoying. I just think it sounds like a decent bar band. It is NOT something that belongs on such a list. Calling it a 2
frank zappa if he was honky tonk 2.5/5
it was fine, only annoying sometimes
Not for me
I tried but no.
It's not bad, but it did remind me of that Kurt Cobain interview where he took great pride in the fact that Nirvana had never jammed Louie Louie. It's kind of like the punk/garage version of pub rock or something? Sounds like they had a good time making it. Not one i'll be going back to.
Fav song: Whiskey Woman Categorically not for me. Also that song about shooting your girlfriend because you think she cheated on you is just weird lmfao
It’s not a terrible album, but I wasn't really into it. I think Jagger is wrong on this one.
Flamin' Groovies are all over the place in terms of quality on Teenage Head. It's a lot of bluesy rock 'n' roll, which at times, can be fun and often draws comparisons to the Rolling Stones, The Groovies play in a couple different styles under that blues umbrella; some that I found surprising and some I didn't care for. Plenty to like if you're into blues, but it's just not for me. Highlights: "Evil Hearted Ada", "Whiskey Woman"
It's alright but isn't mandatory in any way.
This gives me vibes of The Doors and that's not a good thing. Sounds like a sloppy drunk approximation of the Blues. Whiskey Woman had something going on.
Not sure what I am missing here - sounds like early punk or a lesser Rolling Stones? Pretty solid rock n roll but can’t see myself re-listening to this album
It was OK - don't really know how it could make it into the top 1001 albums of all time..
so the opening track fucking rocks until the lead singer comes in, and that remains true for most of the album, seriously, it sounds like they recorded the vocals using the equivalent of a laptop microphone. I dig rock n' roll blues but this is a miss, it doesnt stand out at all and just apes better artists
Yet another example of “1001 albums is obviously too many for the author to handle”. This album is so aggressively uninteresting. By the time the dog shit Elvis impression started I was out. Please remove this one from future updates and replace it with LUX by Rosalia Lonesome Country by Lord Huron Euro-Country by CMAT Ritual in Repeat by Tennis
This is what The Rolling Stones would have sounded like if they were from the west coast of the USA. I don’t really like The Rolling Stones.
Boring white people making boring RnB rock music was all the rage back then. The album’s just ok I guess; but something just doesn’t hit. There’s nothing to set this apart from and expand on their peers; and it’s dreadfully boring. Vocals and guitars are forgettable. Another 70s album buried and never to be recovered.
Just judging from this album, they seem like they would be a better cover band. Appreciate the proto-punk, power pop, garage rock style and normally like those genres but this album was kinda all over the place. Best Tracks: Whiskey Women, High Flyin' Baby, Have You Seen My Baby 2/5 Stars
Sure, it might be better than Rolling Stones but big whoop
Average at best, poor man's Rolling Stones
Not my cup of tea. They try to be blues, but not well. They try to be rockabilly but not well. Thy try to be new wave , but not well.
Gave me a rolling Stones vibe. Not a bad album
Better than I thought it would be, but still not great.
Meh
Fine! Just did what these things always do.
Misschien ben ik iets te kritisch maar dit is niet echt mn ding
Not my vibe
Early blues with some covers, ok 2.5
Never heard of this band. My tolerance for 60s rock and roll is diminishing. Some interesting songs, the poppier ones I prefer. Otherwise bland. 2.5 rounded down Heard before? No Owned: No: 21/1001, 21/85 (24%) Will I get? No
Best Song: Whiskey Woman. The guitar work here was the best on the album. Worst Song: Evil Hearted Ada. Nobody needs this Elvis impersonation. Overall: This just feels like the Rolling Stones - a band I already don't particularly like - without the hits. I just can't get over how none of the tracks have any of the passion of true blues, nor any of the enery of rock. The worst of both worlds. Mostly boring while being occasionally unpleasant.
Sounds like loud chamomile tea. Not my cup.
I guess if Mick Jagger likes it then it must be good, right? Meh. Not sure how this made the list. 2⭐️
++: Have You Seen My Baby?, 32-20, Evil Hearted Ada, Doctor Boogie +: High Flyin' Baby, City Lights, Yesterday's Numbers, Teenage Head, Whiskey Woman 5,4/10
helt grei rockabilly. tror ikke jeg kommer til å høre noe særlig mer på
Shake Some Action is one of the best songs ever written so I had high hopes for this, but like a lot of other music from the time, the album started strong then fizzled into a bunch of standard covers. Merely fine, and exciting to hear someone say fuck on an album from 1971, but I won’t be returning to this any time soon.
This album really pissed me off
Yeah way too much
This is all fine. A lot of this sounds very modern, I could believe some of these tracks were recorded in the last couple of years. A lot of the tracks sound like other artists, too. Beatles, T Rex, Rolling Stones, loads of garage bands. But it's somehow less than its parts, I was just bored listening, a gut reaction.
Dreary. 2
I think this was a pretty OK rock ‘n’ roll/blues/country style, it really reminded me a lot of the Rolling Stones. Only thing is, I don’t see myself really revisiting this, I didn’t think it sounded much different or memorable enough to revisit. 2 to 3 stars is good.
Whisky Woman er dritbra. Minner litt om de beste låtene til Stones. Resten av skiva svinger mellom helt grei og ganske døll. I 1971 er dette allerede pastiche; muzak for en 50s themed diner. Jeg kan se meg selv på konsert med dem. De er det lokale bandet som spiller musikken de vokste opp med. Fansen deres vrikker løs når de drar High Flying Baby. Jeg synes reaksjonen er litt overdreven, men prøver å nikke på hodet for å ikke se sosiopatisk ut. Fem låter senere orker jeg ikke å late som mer og drar.
Det er ikke vits å høre på Stones når man har dette! Nå er det heller ikke noe vits å høre på Stones i utgangspunktet…
Not bad, but this exact album has been on this list fifty times, man.
Another really forgettable album. I wasn't a fan of this one much
This album is so similar to The Rolling Stones its crazy. Unfortunately I don't love this style.
:/
It was decent but felt quite generic. There were no unique songs / melodies / conceps, just the same generic background music. I think it may have been a product of its time but listening to it now just felt a bit dated
I don't really see why this one is a fundamental listen, it's pretty straightforward rock and roll. I didn't find it too good, just average. The instrumentals are on par for 70s garage rock, nothing really stood out. I liked 2 songs, the most popular ones: "Yesterday's Numbers" and "Whiskey Woman". Edit: The wiki page says this record was praised by Mick Jagger as supposedly being a "better take" than Sticky Fingers on blues/rock n roll. By luck, the next album I got was Sticky Fingers, and I'm sorry but there is no way Teenage Head is anywhere near Sticky Fingers. I'm sure Jagger was just being nice to them, but anyone who isn't deaf can see Sticky Fingers is a far superior album.
The second half of Whiskey Woman is really neat. The rest of the album did not stand the test of time for me.
Is the inclusion of this album simply "isn't it weird this came out at the same time as a much better album by a more famous band?" It's fine for what it is, but what it is isn't particularly noteworthy.
Its okay, its a standard rock album. Find it similar to the Rolling Stones
Day 26 First listen- A decent album, I really liked the guitar and the drums but not very memorable for my taste. (2.5/5)
Excellent last track but mediocre rest of the Album.
Not my thing, it's fine but just kind of generic. 2/5 stars.
Mid-50's revivalism in the early 70's? Sounds kinda anachronistic. I don't understand the deal with this.
I wasn't able to listen to it till the end. Maybe it's good for listening to on the background but idk, something is wrong with it for me
Just kinda bleh throughout, nothing stuck out to me as overly significant or impactful. The mix is also just quiet and muddy and the music is bland.
Their third album. Rock / Psychedelic Rock / Blues. As soon as the opening track, High Flyin', kicked in I immediately thought Rolling Stones ! Also some Elvis rips here too. It's a decent enough album. Standard Rock n Roll and Blues riffs. They do a Shakin' All Over cover which is nowhere near as good as the original.
it's like ok. I like the artist name though!
Pa ono, nije najgori album, ali ni ništa prenapeto. Neka glazba za konobu utorkom navečer da se vrti u pozadini 😁 2/5, 3/10
Questionable lyrics about gay people
Started out ok, kinda country-punky, but it got old fast and soon I couldn't wait for it to be over. The only song I considered above average was Whiskey Woman.
Certainly has a Rolling Stones vibe to some of the tracks and I don't like The Stones either.
"Teenage Head" serves as a garage band's take on classic rock n roll, and delivers as expected. The singer's vocal style starts off grating, but over the course of the album settles into a more palatable tone. This is an album that could have been great, but a few shortcomings lead it to just okay.
it’s hard for me to think of bands that have more undeserved imitation than The Rolling Stones
I did not know this band. Run of the mill Rock & Roll garage band
Another attempt at American critics finding a great American rock band. Nope. They’re good. But they’re not better than the stones. Where did mick say that? There’s rock here, but when was the last time you played this? And when was the last time you played the stones? Or given this or the stones for eternity what would you take? 2.5 rounded down because critics.
Bog standard and boring.
Старый рок-н-ролл, не самый лучший
A LOOOTTT of this album is just... super annoying to me. Like a cosplay or parody of other, better musicians.
Not terrible but probably something I won't listen to, very Status Quo-y
Mish mash
Pretty standard late 60's early 70s rock. Did not intrigue me.
Was there a Hamilton band called Teenage Head?
Clearly heavily inspired by the Rolling Stones. Not a bad thing necessarily, but would expect something more interesting than a Stones knock-off album to make this list. Best Tracks: - Whiskey Woman Worst Tracks: - Evil Hearted Ada Rating: 4/10
Rock n Roll. Nichts besonderes. Vielleicht prägt es den Übergang zu härteren Rock, aber ich bezweifel es.
This album should have stayed in the 70's. The songs lack proper endings, with almost all of them fading out in volume, which feels like the guys don't know how to properly end a song. The music itself is uninspired and fails to leave a lasting impression. I will not be listening to this album again.
This is #day272 of my #1001albumsyoumusthearbeforeyoudie challenge, and... here's to some old school garage rock and rock'n'roll, baby. I imagine this as something Iggy Pop would spin on his Confidential show on BBC Radio 6 Music. Have you heard the show? I like to tune in now and then. So yeah, that's the kind of setting where I wouldn't mind hearing this. Outside of that, I'd pass, I guess. This is a 2 out of 5. Looking forward to #day273.
knock off even worse Elvis
Sjovt nok, svært at høre hvor seriøst det er meningen man skal tage det.
Not feeling it
So, if this gets on this list I can expect to see some Status Quo, yes? Piledriver at least? This is perfectly fine rock and roll. But there's nothing stand out on this. Seems like it's on the list because of what Jagger said about it. He was probably wrong. Just doesn't seem to fit on this list at all.
The Rolling Stones despite their greatness have never been my go to band. So a Rolling Stones tribute band have no chance. 2/5 25/4/25 Lots of 2 and 5’s there. Will have to remember that next month.
Fine yet forgettable 70s grooves
Good guitar riffs and terrible lyrics
Not very outstanding
Everything here sounds like the soundtrack to a bad parody movie. Band name and titles included.
M'eh. Let's just put this album in the "Sounds like everything else" box.
Als dit in de bar opkomt doe ik echt dekseltje over mn drinken
Yesterday’s Numbers was good but I mostly found myself wanting to listen to something else
Like the worst parts of The Rolling Stones mixed with a little Elvis mixed with *insert generic 60s/70s psychedelic sound here*. And too damn long
Gear: Dunu SA6 Artwork: 🎸😎🚬 Production: 🫢🤔💩 Music: 🙄🥱🤷♂️ Rating: 👨🚒(👩🚒)/5
Obviously shades of the Stones and others of that era/style with some moments of Elvis and Cash. My top tracks were Have You Seen My Baby and Whiskey Woman. Overall good though didn’t find it anything particularly memorable or special. (2.5 stars)
Sorry boys, but I simply did not enjoy this. It felt very same same to other, better music I had heard. A+ band name tho.
If I worked for a publication and they asked me to compile a list like this and I came back with so many albums full of covers I'd expect to be fired on the spot.
yeeeeeeeeeeha
Un rock básico, pasable, que no destaca mucho.
A couple fun songs, particularly in the first half but most of them were so corny.
I didn’t like it. It was folky in a bad way to me.
Aren't I done with this stupid project and all its stupid mediocre rock albums yet *checks* *994 albums rated* uuuuugghh
Acceptable background noise
Nothing makes me sadder than seeing today’s album be another 70s classic rock. At least this one was a bit more bluesy so I’ll give it credit there. But it’s another pass.
2.5 Fine, I guess. Lots of covers of songs done better by other people. The lead's voice is annoying. If this is supposedly better than the Rolling Stones album, why is that also on the list? Why are there also 5 more Rolling Stones albums on the list? 1001 albums to cover the entire breadth of all music released from the beginning of time, and we have to listen to 5-10 albums each of this guy's favorite 15 bands. I'm sure I will get angrier about this as I move forward.
Okay album. I wasn’t sure what to expect with a band name of “Flamin’ Groovies” but it was not too bad. It was a bluesy rock for several songs, country rock in places and rockabilly in others. I came away with the feeling that they had a big following in their hometown and surrounding areas but never really made the transition to the “big time”. Glad to have heard this album but I won’t return to it. I was torn between a 2 and a 3 for this one so erring on the side of caution.
Maybe it's here so we can recognize the evolution of the music business that went from "mick jagger thinks a rip-off band is better than his in 71" to "Mick Jagger will take all of your royalties for a loose similarity of your hit song in 96" Otherwise I guess this is just ok
About as milk toast as any other Stones knock off band I guess. The Flamin' Groovies are neither flamin', nor groovy on this sloppy garage-dad-band of a record, but some of the songs would be a good time at the pub after a few cold ones.
probably cause I'm not in the mood for this rn
Blah
Unique.
Tedious
Not that interesting
Lyrics: 2/5 Music: 2/5 Production: 2/5 Cohesiveness: 2/5 Overall: 2/5 Stand out songs: City lights
If George Thorogood started a shitty late-career Doors cover band, they would call themselves Flamin’ Grooves. City Lights had a blue-eyed bluesy drift to it. Evil Hearted Ada could have been the song Elvis was singing before he crapped himself to death. I found that most of this album you could randomly advance the scroll bar and it didn’t change the song. Overall, like drinking absinthe, I don’t regret listening but I won’t be doin’ that again.
This one was okay, I was surprised when I looked up the reviews and saw how good they were when this album came out. It just felt like standard garage-rock/british invasion sound, like they were trying to be the Rolling Stones. I wouldn't listen to this one again.
Je ne vois vraiment pas l'attrait de cet album. Chaque pièce sonnait comme si le band essayait de reproduire le son d'un autre de leurs contemporains (ex : RS, Eagles). 3/10
I had a huge review typed in here that appears to now be lost. My main thesis is that they sound like a really good bar band (and that's based on their originals, not the extra covers at the end). You could pick Grateful Dead vocals, Elvis, Rockpile, and a bunch of other similarities out of their music. I'm not accusing them of copying, just of not having a strong identity. They get a 2 because they annoyed me - they are so close to being something perfect to me and they just kept not being.
It’s fine - I was honestly expecting a garage rock or proto punk album based on the cover and my preconceived notions about this band. Kinda underwhelming blues rock when you actually listen. I’d probably end up playing Sticky Fingers by the Rolling Stones rather than this.
Not great, not too bad. Wasn’t too excited by the vocalist- meh.
jahas yllpidolla metkupäällä, metkut pyärii päässä hmm mitäs tehtäis seuraavaksi juksuttae mites juksutellaan et-tajuu-viela tyyppiä (VIHAAN SITÄ.. NIIN VITUSTI...) ja sitten laittaa näitä kuravesi 70-alkupoppia kymmenen peräjälkeen kongajonoon ulvomaan. ei pahemmin ole sitä pysymisvoimaa tällä teoksella mutta ilmeisesti tarpeeksi että päässyt kirjaan mukaan juhlimaan. hohhoijjakkaa tämä oltaisiin unholaan voitu jättää, en vihaa toki.. en vihaa.. no hate here.. .im not hating im just asking questions... love their refusal to jump on the bandwagon of the times???????????????????????? se kysymys tässä kontekstissa on että kuka vittu tuon kirjoitti blruuuuh.. minä tiedän ehkä vähän paremmin näistä asioista ja kyseenalaistan kommenttia. anyway teenage head.... teen teen head... city lights
Deeply, thoroughly inessential.
I didn't even get halfway through. It was competent blues rock, but it just sounded like the Rolling Stones without the panache.
It's not Rolling Stones, and it's not something I would listen to without being forced. So unfortunately, I will just quietly move on.
on a streak of boring albums
vintage bluesy good-times pervert rock has really never been my thing, i gotta be real, and this record does nothing interesting to make me reassess my bias
2.5
There’s a real garage band sound going on, not in a good way. Amazon initially took me to a completely different album by them, so I’ve listened to 2 of these to come to this conclusion.
Albums like this remind me about the fact, that not every album from this list is great. Cause I definitely didn't have to listen to this before I die. It's incredibly mediocre. I don't want to listen to albums like this.
Good old classic blues rock, not the best of it's kind. It's neither good nor bad. There're are some good basslines and arrangements. Decent, but to be fair, it doesn't age well. However, I'm kind of into this genre so I'd give it a 3 for personal bias.
an album like this really makes it obvious how this dude just made up a list of almost random “significant” records cobbled from other sources and peppered with contemporary critical favourites in order to seem “relevant”. all well and good but makes the whole enterprise a bit of a slog
A couple of interesting came out of this for me. One, I noted another Randy Newman writing credit, on Have You Seen My Baby? The guy’s fingerprints are everywhere! Two, it led me to discover the Flamin’ Groovies’ song Shake Some Action, which is rather, ahem, groovy. Unfortunately none of the songs that are actually on this album are as good as that, with the possible exception of Whiskey Woman. 2.5
There is little I hate more than a steel guitar. I despise this.
I love blues rock, so this was a good album to listen to. That said, I don’t know that it really belongs on this list. There wasn’t anything terribly distinctive, and the style is well represented by other albums from bands with a much more lasting impact on the industry. I say cut this for something underrepresented
What a boring and forgettable album! Most generic rock I can think of, nothing special whatsoever. Didn't sound particularly good either compared to some other '70s albums. Maybe it was influential back then, I don't know, but it certainly drowns in the sea of good rock available from that era. Giving it a weak 2 out of lack of inspiration and fun-ness. Only thing saving it from a 1 was that it doesn't sound as outright bad as some other 1s we've had.
Reading wikipedia I found out the covers at the end were not a part of the original album (which is a good thing) and it was released the same year as "Sticky Fingers" by "The Rolling Stones" which puts this album in to the context that maybe this was quite a newish sound when it came out. To modern ears it sounds quite generic blues rock. I really liked "Whiskey Woman" but the rest just felt your standard rock and blue band playing at their local pub.
This album just really doesn't do it for me. It's so bland and unoriginal, yet it also manages to be dissonant and unmelodic. There are so many much better 70s rock albums out in the world, and even on this list, and there is absolutely no reason that this album should be in the book.
Average garage rock
not bad but wouldn’t call it good. too many bland albums like this on this list tbh
The worse Rolling Stones. 2.375
Average blues rock album
Yeah not bad some odd songs though
Wasn't expecting to hate this, but the singer's *affect* really grated on me. Otherwise unremarkable 60s rock. Not for me.
I feel like. This is fine
I don't know. I could appreciate what they were going for more than I could actually enjoy it if you know what I mean. I would give it a 2.5 if I could. I'm rounding down because I really just didn't care for this all that much and by the time the last song hit I was quite done with it.
Not bad for the era. A little too rockabilly, but a fun little record.
Not interested.
Very 80s US bluesy rock inspired by 50s rock. Not crazy about 50s rock so those influences leave me colder. I liked some of the songs a lot like whisky woman (such a doors title and vibe) and city lights - a bit slower more of a pensive bluesy twangy guitar vibe. Probably won’t put this on again but wouldn’t mind hearing it.
And here I thought there was nothing worst than The Rolling Stones...
Not very memorable.
Its as if the rolling stones were born in the south of the USA, but not as good.
Mediocre. Not mad or anything, but I would probably never listen to this again of my own accord
Pretty 'meh' bluesy garage rock. I don't have much to say, least of all anything interesting, because I didn't really notice anything special. I guess that for the time they went against the mainstream some, but I don't see this album as being particularly important in music history. Or really a notable one at that. The music is fine and pleasant enough with it's rock n' roll/rockability vibes. Maybe it's just not really my genre? Either way: Not sure why it's on the list, but I don't hate it. It's unlikely that it will ever come up for me ever again though Standouts That'll Be the Day 2/5
3/10 No thanks, this isn't what we ordered. you can take it back to the kitchen now. 7-24-2024
If I closed my eyes and concentrated, I’d think I was listening to the Rolling Stones. Or maybe that’s wishful thinking.
Decent blues rock but for the era of Yardbirds, and so many others, this feels like the Dollar Store version.
It's almost like this album is boring or something. OH WAIT, IT IS ANOTHER BORING 70's ALBUM! This album is so uninteresting and has no identity of its own.
Underwhelming
It's okay
enjoyable music-music but nothing my brain will retain after a week
Q: How many Stones licks can one garage band rip off on one side? A: Too many to count. Yes, this rocks and would seem easy to like, but in totally derivative fashion (including both covers and originals). One doesn't have to like it just because Greil Marcus thought enough of this lot to write about them (or one song anyway). Plus, the idiotic name, for which rounding down. 2.5 > 2
Ziemlich nervig
Thought the R&B music vibes throughout this album were really good. Some of it reminiscent of The Stones in an inferior kind of way though. Vocally I thought it was very weak, especially the harmonies. Think it was a live recording and it's the first time I have listened to this band in fairness. Overall not bad. Would have given it more stars if I had liked the vocals more
Never heard of this. The wiki said it was a better version of the stones blend of white boy rock and blues. A couple of run throughs just confirmed this was a mostly correct statement, except it's not better. It could be the same or worse.
Blir bara en svag tvåa.
Musically was pretty good but some of the lyrics were questionable. Specifically the part about fantasizing about high schoolers. Probably will never go back to listen.
Not for me, wasn’t really feeling this. Didn’t feel fresh to me, and I thought the lyrics were lame
not bad but not for me. I'd rather listen to zz top
Nothing wrong with doing old music as long as you bring something new to the table which this album doesn’t do. This is just “here is a cool blues riff” and “here is a neat rockabilly song” for thirty minutes. The title track gets close to something new, but other than that, it’s basically a cover record. I’m glad that you discovered a bunch of cool old songs that you like, but if that’s all you have to say then just make a mix tape.
It's fine, but sounds rather Rolling Stones derivative and uninspiring
BORING! I was quite up for this. They're groovy right? I like that! But actually, I don't like hearing garage band covers of old rock 'n' roll standards and not very good musicality. Get a few marks for the opener and the Whisky one (I'm unwilling to even check the track listings, such is my disdain).
Ok I'm sorry it this sounds so so dated and rusty. It's like what somebody's dad calls "the underground music".
Flamin Groovies didn’t really pick a lane with this…sometimes it’s similar to The Rolling Stones, a few songs have a NY early-punk vibe, and then there’s some bluesy slide guitar à la Jack White. Interesting if not entirely compelling.
Unremarkable
Not really my thing. It is a bluesy rock n roll thing but still it is a bit to rough for me.
En oikein jaksa blues rock Oli tässä yks hyvä biisi: Whiskey woman
Sounds like every other blues/psychedelic rock band (and album) from the era, except this is even less memorable than usual.
the flaming groovies' teenage head isn't the most engaging music, but it also wasn't terrible. an album that's easy to forget. the garage rock with some blues aspects stood out some. at least it didn't stand out enough in such a negative way?
A band I had never heard of before. This was fine, average blues rock. They reminded me a lot of the Rolling Stones in their sound. Overall, this just didn't really hit me in any kind of special way. Not offense, but not great.
Started off fine and was Rolling Stones-y but I got a little sick of it.
Кантри психодел что-то Я хз, местами я смеялся в голос с того, что я не понимал что за херню я слушаю) А местами мне было приятно Алкоальбом: пиво 387
Ну. Это сильно конечно, но чёт подзадолбало, Периодически было ощущение, что я начинаю вдуплять и втягиваться в вайб, но звук чёт прям ужасный. Наверное под пивас можно было бы втащиться, прям представляю себя где-то в баре с ковбойской шляпой... хер знает почему со шляпой.
Nothing amazing, but it’s nice to hear stuff from bands I’ve never heard of.
Meh
Pretty cool sound. I wasn't expecting the Beatles-y sounding tracks (like "Have You Seen My Baby?") or the twangy folk country tracks (like "City Lights") or the Johnny Cash / Elvis tracks (like "Evil Hearted Ada") or the Neil Young tracks (like "Whiskey Woman") or the Rolling Stones tracks (like "Walkin' the Dog"). The more I listen the more I think this is like a medley album that pays homage to these artists, and the more I think about it the more I think it's not a great album. I feel like there's such a lack of consistency between the tracks that if I avert my attention away from the music for a few minutes, my subconscious brain would probably process this as a local dad rock band (nothing against dad rock!) that is trying to cover other famous artists and genre hops to the best of their ability. Then when it gets to the cover of "That'll Be the Day" all I can think of is "yea this is the point in the local VFW town BBQ where the band comprised of 60+ year old Knights of Columbus members starts playing covers- where every member plays the songs to the "t", everyone in the band sings, and there's no added substance or fun or energy added. Doing a deeper dive into the subgenre's of this list (curated by Spotify, not by me), we're currently at 526 albums generated, and the top subgenre is Rock with 211 entries, then Classic Rock with 125. In a list that is utterly filled with blues rock / classic rock, I really don't think this addition is worth it. Does this compare to The Who, Bruce Springsteen, David Bowie, Aerosmith, Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones, The Doors, Creedence, Pink Floyd, etc etc.? No, and it's not even close. I want to give it a 1 but I feel like it's a 1.8 for me which is way too high for a 1.
Meh
A poor man's Rolling Stones. And you know how I feel about the Rolling Stones...
Good ... but it seems old hat. The songs don't exactly push the boundaries of rock. Think "The Cramps" without the kitsch, or the fun.
Well, that was interesting! 1st song starts out good - and then he sings! I almost stopped it right there, well, actually I did. But I tried another, and City Lights was different, and pretty good. But it kept bouncing around, like they just didn't know WHAT to play. By the end of the album they are playing older songs, and they do them well. I know, Mick Jagger heard them and like 'em. But I'm not going to add this to my must listen list.
Ikkje da mest minneverdige eg har hørt fra den epoken
Rockabilly!
Was ok, but the penultimate song was super creepy, so minus a star for that.
Aufgeregt langweiliger Garage Rock.
Favorite Tracks: Whiskey Woman Have You Seen My Baby 32-20
I dunno, if you like blues and rock you’ll get something out of it but if that’s not your go to? Then there’s not much here.
This is fine, but that's all it is. All the best tracks are covers, and having this many covers highlights the shortcomings of the originals. Adding to that it's a bit sloppy sounding in parts I probably wouldn't listen again.
Had fun, did t really stick with me
Predictably average country rock. The best songs were covers.
Standard 70's blues/rock, nothing special here
not great, the spotify bio suggests there might be some groove, or blues to this, but there isn't - it's pretty much sub Stones pub rock garbage
As it stands, I felt incredibly lukewarm about it. I'd definitely have to be in the right mood for it
I couldn't get into this band/album. I had never heard of Flamin' Groovies before and I doubt I'll hear about them after today which begs the question why they are on this list to begin with.
I never liked the Stones. And I don't like this. So I suppose their connection through Jagger's thoughts on this album makes sense. It's well put together and all. It's just empty and doesn't elicit any excitement from me. I am sure had I been a teen in '71, I would feel different.
Udmærket rock, lidt psyk/blues vibes, ikke helt oppe at ringe
First few songs were decent but the rest of the album was awful
Why are the most bland/uninteresting albums the longest? Not sure what the significance of this LP is, especially to merit inclusion here. It's decent blues rock, but I'd wager good money it was far from the first LP to sound this way and there are 100 others out there that are better executed. Only thing I can guess is this is the first recorded example of butt rock, otherwise I've got nothing
not bad
Long and annoying.
1. high flying baby - 1 2. city lightz - 1 3. have you zeen my baby - 1 4. yezterdayz numberz - 1 5. teenage head - 1 6. 32 -20 - 1 7. evil hearted ada - 1.5 8. doctor boogie - 1 9. uuhizky uuoman - 1.5 10. zhaking all over - 1 11. thatll be the day - 1.5 12. louie louie - 1.5 13. uualking the dog - 1 14. zcratch my back - 1 15. carol - 1.5 16. going out theme - 1
You know, every album I've listened to for a project has given me some reason to say, "Yeah, I could see this being one of the top 1000 or so most important albums to listen to." Whether the artist and/or album has an iconic legacy, the ties to a specific genre or music movement give it historical value, or the album is just really good, these albums (for the most part) all make sense to be on this list. Teenage Head by Flamin' Groovies does not make sense to be on this list. Between Wikipedia, Apple Music, and the description on this very website, the only thing of value that I gathered about this album is that Mick Jagger liked it. That's it. But hey, something doesn't have to be popular to deserve recognition. Maybe this album is really good to give it that value. Well, if you're looking for a really good album, look somewhere else. This album has two songs that I thought were decent (Yesterday's Numbers and Whiskey Woman). The others made me feel practically nothing. While this album isn't horrible or anything, and I didn't feel any true negativity while listening to this, I can not find a good reason as to why this should be considered for this list. 2/5. The first of this project.
Yet again not sure how essential this is. Certainly has some fun moments, but it's also kinda silly and lyrically lame. 2.5/5 Fav track: Whisky woman
Nope, boring rehashes of far better artists with far more personality. More songs about underage girls. One and a half. Favourite track: City Lights
Not really my kind of thing. Close though. 70s blues/rock can be ok but I'd probably rather just have either blues, or rock.
Some good covers, but otherwise not for me.
meh.
The opening song was fun but the rest of the album just didn’t change and got very old very quickly
Louie Louie only song
Sounds like a local cover band. Nothing special here