This is the dreamy kind of music that sounds pleasant while it's playing, but it doesn't really go anywhere and you forget what each song sounded like as soon as it's ended.
After listening to parts of the first 6 tracks I have concluded that the atrocious vocals make the record completely unlistenable. The instrumental parts aren't great either - partially OK but too repetitive to sustain interest throughout an entire track. I also gave the previous PIL album 1 star, and hope this was the last one.
Liked it from the first song (the only one I already knew) but it grew on me even more throughout the album. Just enjoyable rock songs on the surface, but very playful and occasionally quite technical instrumentation underneath. Reminds me a lot of a less folky version of America or a more playful version of The Eagles. No idea Why I wasn't more familiar with them before, but I'll definitely listen to more Steely Dan. [Update: spent the next two hours listening to more Steely Dan]
I seem to be mostly alone with this opinion, but here goes: I find Led Zeppelin overrated. That said, this is still a really good album. I like it much better than the other two LZ albums we've had. And Stairway To Heaven and When The Levee Breaks are great songs. But I really can't see this as a masterpiece and tracks 5-7 were pretty weak.
This one was incredibly weird for a whole number of reasons (most of which should be pretty obvious if you listen to the album). Another way in how it's weird is how good and interesting and varied the music is under all of the layers of weirdness and showmanship. Most glam rock just tends to be style over substance in my opinion. But these guys manage to do both. Not only does this album sound like it must have been hugely influential for a wide range of new wave, synth pop and rock bands, but it also still sounds really fun and good today on its own merits. I did need a few tracks until I could start to wrap my head around the style and I'm sure it will hit me differently when I listen to it a second time, but I am absolutely going to do just that.
Fantastic classic. Always was very good, still is
Really boring. Not annoying as such, but I can't imagine this as anything else but background music.
Pretty good, some interesting guitarplay. Never heard of them before!
Sort of confused by this one. Very pleasant background listening during work though.
Oh for fuck's sake. I don't want to listen to this during Christmas time. Definitely miss me with this.
This one is pretty weird. The music sort of sounds like "bad guy songs" from Disney movies (just with more alcohol in the lyrics). I sort of liked it though, fun to listen to.
Punk music always gives me the urge to roll my eyes. During the first song I thought "this isn't too bad", but by song 8 I was completely annoyed and stopped listening.
Not the best music to concentrate to, but I enjoyed it. It has a special sort of intensity all its own. Reminded me a lot of Stevie Nicks and some of the wilder Fleetwood Mac songs. The My Generation live cover at the end was really shitty though.
I guess it's OK. It didn't really annoy me, but it didn't really interest me in any way either, so I stopped midway through because it's on the long side.
I really liked. It's pretty much the same as The Cure or even The Smiths to me, but well, I really like those too.
So far I only knew Common People by Pulp, a song I really love. Turns out, I very much enjoyed the rest of the album too! Will probably check out other albums by Pulp :-)
I'll admit I enjoyed the album a lot better than I'd expected. Maybe because it didn't contain the high-pitched screeches I associated with Judas Priest. The lyrics are really extremely ridiculous to the point of being hilarious. Of course this was long before the app Grindr, but coincidentally (?) the song Grinder is full of lines that could be understood as metaphors for homosexual promoscuity "Never straight and narrow", "Got no use for routine", "Grinder, looking for meat". Although presumably not intended (?), this added to my enjoyment of the album.
Never listened to Björk before and had no idea what to expect, but I absolutely loved it. I found her voice tantalizing and the music both relaxing and stimulating. I will absolutely listen to this and other Björk albums again. Actually, I'm going to listen to another Björk album right now.
Had it's moments. And I do like Wonderwall. But on the whole it's very "meh".
Didn't sound bad. Didn't sound particularly interesting either though.
It's OK, but not something I can really enjoy. The singing is a bit annoying to me. The guitars sound pretty good initially, but they get very samey very quickly. The drumming is good. On the whole, there was way too little variation within individual songs and they were too long. The album wasn't so bad, but very unvaried and I didn't feel like it, so I only listened to half.
This one was a bit strange to me. It's a 3 not because all of it is pleasantly mediocre, but rather I found half of the album (the more punkish songs) pretty annoying and would like to give them a 2, but also I enjoyed half of the album (the more oldschool rock songs) quite a lot and would like to give those a 4. So here's a 3 for the whole thing.
Another weird one. There are parts that I quite dislike, but other parts are made interesting through the use of different kinds of instruments and fusions with various other styles of music.
Bittersweet Symphony is pretty much a masterpiece of a song. The rest of the album also had a lot more depth than I expected and I found myself thoroughly enjoying it. Just good music, good songwriting, sufficient variety and finally just a very good album!
Never heard of them before and had negative preconceptions based on the band name but there's no two ways about it: I loved it. I'm not sure why I loved, since it's very rare that I enjoy electronic music and even rarer that I enjoy rap/hiphop. Somehow this album hits my sweet spots for both genres. I found myself dancing along on my chair from the first track. Will definitely spend the rest of the afternoon listening to more by Stereo MCs.
Never consciously listened to Duran Duran before. Really liked the album. Sounds pretty modern for its time!
Damn, who knew that 3 minute songs can take so incredibly long. It's a very easy 1, but at the same time still much better (or less bad) than I had expected. Nonetheless, it's sooooooo boring. I didn't last 3 full songs.
Why do people like this. Why do people listen to this. Why. Why. It's still incomparably better than something like Wu-Tang Clan or Bob Marley though.
Nothing much to say. Completely uninteresting and sometimes bordering on annoying. At least it was pretty short.
Live albums :-( I really like Johnny Cash and the songs are so good that this would be an easy 5 if it were studio recordings. The live versions still get a 4 from me. But I really don't understand why anyone would prefer to listen to the live versions over studio ones.
I listened to the first track and half each of the next two. It's not that it sounds really horrible (although it does sound completely improvies), but it's way too distracting for work.
I liked this one a lot better than the other CCR album I got from this album generator. This one seems somehow 'swampier', but it also has more variety and more experimentation in the songs. This sets it apart from just being more highly polished radio-friendly standard rock-fare. Just a really good album, loved listening to it.
Yeah, no. I stopped during the third song. So not for me.
Just slightly disappointed that this album is not about man asses. That aside, the album didn't disappoint at all. It's just simply good rock music. What sets it apart is the variation within the album, the wide range of influences Stills infuses his rock with and the fact that no matter what style he mixes in, it all sounds good. My favorite track is the final, bluesy song of the album.
Nope. Stopped after a couple of songs. Would get a headache if I listen to much more. It's just chaotic noise to me.
Not much to say, very standard country music with some slight rock touches. I enjoyed listening to it during work, but don't think I'd actively listen to it in other contexts. The rating is generously rounded up from a 3.5
Pretty split on this one. Some of the songs are really good, such as the London Calling and Wrong 'Em Boyo, Lover's Rock, Train in Vain, basically all of the more post-punk songs. On the other hand there are the punk rock songs which aren't quite as bad for me as most punk, but I still hate punk, no two ways about it. Basically it's a 4 for the post-punk parts and a 1.5 for the punk parts, rounded up to a 3.
Hm, strange one. I liked the instrumentation as pretty good ambient background music. The vocals were quite a mixed bag. Really hated the track with the high-pitched vocals. Can't say with that was, they blended together too much for me.
This definitely doesn't sound like what I expected from the album title. It actually sounds a lot worse (and my expectations were already extremely low, mind you). Instead, it sounds more like the band name. Horrible. Please no more. I didn't even last two full songs. I skipped through it a bit to hear what the rest sounds like though. Didn't seem to get any better.
Not something I would actively choose to listen to, but very interesting to hear once. Enriching to know about this music, but I won't listen to it again.
Surprisingly good. I especially liked some of the more subtle touches underneath what could pass for pretty standard rock-fare on a superficial listen. The cover art is pretty weird for a music album - I wonder how it affected sales numbers.
First time I listened to a Bad Company album in its entirety although I already knew quite a few of the songs. There isn't all too much to say about the album. It's very good, but at the same time it's very standard rock-fare and just not interesting enough for a 5.
Pretty good. Very good voice. Not remarkable enough to listen to regularly, but very nice for the background and definitely something I could listen to again, especially within larger playlists.
This one surprised me a bit. I expected it to be 0-star level atrocious. Instead it was actually very decent and I even really enjoyed a couple of tracks. I absolutely hated the "skits" and interludes. Luckily there were less of those as the album went on. And admittedly I didn't read up on the lyrics and didn't pay attention to them. But from the scraps I consciously heard here and there I suspect I might possible have rounded the album down to a 2 if I actually read them... But instead I'm rounding up because it changed some of my preconceptions and that's a good thing.
Pretty nice. Classical soul infused with funk and jazz elements. I particularly liked Runaway Child.
I like this kind of music, but it seems like the makers of this list like it a tad too much. We've already had a couple of similar albums that were much better.
Like the previous Doors album from this list it's simply a very good album. Not much more to say - just good music.
Interesting, strange, at times intriguing, at times serene. A nice background album that sometimes captivates the mind and sometimes lets it wander.
I think how I rate this album in particular could be wildly different depending on the day and my mood. Today it really matched my vibe during work and was fantastic as accompanying background music.
I quite like Running Up That Hill. The rest of the album was sort of mixed bag, but in the end just not really spectacular enough to really grab my attention.
Very good, I liked it quite a lot. The only track I knew so far was Wild World but that turned out to be one of the weakest tracks of the album.
My expectations for this one were rather low, as I had a low opinion of Slipknot back when I was still a metalhead (considered them a sellout, etc). Turns out, this album sounds a lot better than I expected. I particularly enjoyed the drumming and the variation in instrumentation and song structure. I'm not too big on growling anymore these days, so I liked the less-growly songs such as Wait And Bleed better. Also not too big on the rap in songs such as Spit It Out. All in all this was a positive surprise though.
What is this even supposed to be? Definitely not for me.
The difference between the hits and the chaff of this album is huge. There are a few real five star songs on here such as Take On Me and The Sun Always Shines On TV. On the other hand, the rest of the songs are just really boring to the tune of two stars. I'd really like to give this four stars because those two good songs are so good. But they really are the only ones.
Of course I knew The Velvet Underground by name, I know the famous banana image and I've definitely heard a couple of the songs without ever knowing it's by them (especially the opening song Sunday Morning). Yet, for some reason I was never interested in them and my expectations were low. I really don't know why though, as this album is just really good. The depth and versatility really caught me by surprise and I can easily imagine this album being as hugely influential as it ended up being. Saved this album and will re-listen. I do have one criticism: I really could have done without the final six minutes of the album.
I'm sort of torn between giving this 1 and 2 stars. On the one hand, it's a lot less horrible than I expected. Still, there were a couple of songs I had to skip, but really not that many. I'll round up from 1.5 because I do recognize interesting ideas throughout the album and find the majority of it listenable. Which is more than I can say of some other albums on this list.
Well, it's ABBA. What else is there to say? Catchy pop tunes, a couple of them extremely well-known. But mostly too unassuming and lacking any depth.
The music is very well played/sung and very well-produced. But it's slick and inoffensive to the point where there's nothing interesting about it. I can't really see this as anything else than background music.
Great voice, but very uninteresting music unfortunately.
I've never listened to Jamiroquai before and had no idea what to expect. But I was very positively surprised! It's an interesting mix of styles, nice to hear some rarely used instruments and a lot of variety.
I knew the name but am not sure if I've ever listened to Tori Amos before. Honestly, I didn't even know it's a woman. It was a very nice listen. A lot of emotion and musical depth. But I didn't find it gripping enough to see myself actively listening to much more of it.
It's interesting how an album can be totally groundbreaking at it's time and because of that have a huge influence on contemporary and following artists and then when you listen to it decades later, it feels like you've heard similar music millions of times before and that makes it sound uninteresting and uninspired. It's a 3.5 for me, rounded down because although it's not bad, it failed to grab enough of my attention. When Doves Cry is a really good song though.
Wow, it's incredible how boring they are able to be. I don't think I've heard many more boring albums in my entire life (OK, Bob Marley is still worse). Not sure why anyone would ever put this on except for just letting something play in the background that won't distract people and which they won't remember.
It's blues music but with Eric Clapton on the guitar? Awesome, love it.
He does ramble, I'll give him that. I really don't understand why this is worth listening to though.
While Ray Charles was undoubtedly a very gifted musician, calling one of your own albums "the genius of myself" really seems like too much. That said, despite the undeniable musicianship, the songs were just not interesting enough to me. Add to that the production which sounds even older than the album itself.
Just really solid old hard rock. Probably the album already wasn't very original from the moment it was released, but it's just all-round solid without a bad track on it. The only stand-out track is Wild Horses - a true classic of a song.
Really enjoyed this one. Compared to the other Yes album we've had on this list so far, this one feels much tighter in terms of songwriting and song structure. The tracks seem more cohesive rather than made for the purpose of showing off the musician's (considerable) skill. My other main criticism of the other Yes album still holds: the singer's voice doesn't do the instrumentation justice. He's just not up to par with the others. Still, a fantastic album.
So far I only new Lola by The Kinks. Nice to know not all of their songs are about a teenager losing his virginity to a middle-aged crossdresser. Nice album, a couple good songs, similarities to the trippier phases of The Beatles. Didn't know Waterloo Sunset was by them.
I started out liking it and thinking "well, this is interesting". But after the first two songs the quality and my interest dropped off. It has its moments, but on the whole I didn't enjoy it.
That albumcover is awkward af, as is the band's name. Background-listening American Folk. Very uninspiring, as that style often tends to be. Pleasant at first, but got boring real quick. California Dreamin' is still pretty nice, I also liked You Baby. Nothing else caught/held my attention though.
Boring af. Mostly very uninteristing guitarplay; the riffs are uninspired and the solos seem perfunctory. Within a song, the vocals sound the same throughout, no inflection at all. The lyrics seem to be nothing more than strings of "badass" sounding words. OK, it was heavy for its time, but what else?? Like or dislike, the other albums so far at least had interesting parts.
Never listened to them before. a lot better than I thought!
Pleasant background listening. Not interesting enough for the foreground though.
I somewhat liked it. Very pleasant to listen to while working. But not something I'd listen to with full attention.
First I was excited because I've wanted to give LZ another chance for a while. But most of the songs really just don't excite me. They're not bad, but they feel very meandering without going anywhere and end up being pleasant but mostly forgettable.
Something new for me. Good listening experience for one time, but not something I'll actively listen to more of. Not so good for background during work, a bit distracting.
I admit, I didn't want to listen to it at first. But I was actually very positively surprised and enjoyed it more than I was annoyed by it. That's saying a lot for a rap album. Would like to rate 3.5. Rounded down instead of up for the casual sexism.
I liked it, but don't think it's something I could listen to for longer than one album at a time. Also almost a bit too intense to listen to during work.
I don't think I've heard of her before and don't understand why this album has any significance. I don't think it's bad and it does have pleasant moments, but it just doesn't really seem interesting or innovative to me in any way. Sounds like radio-friendly background music to me. 2.5 rounded down.
I've liked classical soul for a long time and that includes Marvin Gaye. Usually I prefer a bit faster soul music, but still a good album. Also, foreplay music (too slow for actual sex music though).
Actually very good. I always thought about Deep Purple as having their moments but not really interesting to me in general. But I enjoyed this album way more than I expected. The playing is quite 'tight' but technical at the same time. Definitely reevaluating DP and will listen to them again.
I liked it. Generally this isn't really my style of music, but on this album the intensity and atmosphere just hit the right notes for me.
Really couldn't get anything positive out of this. Didn't like the music, but was able to simply ignore most of it except the most annoying tracks such as 7th chamber oder method man. Some of the voice samples/intros/interludes were extremely distracting and annoying. After half of the album I started skipping some parts. For me, clearly the worst album so far.
Before this I had no idea what Beck sounds like. I guess now I do. Nothing more to say really.
Massively surprised by this one. I've heard a lot of RHCP when I was a kid because my brother loved them. Since then I've sort of discarded them because I found the singer's voice annoying on their best known songs like Californication. But this album is actual fire. Loving the funky guitars and the mix of playful and technical details. With this less pop-oriented style the singer's voice fits way better too.
After 10 songs I was too bored with it and stopped listening.
I like David Bowie, not sure why they would choose this album though.
Either the entire style or at least this particular album didn't age well at all. The music isn't bad as such, but it's entirely uninteresting to me from start to finish. The well-known title track might be the worst song of the album by virtue of being catchy in an annoying way.
Yes, love The Eagles. Although that's long past, they used to be my favorite band for a while and I even had a t-shirt with this album art. The guitar-work on this album is fantastic throughout and I consider the title-track nothing short of a masterpiece. My criticism would be that the album is a bit too ballad-heavy and that those ballads can tend to the kitschy side. I'd prefer less "Wasted Time" and more "Life in the Fast Lane". Or if their calmer songs would all be like "The Last Resort" (my second favorite track of the album) there would be absolutely nothing to complain about.
Well, I think I would have enjoyed this a lot more if it weren't live. Probably the studio version would have gotten 4 or 3 stars. But I don't really appreciate live recordings much. Especially if I haven't heard the studio version of (most of) the songs yet.
It's rare that I don't dislike punkish music, but this one sort of hit the right spots. I liked how it was upbeat without being "just fun" (=super annoying). The songs were more structured and the chaotic parts thereby more enjoyable to me than usual for this style. Not something I'd listen to again, but a good experience. I really liked Sofa Of My Lethargy, that was a very good song.
To my great surprise, I actually really enjoyed it. Was good to have it playing, although it would fit better when accompanying household chores or workout rather than for work. Too repetitive for five stars though.
Wow. What is this even? Please miss me with this. Absolutely hated it.
I liked it, very nice music to work to. Might listen to The Doors more some other time :-)
This album is really weird and also, I really hated it. At least the four songs I was able to listen to (OK, two of those I only listened to partially).
It's good music, but I would have way way way preferred studio recordings over live recordings. Bleh. Not sure why the Albums Generator is doing this to us :-( Probably a 4 or maybe even a 5 for the studio recordings of the same tracks.
It was fine to listen to, but very unexciting. Almost none of the songs really stood out in any way. Just The Killing Moon and Seven Seas a little bit and the rest was just low attention pleasant background sound.
Quite pleasant to have playing in the background, but utterfly forgettable and unexciting.
Really enjoyed it. S&G are very relaxing to listen to and at the same time I really enjoy the poetic and artsy quality of their music. I liked the first thematic half of the album (bookends), but liked the unthematic second half a bit better. For songs, Mrs. Robinson and Hazy Shade Of Winter are my clear favorites from this album. Great!
Booooooring. The songwriting seems really shallow and most of the instrumentation overly simple and repetitive. The last song is an exception - but I didn't enjoy that one either.
This album is less meandering than the other LZ album we've had. It's still completely unexciting to me though. It's not "bad" and there are some good parts. But not enough to hold my attention. The album was also way too long, considering the lack of variety within and between songs.
Urgh, stupid live albums. Why?? The songs actually seemed really good. The studio versions of the songs would have maybe received a 5 from me, a 4 for sure. Might listen to some non-live Thin Lizzy later.
Wow, I hate it. It's just chaotic noise to me. Most of the singing was just annoying to me and really not much else than that. I soldiered through about half of the album and gave up after the sixth song.
It's OK as pure background music, but can't see it as anything else. The lyrics seem somewhat interesting, but I mostly didn't pay much attention.
Good voice, good tracks. Fast Car is a fantastic song of course. Don't think I'll listen to more, but very nice for one time.
Quite pleasant to listen to, I enjoyed it playing in the background while working. But the songs don't really feel like they're going anywhere and blended together. Wouldn't actively listen to it again, but nice for one time.
Mostly very pleasant to listen to, but doesn't stand out from among other well-known 60s music. Feels very been there, done that.
Hate it. I really can't enjoy punk (or is this even punk? This album generator is giving me the feeling that I don't really know what punk is - but anyway, I hate this one). Somehow it's simultaneously annoying chaotic noise and musically absolutely boring to me.
Liked it from the first song (the only one I already knew) but it grew on me even more throughout the album. Just enjoyable rock songs on the surface, but very playful and occasionally quite technical instrumentation underneath. Reminds me a lot of a less folky version of America or a more playful version of The Eagles. No idea Why I wasn't more familiar with them before, but I'll definitely listen to more Steely Dan. [Update: spent the next two hours listening to more Steely Dan]
Pleasant singing voice and the music sounds nice in the background. I definitely didn't mind it playing, but there's nothing about it that might hold my attention. Probably great to have playing while trying to fall asleep.
Hm, not quite what I expected, found it weird to listen to. More distracting than enjoyable.
Very pleasant listening. I like Bob Dylan's voice. But the songs weren't really interesting enough to fully catch and hold my attention either,
Stopped listening after two and a half songs. Distracting noise. Can't work with this playing.
I liked this one quite a lot. I enjoyed the singing, the variety between songs and also the background music which usually sounded pretty simple superficially but still seemed to offer a lot of depth and variety between songs. Good album!
Nope. Nope nope nope. During the first two songs I thought it's OK-ish. Maybe a 2. But songs three and four were sooo bad that I had to stop. I also hated the really weird mix. It somehow sounds like the singing and the instrumentation were recorded simultaneously but pretty far away from each other. Really weird mixing.
Sort of strange. Sounds like a mix of alternative rock and dark ambient music. I liked it.
Good music, great voice. The music does sound extremely old though and not all of it has aged particularly well. I enjoyed the "big sound" more swingy and soul-heavy tracks a lot more than the softer lounge-y or balladesque tracks. I won't actively listen to it again, but a good one-time experience.
Not bad, absolutely fine to have playing during work. But there's nothing remarkable about it either. And I don't think I could listen to much more of them than this album at a time without getting restless.
I really loved the first song, so it's a shame that the rest of the album didn't quite live up to it. But I still quite enjoyed it. Just good old rock by some guys who may or may not have enjoyed some recreational marijuana or other substances (not judging). I also enjoyed the occasional harpsichord, sound samples and over the top guitars.
I'm sort of split on this one. The gritty start of the album surprised me a bit, before it turned to the mellower songs more in the style of his famous hits that I know Bob Dylan from. I liked some of these mellower ones a lot better, but others were just a bit boring and went on for a little too long. The songs I liked best were Mr. Tambourine Man, 115th Dream (although I strongly disliked the beginning) and Love Minus Zero.
The 80s are strong with this one and I really don't feel like this album has aged particularly well. I've heard covers of Cindy Lauper songs in somewhat different styles which I really enjoyed. The originals I don't enjoy, as it turns out.
First off, the album cover is hilariously ridiculous. Make it black&white and it could be the profile picture of that one edgy emo kid in high school. That aside, the music is pretty good. Nice voice, relaxing instrumentation. It sounds more like background-lounge music, however, without any exciting songs/parts. Really pleasant for working though.
Sounds pleasant enough, but really not very interesting. Actually a 2.5
First off, another really horrible album cover. Can it get any sleazier? Yes it can. All of the lyrics are about dating and might already have been old-fashioned in the early sixties - sexism and double standards abound. The music itself really didn't age well and is just incredibly boring. Apparently the Every Bros don't know how to end songs either. Almost every single one just fades out on chorus. But that also leads us to the biggest positive point of the album: the songs do end and quite quickly so. At least it doesn't just keep dragging on.
Sounds good enough, pleasant to listen to. But it's also extremely unremarkable and I sort of forgot what each song sounded like as soon as the next one started. Good for background listening during work though.
It's good music, I enjoy listening to CCR. But most of the songs drag out a bit too long without much to keep them interesting. Therefore, not quite good enough for a 5.
This was a pretty strange one. Not sure what to think of it. There were a couple songs I liked quite a bit and others not at all.
OK, this one really surprised me. All those years ago as a teenage metalhead I quickly discovered that thrash metal just isn't the right subgenre for me. It simply didn't appeal to me and that included all the old legends such as Slayer and Sepultura (which I rated 1 and 2 stars respectively, when it was their turn in this album generator) and also Megadeth. For some reason Rust In Peace hit me in a completely different way this time though. It just sounds really good, the riffs are great, the groove is exactly right, the voice fits perfectly, the songs are well-structured; just a great album - regardless of if my teenager-self would have agreed or not. We learn and grow, I guess.
Not quite as bad as other albums I don't finish, but I didn't listen to more than 3.5 songs because it was too distracting during work. Seems like a mix of standard brit-pop and annoying noise.
Well, I do know a lot more about Indian music now than I ever did before. That said, I have no desire to ever actively listen to it again. It's not the worst and it's absolutely fine for bollywood, for scenes or movies from international productions taking place in India and for Indian restaurants. But I'm unlikely to ever actively choose to listen to traditional Indian music ever again.
Good music, I've always liked Elvis. Not his very best ones, but a couple of nice songs on here such as In The Ghetto, Suspicious Minds and Don't Cry Daddy.
Wow, this just sounds really really bad. I can understand how it might have been very original at it's time and how it may have influenced a lot of later, better music. But this just sounds atrocious.
I'm not surprised if I'm the only one from our group, but I actually really enjoy the Pet Shop Boys and have listened to their Best Of quite a few times. I'm not really sure why they picked this album, my couple favorite Pet Shop Boys songs aren't on it. A slight shame, but I still enjoyed it.
As background music during work I quite enjoyed it. It was relaxing, pleasant and the slight "space-sound" touches made parts of it interesting too. Still as pure background music it's not interesting enough for a 5.
It wasn't horrible, but the songs that weren't "bad" were certainly more "strange" than "good" to me. I can see some parts of the album being considered pretty interesting and I didn't mind it for one listen, but I'm certainly not interested in hearing more. Too chaotic, too unfocused, too unpolished.
Just listened to another Pet Shop Boys album from this list yesterday. The same holds true: I like the Pet Shop Boys a lot, but I'm not sure why this album was chosen specifically since it doesn't contain my favorite songs by them (top two: It's A Sin and Heart). But compared to the other album which was a 4 for me, this one seems to have a bolder, fuller sound. I enjoyed listening to it a lot and if there happens to be a third Pet Shop Boys album on this list, I surely won't mind.
Nothing to see here, just some more really bad, old punk. I guess I'm simply not angry enough.
It's Michael Jackson, what else is there to say? Some songs are really really really good (my favorite here easily being Billie Jean) but some other tracks (like the first one) are pretty boring. The best songs are still good enough to merit a 4 for the whole album though.
So far I only knew Fatboy Slim by name. I'm not entirely sure what I expected his music to sound like, but it wasn't this. I sort of liked it though, I think. I'll need to listen to this one more than once to be able to deliver a final verdict, but for now a 4 will do.
Some time last year I realized, to my great surprise, that there are some styles of country that I actually enjoy a lot. Since this band seems to mix a couple of different country styles there were quite a few songs I liked a lot, such as the first and third ones. Other songs however I found really boring and at the same time borderline annoying. For a while I thought that would even out to a generously rounded up 4, but the album drags out waaaay too long at over two hours, which cost it a star.
It's not as bad as the really atrocious albums we've had, but I really can't say anything good about this album beyond that. It's mostly just really boring with the occasional hint of pretty annoying.
This was actually a lot more fun to listen to than I expected. Probably not one that I would actively revisit, but certainly a good experience in terms of broadening my perspective and appreciating music I wouldn't usually listen to. Rounded up from a 3.5 for that.
Yeah, no, I didn't like it at all. But on the bright side it wasn't nearly as bad as I expected it to be! Just a bit bad, bland, boring, unappealing - but not nearly as annoying as expected!
By this point, I'm already relieved every time the daily album's name and cover seem like it could be punk rock but then isn't. Instead we have some fairly standard old-school rock. Nothing special, but not bad as a whole. The instrumentation is pretty good, the vocals on the hand not very good at all. The lyrics are ridiculous and frankly, pretty stupid. But that seems to be on purpose. Won't listen to The Dictators again, but fine for one round.
An interesting album that must have been way ahead of its time when it first came out. So far I only knew Psycho Killer and I would never have guessed that the song is older than mid-90s. From the polished sound and varied song-writing I would also never have guessed that this is a debut album. The album doesn't sound amazing to me either, but I did enjoy it enough to see myself re-visiting it.
Out of all the people in the entire world, I believe Kanye West is one of the hardest people to take serious (on non-music topics). And not being a rap fan in general, this is the first time I ever consciously heard his music. But damn, this is actually really good, interesting and musically varied. The one big downside being any time West tries to do anything melodious with his voice. That sounds pretty bad and he should definitely stop doing that. Still, this is definitely the best rap album I've ever heard - which would put it at a 4 for me in terms of enjoyment. But I'll give it a 5 instead to show my appreciation for broadening my mind to what rap can sound like and how good it can be.
What is this even? Not good in any case. Mostly it was bad and boring but unintrusive. I had to skip Super Rich Kids and then stopped altogether after a bit over half the album.
A bit torn on this one. It doesn't sound bad as such, but it aged really badly, unfortunately and in the end it just went on for way too long, considering that it simply isn't very interesting musically. While it was good background music for a while, it started getting on my nerves before it was over.
I'll be honest. I've heard the name Goldie before and simply assumed that it's a random female pop singer. That should tell you more or less how much I know about D'n'B. That said, I really enjoyed this album a lot more than I expected. Especially the first half. My favorite track was State of Mind. eventually I found the album dragging on for too long however. And it being a bit samey, it started to get boring eventually. Therefore rounded down from 3.5.
It's been a looooong time since I listened to a Nirvana album in its entirety (the unplugged live recording probably being the exception). I used to really love Nirvana as a pre-teen and obviously my music tastes have changed again and again. Revisiting it so many years later I'm sort of surprised by how good this album really is. I don't think it's the nostalgia speaking, since the vast majority of music I liked as a teen makes me cringe now. It's just a really really good album, very well-rounded too. The only song I didn't like was the last one, which was originally omitted and then added as a hidden, final track. Omitting it was probably the right thing to do. But still a fantastic album overall.
This started out really good, but then turned kinda meh. Some standout moments and good, interesting parts, but also some pretty bad parts (All about Love and See The Light in particular). Good to hear this album once, since I don't know much about funk, but won't actively listen to it again.
Nope, really not interested in traditional Indian music. I guess it was well-played, but that didn't make me much more interested in it.
What is this supposed to be? Some sort of 90s dissonant, psychedelic alt-rock that can't decide if it wants to be modern or old-school (for it's time, respectively). In any case it's not good and I was relieved when it was over.
Didn't really like it at the beginning. Seemed ok, but just too garage-y. Low quality protection, mostly uninteresting songwriting. Things turned around later on in the album when it got more interesting. In particular, the last two songs and then the final instrumental track were really good. So a 2 for most of the album but then a 4 for the last three tracks.
Quite a lot better than I expected. Definitely enjoyed it. The last track surprised me quite a bit too, but it was a good finish to a good album. No real standout songs for me though and therefore not a 5.
Nah. Too angry. Too chaotic. Not interesting enough. There were a couple of nice shreds and riffs, but it wasn't nearly enough. And they completely butchered Just Like Heaven. As far as covers go, that was absolutely horrible.
I actually rated Rainbows by Radiohead a 2 previously - but thought OK Computer was fantastic. I really enjoyed it and thought to myself I should listen to more Radiohead - until I remembered I might have already listened to one of their albums from this list and saw that I didn't like that one at all. Still, this was good enough to make it work giving some others of their older albums a try, even if I don't seem to be a fan of their 'newer' albums. My favorite tracks were Karma Police, Subterranean Homesick Alien and The Tourist. The only one I disliked was Paranoid Android.
I liked it. Great to listen to during work. Relaxing enough to feel good about it, interesting enough to not get bored. It was a bit weird how the first song was half of the album and stylistically somewhat different from the second half. The first half I clearly enjoyed more and would have rated it a 4.5 whereas the second half was more of a 3.5 for me.
OK, this was probably the strangest album yet. I have no idea how to start describing it. But I definitely really liked it a lot - without being able to describe why either. I have already saved the album to listen to it again another time. But first I'll just go straight ahead and listen to something else by Dirty Projectors. Update: I then spent the rest of the day listening to radio playlists based on Dirty Projectors and loved it all the way. Even though I still don't really know what kind of music this is.
This one was also pretty weird and just pretty uncomfortable to listen to. There were some interesting parts and parts I liked, such as the guitars on Paranoia Man. But on the whole, I was glad when it was over.
This one was definitely hard to wrap my head around and needed a second listen. Even as a fan of progressive metal I found Close to the Edge pretty overwhelming. It's easily enough material for two full rock albums pressed into one 18 minute song. The question of how good it is - outside of just being complex - is a different one. While I enjoy the different styles and experimentation, I am sort of missing a feeling of cohesiveness where the different styles and elements would point in the same direction. Another point of objection is the vocals, which are somewhat bland and don't feel like they do justice to the mind-boggling instrumentation. This turned out a difficult one to rate as well. I'd like to give a 4.5, but I'll round it down because the Simon & Garfunkel was sort of awkward.
Another rather strange one. There were some songs I could appreciate as nice background music such as Pumpkin and Aftermath and other songs I absolutely hated such as Hell Is Round The Corner, Brand New You're Retro, Suffocated Love and Strugglin', which I all skipped after half of the song. All in all not an enjoyable experience.
It just sounds so incredibly old. Still, the singing is good, the voice is great. Not something I'd listen to actively, but was a very pleasant background album for working.
It was OK, but not much more than that. Basically not bad, but pretty much just a much less exciting clone of bands like The Cure.
Pretty good, I enjoyed it. Both very good instrumentation (a shame it can't all be with Santana though!) and a very good voice with just a little bit of grit.
It was a good listen, but I find this album somewhat overrated within the metal community. It's good, especially in terms of musicianship. But I find the songwriting somewhat bland. I do like Welcome Home (Sanitarium) a lot and always have. But on the whole I find the album just good and not at all the masterpiece many metal fans make it out to be.
Great, a pleasure to listen to. I've heard a Best Of from REM quite a few times, but this was the first time I listened to a full album of theirs. I don't think there wasn't a single song on it that wasn't very good.
Wow, ok. I don't really know what this is, but I'm pretty sure that I hate it. I made it until the fifth song and then couldn't take anymore.
I listened to about the first minute of each of the first three songs and then a few seconds of the fourth before deciding that nope, I don't have to do this to myself. It's just some more stupid old punk rock and I hate it just as much as all of the other punk so far, if not more so. Actually more so. It seems to be a particularly punkish punk album. Bleh.
This seems to be a very angry woman shouting over what is otherwise very standard and very mediocre garage rock for almost 40 minutes. I skipped the seconds halves of most songs, and stopped altogether after half the album. So luckily I didn't need to listen to it for 40 minutes.
Just a few days ago we had the previous Metallica album Master Of Puppets. I gave that one a 4 and liked this one a bit better. It's more straightforward and more focused & relentless. Also, Master Of Puppets came across as somewhat pretentious at times, while And Justice For All doesn't. There were a few really good tracks but One and the instrumental track To Live Ist To Die in particular were excellent. 4.5 rounded up because of how fantastic To Live Is To Die was.
Not bad, but very unexciting, standard American rock music. Pleasant background music during work.
I used to have the title track of this album on a couple of playlists years ago, but never heard much more by Funkadelic. I still absolutely love the title track and there were also some more good parts on this album, especially Who Says A Funk Band Can't Play Rock and the live track Maggot Brain which both have some sick guitars. It's not the kind of music I want to listen to for too long in one go or particularly often. But for every once in a while it's pretty good.
It sounds pretty good and the guy has a great voice. But it's hard to see this as anything else than background music. A 3.5 for me, generously rounding it up because Silver Raven and Lady Of The North were really good.
Of course I've heard their well-known hits plenty of times, but I never listened to an Aerosmith song outside of their hits before today. Turns out it's a lot better than I would have expected! Easy 4
Well, it's just really boring. Also very dated. But I'm pretty sure it was already boring when it was still brand new...
The title-track of this album is an absolute masterpiece of a song. Apart from the second track, most of the others were very good too, although not quite at the same level of brilliance as Young Americans. Still, all-round a great artist with a great album.
This is the second Talking Heads album we've had. Released two years after the other one. I rated that one a 4, but feel like this one is a lot less interesting, a lot less fresh. It's not bad, but not good enough either.
I feel like this space rock album was already extremely dated in the late 90s and should have belonged more to the mid 80s. It was fine, pleasant background listening, but really just not interesting enough for much more than that. I had to skip The Individual because it was too distracting, but then the very next one, Broken Heart, was really good and possibly the highlight of the album.
I really liked the combination of classic hard rock and jazz that Steely Dan have going on here. A nice album to listen to and a band I'll definitely revisit. Not entirely gripping enough for a 5 though.
Good songs, very good voice. A relaxing album to listen to. I liked it.
I already knew and enjoyed a couple songs by The Smiths, but none of them are on this album. Regardless, I enjoyed the whole album a lot. It's just really nice and relaxing in a good, mellow, quality darkish synth-pop way. After it finished, I gave it a second spin right after. Great for an otherwise stressful day.
I guess I'd describe this as ambient space-electronica. Not bad for in the background and I can see this working well in film or as background music in sci-fi video games. It wasn't interesting or gripping enough for any kind of active listening however.
I never understood the hype around U2. I mean, they're just not really good. The songs just aren't very interesting, or inspiring, or emotional, or technical, or anything of note, really. It's not that it's super bad either, but I really don't understand why they may be worth listening to at all. And for that, at almost an hour this album drags on for way too long. I did like Who's Gonna Ride Your Wild Horses. But that's the only track that stood out somewhat.
I'm not entirely sure if this is the first (non-compilation) Queen album I've listened to in full. That said, I've listened to multiple Queen compilations up and down and there are a couple of their songs that I really love (none of them included here though). The majority of songs on this album are versatile, very good & interesting and the guitars as well as the singing of course are frequently fantastic. Some of the songs seem a bit overly dramatic. But it's well-executed enough to contribute to Queen's charm. Also, this album doesn't contain any of their really annoying and uninteresting/cheesy hits (which Queen also have a couple of... the horrendous We Are The Champions, Another One Bites The Dust and We Will Rock You come to mind... urgh). Instead, this album is straight-up quality - only In The Lap Of The Gods was sort of, uh, weird.
It's not actively horrible to listen to like some of the other albums we've had so far, but it really isn't pleasant in any sort of way either. I guess some of the instrumentation and song structures (particularly the funk-influences in the guitar lines and bass) could be interesting if it weren't all so dissonant, so droning, and covered by the off-putting vocals.
I have to say, I'm pretty disappointed by this one. I've considered Alison a masterpiece of a song for quite a while now and to a lesser extent also What's So Funny (About Peace, Love & Understanding). I didn't expect everything to be on the level of Alison, but the drop-off in quality between Costello's best songs and average songs is apparently humongous. My second-biggest issue is the very bad sound quality. I've heard few albums in more dire need of remastering than this one. Costello's songs definitely need a much fuller and vibrant sound. Somewhat less twangy guitars wouldn't hurt either. In addition, the album seems to start off with the worst songs of the album, which set the wrong mood. This is a 3.5 for me. It's lifted from a 3 by the brilliance of Alison, but still rounded down for the feeling of disappointment. With a good remaster it would easily be a 4.
With such bombastic band and album names, I found the music disappointingly minimalistic. I can see it being enjoyable when in the right mood or how this album may have been a strong influence for many new wave bands to come. But as an album, no, I definitely didn't like it. Mostly boring and occasionally annoying.
It was A LOT better than I expected, that's why it's getting two stars from me. That said, my expectations were exceptionally low.
Usually I quite like this kind of music as long as it's decent quality - and the well-known singer-songwriters usually are. But with the really grating vocals and the completely unimaginative, minimalistic, yet also squeaky instrumentation - no. Just a big and easy, definitive no. There are albums that I hated more than this one but gave a 2 (such as a Jay Z album just before this one). But those may have had at least some redeeming qualities, despite me disliking them. This one just seems bad in every way.
Pretty strange. First half a live album (as always: would be way better to hear the same music as studio versions. I really don't understand what people get out of this...) and then a couple tracks tacked on. I guess this is what some would describe as guitar-wankery. Although I like this kind of music in general, I'm not gonna lie, these guys sound particularly show-offy. They definitely do know how to play their instruments and this was quite pleasant to listen to in the background. But they lose a point for the live music and for the generally lacklustre production of the album, that doesn't quite fit the technicality of the musicianship.
I really like The Cure. But I have to say I prefer their later, poppier, more polished work. This album was darker and colder and lacked any stand-out hits. But it was still good and an interesting listen.
The voice is very good but the songs are just pretty boring. Also, live recordings as always make the music worse.
I listened to the intro and then to half each of the first three songs. Definitely can't take more than that though. This is just incredibly atrocious. I will admit that the instrumentation seems quite smart and varied. But that aside, this album could hardly be further away from what I enjoy in music.
First time I listened to an entire album by The Who. I don't plan on actively listening to it again, but not bad at all. Giving it a 3.5 for the music but rounding up for the fun factor of the album.
I liked it, cool music. Something completely new for me, but extremely enjoyable. Will listen to again.
Very nice, fantastic background music to listen to while working. I'll save and re-listen to the album for that purpose. Still 4 and not 5 stars, because after one listen I find it hard to recall much of the music apart from that it was enjoyable.
Ok, not-bad, enjoyable rock. But completely unspectacular and unmemorable. Seems like these guys are only on this list because of their image/personas, which is fine of course. But that doesn't really come across the same way when listened to on Spotify 50 years later.
Wow, I really don't think I've ever heard british rap before. It sounds different, I'll give it that. But I really just don't like rap with very few exceptions, so there's that. I'll also give it that the concept is something different and that the symphonic touches are nice. However, the bare bones, minimalist production offsets that again. This one simply isn't for me.
Not bad at all, pretty nice background music. A good 3.5 but rounded down because it's completely unmemorable and I already forgot what it sounded like.
I was hoping that not the whole album would be as annoying as the obnoxious "Song 2". That hope didn't come true. It's chaotic, noisy, senseless and really pretty much without redeeming qualities. I gave up halfway through the fifth track.
A very nice jazz album. Great background listening, very enjoyable during work.
On the whole, I liked it. Good, old-school, jazz-infused psychedelic rock. There were some things I didn't like though. The guitars were occasionally too high-pitched and whiny for my liking (although I really liked the more swamp-style twingey guitar parts) and the vocals weren't the best either. Still, a nice listen overall.
I enjoyed the simple, synth-pop instrumentation and the satisfying new-wave songwriting and could easily see myself giving the album 3-4 stars if it had another singer. Unfortunately, I just don't like Gary Numan's voice apparently.
Had to listen to this a second time on the following day. On the first listen I disliked the first song and then didn't listen too attentively, but found myself liking the album more and more as it progressed. Since it's a fairly unobtrusive album I thought it fair to give it another spin the next day and listen more attentively. I'm really glad that I did because this time around I really loved it. It's serene, but has a surprising amount of depth and versatility. I can see myself revisiting this one quite often when I want background music that is relaxing but simultaneously of really high quality.
A pretty strange album, not sure if I've listened to something like this before. But it was nice, I enjoyed it. A standout song for me was Frontier Psychiatrist.
I really hate punk, so of course I didn't like this one. But for punk it wasn't all too bad. I guess it didn't sound as angry and chaotic as most punk. More pop-punk than punk-rock as well. So anyway, 2 stars is a good rating for a punk album from me.
This is the third Talking Heads album we've had and I hope it's the last. I rated the others 4 and 3 stars, so they're definitely not horrible. But I definitely feel like I've heard enough of them. The only song I knew of this album was Once In A Lifetime. Most of the songs were not bad, but a couple were pretty annoying such as Fela's Riff and the final track.
I lasted until the fifth song. It's chaotic, noisy, dissonant, angry and the guy's voice is... of subjective quality. I saw Manson live at a festival about ten years ago. He was possibly the worst live act I've ever seen - totally wasted and unable to keep up with his playback. Turns out I can't stand him in studio quality either.
Not bad at all. Didn't know them yet and didn't have very high expectations when I read about them, but it's really very decent. A variation of rather light grunge with some more experimental psychedelic rock mixed in. 3.5 stars rounded up to 4.
Based on the artist and band name I was definitely expecting something very different. It was a good surprise though with some really nice jazz. Fantastic background listening during work.
Very pleasant US folk-rock album. The biggest issue is that it's simply not more than that. It's nice background listening during work. But there are no standout songs and nothing about the album to make it truly interesting in any way. Solid 3.5 for the music, rounded down to 3 for being so forgettable.
A really nice instrumental jazzy blues album. Great for background listening. It's main failing however, is that apart from the great title track, the tracks are completely forgettable. If all of them were of the quality of the title track this would easily be a 4 or 4.5. Instead this is a solid 3.5 for me. Good experience to hear it once, but won't listen again.
Another Bowie album of which I'm note quite sure why they chose this one. So far I only knew the title track though, so it was nice to hear some new (for me) Bowie. The first half is very rocky in a ahead-of-it's-time manner typical for Bowie. The synth-ambient tracks on the second half really caught me by surprise though. I really enjoyed Moss Garden on the ambient side, but still, the combination of a couple ambient tracks on a rock album doesn't really work for me. That and the lack of a brilliant, stand-out Bowie hit on this album makes it a 4 and not a 5 for me.
An OK British post-punk album. We've had much better ones on this list so far and although I like the style, it's often pretty samey and this one didn't stand out at all.
The third Steely Dan album we've gotten. I think they're really good, but don't seem them as quite that monumental... still, this is very good jazzy hard rock and I enjoyed listening to the album.
I really enjoyed the mix of Jazz and Samba. Just good, enjoyable music with enough technical depth to get hooked. The bad part though is when getting unhooked, I found it lacked catchy hooks to really draw me back in. When I focused on something else and the album became background listening, I found it hard to distinguish it from simple muzak. I'd rate this one a 3.5, but round it up because it broadened my appreciation for a type of music I don't usually listen to.
It's an interesting mix of styles with an undoubtedly talented singer at the front. But the music is also completely forgettable and too synth-heavy and polished. It wasn't bad. But it didn't stand out as good either.
OK this is just really not good. I don't absolutely hate it either, but I really can't hear anything good about this. It's really uninteresting and seems to have no redeeming qualities. Just not good music.
I have a bit of a soft spot for Dire Straits. I'm fully aware that they were already very unimaginative at the time and are pretty much "elevator background rock" by today's standards. Basically inoffensive radio filler tracks. Yet, even though they don't do all that much, they just do it really well. This isn't my favorite album by theirs, too ballad-heavy. A 3.5 where I might rate their others 4.0 or even 4.5. Still, rounded up to a 4.
I love this album and play it regularly for relaxing, yet touching and inspiring background music.
I've heard about Siouxsie And The Banshees before of course, as a wildly influential band for gothic music and multiple metal subgenres. However, this was the first time I listened to them. I liked what I heard. Haunting post-punk with a good amount of depth and some interesting ideas and techniques. Not quite varied or catchy enough for a 5, but definitely a very good 4.
It doesn't sound bad and is totally fine for background music. But I find it absolutely uninteresting. Just goes in one ear, comes out the other, nothing remains of it in my mind.
Of course we all know Hallelujah, but up to now I've never knowingly heard anything else by Jeff Buckley. From the first song, it took me by surprise. It's a lot rockier and carries a lot more breadth and depth than I had expected. Far short of a one-hit wonder, this album incorporates a surprisingly wide rang of styles which are all transposed with a high degree of proficiency. After I thought I'd already heard the full range of Jeff Buckley, the album hit me with Corpus Christi Carol then followed by Eternal Life. All in all this is a really good album I'm sure I will revisit.
Boring, unremarkable. No idea why this one is on the list.
Another Byrds album and I like it much less than the previous one. The songs aren't interesting and the dissonance just sounds bad. I enjoyed the Bob Dylan cover My Back Pages a lot. That song by itself is a 4.5 star song to me. But the rest of the album really isn't good.
It's more Elvis. That said, I have no idea why this album was chosen. It doesn't contain any of his big hits and is all-round really forgettable.
Ahhh Boston. One of the quintessential "dad rock" records. I've never listened to this album before, but know all of the first five songs from it pretty well from various playlists or radios. It's good music and I can absolutely understand why it got so popular and why it was so influential and I enjoy listening to the individual songs. But it gets very samey very fast and in the end it's really not very interesting music from a modern-day listener perspective. Still good though.
Janis Joplin has an awesome voice, but I found the songwriting and the rest of the music completely unmemorable. Not bad, but into one ear and out the other.
I rated the previous U2 album we got 2 stars and noted that I never understood the hype around them and find them pretty dull. I can understand this album's success a lot better. The songs have an undeniable grandness about them. Good album.
An interesting, very full-bodied interpretation of big band soul. I first thought this was a pretty modern, retro-styled album. It must have been way ahead of its time when it came out. Good album. But not one I'll actively listen to again.
I was sort of dreading this one because I absolute hate the vocalist's way of singing on the songs I've heard. Sure enough, the singing was pretty bad, but actually not nearly as bad as I had feared. To my even bigger surprise, the song writing, song structuring and instrumentation were fantastic. With a good singer, this could easily have been a 5. As is, it's a 3.5 for me. Rounded up because it surprised me so much.
On the first half I liked the overall structure of the compositions a lot, could have been really good - but too minimalistic for my tastes in terms of execution. Could have profitted from fuller-sounding production or some more compositional detail. Would have rated it a 3. The second half was just pretty bad rock. I can see how it must have been fresh and interesting in terms of ideas back in the 70s and I think I can hear its influence on the great David Bowie. But as a modern-day listener I really don't like it and would rate it a 1.5.
Not bad, I enjoyed it playing in the background during work. But I also didn't enjoy it enough to think of it as more than background music.
The only song I knew was the opening Sympathy With The Devil which is a great track. After that things got a bit unexpected. The album is a lot more bluesy and folky than I expected. It was also a lot less good than I expected, only knowing the greatest hits of the Rolling Stones so far. On the whole I was quite disappointed.
I listened to the first half of each of the first five tracks. That was more than enough for the rest of my life.
Great musician, great songs, etc. but fucking live album. Why do this to us. Probably 4 stars for it if it were exactly the same songs as studio recordings. This gets 2.5. Rounded down for the really annoying censorship beeps.
I really enjoyed this one. Especially the excellent instrumentation. I've listened to Arctic Monkeys and enjoyed them in the past, but not this particularly album. I can't listen to them for too long in one go, as I find them a bit too hectic for that. But I do feel like I could listen to them more often and check out their other albums.
This one was incredibly weird for a whole number of reasons (most of which should be pretty obvious if you listen to the album). Another way in how it's weird is how good and interesting and varied the music is under all of the layers of weirdness and showmanship. Most glam rock just tends to be style over substance in my opinion. But these guys manage to do both. Not only does this album sound like it must have been hugely influential for a wide range of new wave, synth pop and rock bands, but it also still sounds really fun and good today on its own merits. I did need a few tracks until I could start to wrap my head around the style and I'm sure it will hit me differently when I listen to it a second time, but I am absolutely going to do just that.
I loved the instrumentation, especially the guitars. The songwriting was pretty good. Together they'd be good enough for 5 stars from me. Unfortunately, I really don't like the vocalist's voice though. The rest of the music is still excellent enough for 4 stars though. I do have to say the album seemed a bit long to me, even though it wasn't so long. Probably due to its high intensity.
Interesting. I think the description dream pop is quite fitting for this one. The songwriting is interesting and the execution pretty good. Unfortunately, it's just not really a style of music I enjoy.
First time I've ever listened to an album by Def Leppard and I don't think I (consciously) knew any of the songs yet. But quite possibly they went into one ear and out the other. The songwriting and execution are decent enough. But the whole thing is just so cookie-cutter hard rock / accessible new wave of british heavy metal. I may not have heard these specific songs yet, but I've heard songs EXACTLY like these soooo many times. It just sounds like standard unobjectionable rock bar background music. As such, I don't mind it, but I absolutely can't get excited about it either and already forgot the songs by now.
So far I only knew The Weight by The Band, a song I quite like. But it definitely didn't prepare me for what the album is like. It is lot more varied and experimental than I expected. Also, it was most likely absolutely groundbreaking at it's time. With one listen I couldn't quite wrap my head around all of it and wasn't sure if it's a 4 or a 5 for me. After a second spin, I'm rounding it up to a 5 from a solid 4.5 stars for the influence it must have had on classic favorites of mine, while still sounding good and interesting today. My favorite tracks were In A Station and the super trippy This Wheel's On Fire
I gave up at the beginning of the sixth track, having finished only the first one. I'm really not sure what they tried to accomplish with this album, or why people would like it. I can see that not taking themselves seriously is part of their whole thing and also how the approach to music was something new and maybe even interesting at the time. Their approach to songwriting and structuring may have been influential for later new wave and alternativ bands. But it just sounds godawful. It seems entirely soulless and devoid of any emotion or really anything that makes me want to hear any of it.
The fourth Steely Dan album so far. I rated the others 4, 4, 5. I do really like the band. But I'm really not convinced they're all that monumental/influential to justify 4+ albums on this list. But hey, more Steely Dan means fewer albums by the likes of Devo, Bob Marley, Wu-Tang Clan. etc. *shudder*. What I really like about Steely Dan is that they play really solid hard rock but then expertly infuse it with all sorts of different styles. This album seems to be especially varied with a lot of jazz, but also soul, swamp rock, outlaw country, prog rock and even classical. The only song I didn't like was the opener, which is the popular radio hit of this album, but is honestly just really boring. Luckily, the rest of the album is great enough to forgive them one radio-friendly pop rock track.
If you take any couple of seconds from the album it will sound pretty good and the musicians seem skilled. The problem is the hugely repetitive tracks which sound absolutely the same from beginning to end for 6 minutes a piece. Exactly the same couple of chords going on and on... It's not like the individual songs are very different from each other either.
Not entirely gripping enough to demand full attention. But definitely not bad playing in the background. I imagine that for some things it'd be pretty great as background music, for example for action video games. For working, OK but not the best. Rounded down from a 3.5.
I may have heard some other tracks by The Police before, but I only consciously knew Every Breath You Take. On the one hand, the music definitely has more variety than I expected and it's solidly executed. On the other hand, it just isn't very interesting to me.
I'm a bit split on this one. Some parts I liked quite a lot and others were very 'meh'. So while I give this a 3, it's actually a 2 for half of the songs and a 4 for the other half. My favorite was the pretty intense instrumental guitar track Sex Machine.
The pop rock style of this albums isn't usually really my cup of tea. But Blondie seem to just do it really well and are on top of the game on this very enjoyable album. I knew One Way Or Another and am pretty sure Heart Of Glass sounds familiar to me. But I didn't know it was by Blondie.
Although I've never listened to this as an album before, I was familiar with all tracks except for the last one and could have given the album 5 stars without listening. However, why would I do that? It was a joy to listen to it before giving it the 5 it merits. The music of Fleetwood Mac is deceptively simple but that doesn't cover up the underlying amazing emotional depth of their masterfully crafted songs. That goes both for their hits and their lesser known songs - but then again, this is Fleetwood Mac. They barely have lesser known songs. Probably every single track from this album has been aired on radio thousands of times - deservedly so.
Rap just really isn't my style. But I have to say, in terms of rap this really isn't the worst. Or rather, I still don't like it, but I do think it sounds better than 95%+ of rap I've heard. The lyrics are absolutely ridiculous of course.
There are some aspects of the music that I really like. But in the end it simply isn't enough for me. Not intense enough, not varied enough, not interesting enough, not quite beautiful enough (not too far off either though).
What may have been interesting and innovative at its time doesn't always translate into good music today. It all sounds really bland and boring and the songs tend to drag on (not so much because they're so long, but because they're so uninteresting).
Maybe I wasn't quite doing the album justice. But having it playing in the background, I never felt like it stood out in a positive way at any point. Just pleasant background music flowing along. Sounding more good than bad, but very uneventful. The song that stood out most was the final track. And I didn't particularly like it.
When listening in the background, really good albums often force themselves into your attention. In other cases, it can take a while to realize how good an album is. I had this playing in the background, found it pleasant, but didn't pay much attention to it. During the final third of the album I finally realized this is really good, starting paying more attention and was enchanted by the dreamy, ethereal beauty. Now I'm halfway through the second spin. The arrangements seem deceptively simple. However, underneath is a wide range of variety with an astonishing depth of feeling, packed in a whimsical shell of not taking itself too seriously. I'll give it a 4 for now, but possibly it would be a 5 after more listens, which it will most likely get from me.
Not sure if I've ever listened to Pixies before. Pretty good alternative rock. Interesting song structuring and skilled musicians. A nice album to listen to.
Sinatra definitely has a great voice, but I just can't get much out of this. It hasn't aged very well and just sounds sooo old. I did like Quiet Night Of Quiet Stars, maybe because it has a more full-bodied sound than the rest of the album.
It wasn't quite so bad that I had to skip songs halfway through, but I'm quitting the album after 7 tracks. It's too distracting and frankly, pretty annoying. I quite dislike the tinny-sounding production and the chaotic vibes of the album.
Never listened to The The yet, as far as I know, but I love the band name. The album was really good too. Quite gripping, fairly varied instrumentation and quite a lot of depth in songwriting. My favorite tracks were Heartland and Slow Train To Dawn. Both of those were really dope.
Pretty good american folk rock. Very pleasant. A 3.5 for me. For most of the album I thought I would round that up to a 4, but the last two tracks were pretty bad. Especially Attics Of My Life was horrible. Therefore rounded down.
While I enjoy jazzy rock, pure instrumental jazz simply doesn't manage to catch and hold my attention well. The music is well executed, but never rises above the level of background music. At times pleasant background music, but more often than not, it feels like the tracks just sort of drone on, going off on all sorts of tangents along the way, but never really going anywhere specific.
Well, yeah, it's britpop. I guess it's not the worst for what it is, but I didn't enjoy it and was glad when the album was done.
OK. I hated it. Senseless, chaotic, angry, distracting, dissonant noise.
This one is somewhat weird and also rather a mixed bag. Sort of sounds like bad guy songs from Disney cartoon movies. The quality also widely varies. For most of the album I wanted to round this up to a 4 from a 3.5. But O'Malley's Bar went on for way too long and then the last song Death Is Not The End was horrible. The album was at least quite interesting and had some very good parts. So this could have been a really good one. But it is what it is.
This album definitely needs background reading to really be appreciated. But that's a pretty bad thing in my book. I'm judging this album purely on its musical merits and the music simply can't quite stand by itself. I'll give the guy that he was a surprisingly varied singer and that the instrumentation is very simple but passable, considering he did it all himself. I'll also give him that the music is full of feeling. But even considering that - these are only demos and they definitely sound like demos. In that light, a 2 (would give 2.5 if I could) is a pretty good score. If the music were fully fleshed out, played by a band and produced in a good quality, this would probably be a 4 with a possibility of going on 5. I liked Books of Moses, that one had a Doors vibe.
Just the kind of music you'd have playing in the background in a rock bar. Not bad and solidly played, fun enough for in the background when you're having drinks with friends. Not nearly interesting enough for me to listen to for its own sake. Cookie-cutter classic, I guess.
Up until the second to last track this would be a perfect 5/5. The songs and arrangements (especially the lovely instrumental details in the arrangements) are fantastic and the title track as well as The Boxer are masterpieces of songs, with El Condor Pasa not far behind. The perfect score is only marred by the live track Bye Bye Love which would already easily and by far be the worst song if it were not a live arrangement. The audience noise is a jarring contrast to the rest of the album's serene beauty and crystal clear production. I'll still round it up to a 5, but I really wish that track weren't on there.
I really liked Beatiful Dark Twisted Fantasy, the other Kanye West album we had so far.-This one I absolutely hate. Probably Kanye would say something like the unenlightened not understanding the genius vision. Be that as it may, the vision sounds horrendous. I'm hating both the bad rap as well as the minimalist techno - both styles I'm not generally a fan of to begin with - and couldn't finish a single song.
Like the other Elvis Costello album we've had, it's pretty disappointing. He's a great singer and some of the songs have the potential to be hits such as Battered Old Birds and Crimes Of Paris. But why does the production have to suck so much? It just completely ruins the album for me. And this one doesn't have a real standout hit like Alison to lift it up either.
It's sort of interesting and I guess it must have been very original at its time. From a modern day perspective it's fine as background music, but nothing too special. I like some of the funk influences that liven the soundscapes up a bit.
I had no idea what to expect but definitely found myself loving it. During the opening to the first track I had a hard time believing it's a 50's jazz track as it sounded much more like the opening to a 80's prog rock or progressive metal track. The rest of the album sounded more like I imagined highly technical cool jazz to sound like. But unlike other examples of this style I never felt bored with it. Just really good music to have playing which is both excellent in the background and for the occasional more intense listening during the particularly playful segments. Will save this one to re-listen for sure.
Sounded pleasant enough in the background. Not bad and occasionally somewhat good. But very uninspiring.
Back to back Wilco... the previous one got three stars from me for being pleasant background music but very unremarkable. This one somehow sounded even less remarkable. Perhaps somewhat more accessible, but less interesting. I really couldn't hear a reason why this is worth listening to.
Definitely had my doubts about this one, because I've never liked Lemmy's voice much. But the music is rock solid, straightforward, fun. It's a good album I enjoyed listening to.
Listened to about half of the first five songs. It's punk rock. I hate punk rock. The guitars are actually pretty decent by themselves, but the vocals are so very atrocious that there's really no saving this one.
Pretty good album, great instrumentation. Songwriting is sort of so-so. The songs are fine, but they don't sound fully fleshed out. The album doesn't really have any breakout songs either.
Good music, good album. Wasn't struck quite as much by this one as by the previous R.E.M. album we've had. It just didn't quite feel inspiring enough for 5 stars. Favorite track: Man On The Moon
At least today, there's nothing groundbreaking or original about this album. Like The Beatles with more technical depth, like The Hollies with more psychedelia, like The Moody Blues with less organ. It seems like I've heard it all before, yet The Zombies combines these disparate parts perfectly to a great album that hits the right spots and which I'll gladly revisit. Standout song: Time of the Season.
I was sort of excited by this one because I know and like If I Had A Heart (from Vikings of course). Turns out that was the only track on the album worth listening too. It's just sort of weird and droning.
As far as I can judge it seems to be well played and it was somewhat fun to have playing. But aside from a one time listen I'm just not really interested in this kind of music and won't actively listen to it again.
The instrumentation is not too bed and with a completely different vocalist and style of singing, this might have been a good album. But I just sort of hate all of the vocals on this album. From what I heard of the lyrics (didn't actively listen to them) it sounds like they're suuuper edgy.
I rather like Neil Young and I quite like some of his hits. But this album is really just exactly what you'd expect if you imagine Neil Young's filler material recorded garage rock style. No more, no less. There's nothing bad on here and it's better background music than a large part of the albums on this list, but not worth re-listening to either. And there's definitely no gold such as After The Gold Rush or Heart Of Gold on this one.
The music sounded quite good, but I really can't imagine this as being anything other than pleasant and unobtrusive background music. 3.5 rounded down for lack of any standout tracks.
Just a few days ago we got the preceding Jimi Hendrix album. I gave that one 4 stars. The reasons it didn't get 5 stars was that the tracks didn't feel completely fleshed out to me and there were no standout tracks for me. This one on the other hand has a couple fantastic tracks, especially Voodoo Chile, Voodoo Child and the masterful Bowie cover All Along The Watchtower. Great album, was a pleasure to listen to.
I rated Odelay by Beck 2 stars. Can't really remember why because my review stated that I don't have much to say about Beck. I guess I don't have all too much to say about this one either, though I like it much better. It's very melancholy and it sounds pretty good. That's really it.
I was excited about this one since I quite like The Cure. But I guess I like their more polished dark alternative pop sound better than their brooding gothic rock sound. Not bad for one spin, but I'm not interested in giving it more spins either.
Really don't care for this one. I listened to a lot more of it than I usually do for my 1 star albums because I liked the second track. But it looks like that was the only track with that lineup and I really really dislike all the rest. Just not my style at all. The music makes me nervous and annoyed.
Definitely not as bad as it could have been, reading about this album being the progenitor of punk (and I hate punk). The vocals were pretty horrible, the rest was fine, but nothing special.
The Wikipedia article for this one sounded really promising. The musicians are without a doubt talented and the compositions multi-layered and multi-faceted. Yet, I found this album really difficult to listen to. There's a lot of dissonance going on, making the album very jarring and distracting during work. It's a good example of how technical prowess isn't enough if the music is inaccessible.
OK, so I really don't understand why this one is on the list. It's an early 80s pop group that I had never heard of before with a barely distinguishable sound and an extremely dorky image. That said, the music is completely inoffensive and rather pleasant at times. They do have that sax-thing going for them as well, which is somewhat nice. So while I'm puzzled as to why they're on the list, they're certainly not the most unpleasant band on it.
To be honest, I don't think I could name a single Beyonce song (and I don't care, sue me) and have never heard any of the songs on this album as far as I know. Well, now I guess I have that experience and never need to listen to her again. Some of the songs were unobtrusive and totally fine in the background and I do think that she's a skilled and versatile singer. But some of the other songs were extremely annoying and I had to skip them halfway though.
The music sounds really old, but still I feel like it has aged quite well. A few good songs here, good voice, chilled and pleasant music.
This was pleasant enough as pure background music, but a far cry from being actually good, or interesting, new, original, inspiring, etc. No idea what the justification is for including this one on this list.
Pretty interesting to hear for me. Lots of influences from musical cultures and styles I'm unfamiliar with. But not something I'd particularly enjoy listening to more often.
Oh right, these guys have more songs than Seven Nation Army. I actually liked this one back when it came out and I was 12 or 13. Now I can't really say the same anymore. It's very noisy and dissonant and really just not all that interesting. I do still like Seven Nation Army and I Want To Be The Boy To Warm Your Mother's Heart was a nice one too and Hypnotize was decent too. But in general I found myself hoping this album would end a lot sooner.
This sounds a lot more like movie music than like album music just by virtue of being so dramatic. Despite or maybe because it is so dramatic, I quite like it. Scott has a great voice and the songs are very soothing.
Some of Springsteen's hits I really like, such as Born To Run or Dancing In The Dark. But this album in general wasn't more than pleasant background listening for me. There's a couple of good tracks on here such as Lonesome Day and Worlds Apart. But most songs just feel like watered down, lukewarm semi-ballads that just don't go anywhere. You should know better by now Bruce. The album is also way too long. Would be much better if it would be cut down to about half of it's length with all the "standard fare" songs cut out.
Wow. I remember hearing/watching Take Me Out on MTV. Has it really been 17 years? At the time I was 14 and didn't really understand Franz Ferdinand or their music and wasn't a big fan. Now I think I understand and like them a lot better. Hard to believe this is a debut album, as sophisticated as it is. I was pretty torn between rounding this up or down from a 4.5, but in the end I'm rounding it down because there are a couple of songs on here that really aren't very good. But there are no really bad ones and I really enjoyed The Dark Of The Matinée and Darts Of Pleasure very much.
I was really surprised by liking this album as much as I did. I have never cared about Salsa in any sort of way, but this just sounded really good. It seems like it mus have been a blueprint for pretty much anything that was good about any Salsa album ever released after this one. It was a joy to listen to and sort of half-dance around in my chair while working (maybe this one is better for remote work than at the office though).
This was an interesting ones. The only songs I knew by Tears For fears were Mad World and Shout and I had no idea that the two songs are by the same band. That feeling holds true for this entire album. Between one song and the next it can feel difficult to believe that it's the same album. Some tracks are really straightforward and simple, while others are really deep and ambitious. Some seem more akin to synth-pop while others are more akin to prog rock, yet their basic sound stays very recognizable with a character of its own. I needed to give it two spins and still can't entirely wrap my head around it, but I certainly enjoyed it.
Surprisingly interesting, deep, meaningful, multi-layered, emotional, touching, tantalizing. I don't think I've ever actively listened to Leonard Cohen before, but I listened to this one twice already and will certainly listen to more in the future. Favorite song: Teachers
Black Sabbath are always a pleasure to listen to. However, I really don't understand why this album was picked. It doesn't have any of their greatest hits and isn't too special in any other ways either. I'll admit they sound tighter on this one then on their previous Ozzy albums. But in the case of Black Sabbath I don't think that's a good thing. Apart from Ozzy's recognizable vocals, this album, while far ahead of the curve at it's time, could have been made by any number of metal bands. I'm missing the the full, droning but catchy sound of their earlier albums, which is the trademark Black Sabbath sound to me.
Well, it's rap and I generally don't like rap. I guess for rap it's really not the worst. I like the dark, brooding atmosphere of the album and Method Man's rapping voice isn't horrible. But that's still a far cry off from enjoying this album.
Supertramp is a pretty weird band to me. They keep getting suggested to me on Spotify playlist because Spotify believes I should really like them. Sometimes I do, but sometimes their songs really annoy me and I skip them. Anyway, first time I'm listening to an entire album by them and it still feels sort of weird to me. Like I almost like them really much and they're almost exactly my cup of tea, but then something is slightly off and it makes them simply OK instead of awesome. I think this is a 3.5 for me. I'll round it up because I really like the ambitiousness of this album, which I didn't get as much of a sense of on the individual tracks I've heard by them.
As always, R.E.M. is simply a good band. This debut sounds like they were still looking for their trademark sound at the time, despite already showing a lot of sophistication. I enjoyed the album, but it lacked standout songs for me or tracks that really grabbed my attention. The songs were a bit too samey.
I'll just copy my review from the previous PJ Harvey album we got. The only difference is that I've heard of her before now (from this list) and that this album seems a little less radio-friendly: I don't think I've heard of her before and don't understand why this album has any significance. I don't think it's bad and it does have pleasant moments, but it just doesn't really seem interesting or innovative to me in any way. Sounds like radio-friendly background music to me. 2.5 rounded down.
Now here's one I've heard often enough to give it a straight 5 without re-listening, even though it's been quite a while that I last heard it. Of course, I still re-listened and it was a pleasure to do so. Not only was this the album that originated metal music as we know it today, but it has also stood the test of time really well and is still a great album when listened to today. Favorite tracks N.I.B. and Warning
This one was reeeeally boring. Absolutely no clue as to why people might enjoy this one. It's definitely not for me.
Wow. This sounds like absolute garbage to me. Why do people enjoy this? I really don't understand at all.
During the first track I really thought "Hey, this is actually pretty good for punk. There's some structure and these guys at least know how to play their instruments. The vocals aren't completely atrocious either. Maybe this will get a 3 or something like that." Then I proceeded to skip all of the songs part-way through because they were so bad - searching for another somewhat decent song. These Hands was OK enough not to skip, but I didn't like it. Geez, I hate punk rock so much. I wasn't even fully aware of how much I hate punk rock before I started this thing.
Is it even possible to enjoy Bob Marley while not being high? Not that I enjoy his music in any way when I am. It's just soooooo boooooring. It's boring to the point that I get really annoyed. I listened to parts of the first 6 songs but I couldn't bare any of them.
Well. It was absolutely OK background music. Didn't sound bad at all. But not interesting at all in any way. Just some regular melancholic singer/songwriter fare.
This is the second Neil Young album we got that doesn't include any of his well-known hits. And as it turns out, the difference in quality between his hits and "the rest" is staggering. As a whole, the album is a huge disappointment to me. The instrumentation is quite good, technically speaking. But the songwriting seems completely incoherent. It's all over the place and at the same time not going anywhere at all.
This one was very OK, very middle of the road for me. Absolutely listenable, but nothing great, nothing really worth revisiting.
This was a really weird one in a neither particularly good nor particularly bad way. I guess it was an interesting experience to hear this really strange genre mashup. But I feel the execution could have been a lot better.
What shall we say, it's The Beatles. It's really old and sounds old, yet it aged well and is still good music today. It was very noticeable how this album is from the beginning of their career, without all the experimentalism that came later on. It didn't have any of my Beatles favorites, but there weren't any bad ones on here either.
This was yet another weird one. Seems to be pretty ambitious conceptually, lyrically and also in terms of song-structure. But I honestly just didn't pay attention to the lyrics at all as I listened while working. Perhaps that means I didn't do it justice. But it is what it is. There were some things I really liked. The aforementioned ambition in song-structure in particular. The instrumentation was generally really good too. But I didn't like the vocals and the album was just a bit too psychedelic and a bit too weird to merit a 5.
While there were a few parts I liked, I didn't enjoy this album as a whole. The musicianship is definitely solid, but the tracks were way too chaotic for my taste. The vocals aren't quite my cup of tea either. I'd give it 2.5 stars but will round it down because I thought the ending track of the album was pretty horrendous.
I was looking forward to this one as I had given our previous New Order album (Low-Life) 5 stars, favorably noting comparisons to The Cure and The Smiths. This album is much more like a darkish dance-pop album however. It's not bad by any means and quite pleasant in the background. But it's a far cry from Low-Life.
Once again an album that's very different from what I would usually listen to, but on the whole a good experience. I was unsure whether to give this 3 or 4 stars, but then the second to last track Raunchy was so bad, that I'm rounding down to 3.
Just lately I've realized that I really like trip-hop and I've been listening to a couple of trip-hop playlists. On those playlists I regularly find myself skipping Massive Attack tracks though, so I wasn't really looking forward to this one. I love the trip-hop sound they've pioneered with this album, but I simply don't really enjoy the abundant hip-hop and reggae parts they threw into the mix. As it turns out, that bothered me a bit less on this album than on some of their later work and I even enjoyed the rap on Daydreaming (a rare thing for me).
Good album. I rated the previous Joni Mitchell album 3 stars with the only criticism that the songs don't really feel like they're going anywhere. This one seems a bit more mature musically. The poppy jazz instrumentation was a great background for Mitchell's beautifully soothing voice. I liked it.
My stance on this one is the same as for Heroes: I really like the typical David Bowie, but the synth-ambient Bowie just doesn't do it for me. First half 4 stars, second half 2.5 stars.
I'm usually not up to date with current music, so I didn't know Solange at all. I started out very positively surprised, thinking "this usually isn't my type of music, but there's a lot of soul in here and it's really well-made, possibly 4 stars." But those stupid interludes ruin the album. They completely disrupt any sense of flow or even continuity, which is particularly bad for an album that could otherwise count "soothingness" and "reflectiveness" to it's strengths. That already takes the album down to 2.5 for me - rounded down because the tracks Mad and Junie were incredibly bad and had to be skipped halfway through. A shame, this one really had high potential!
Alright. This is an album. It has some slightly interesting but not entirely new approaches. That's it. No idea what could possibly merit the inclusion on this list.
I've never heard this one before, but based on how it sounds and the year it was released, it's pretty easy to hear how this album must have had a huge impact on bridging the gap between blues-heavy hard rock and the beginnings of heavy metal soon after. Musically, this sounds really dated, which is sort of funny in as much as it also sounds like it was quite far ahead of its time back in the late 60's. Anyway, very interesting historically, still pretty good, but not one I'd listen to regularly.
Here's the perfect blend of dream pop and trippy indie rock that I didn't know I was waiting for. Must have been pretty far ahead of its time, so much so that it still sounds better than the majority of indie rock bands that got popular with exactly this kind of sound more than 10 years later.
So I definitely didn't listen to all of this. I listened to 32 of them and that simply has to suffice. While I do applaud the ambition of this project, I definitely feel like it's misguided. It just doesn't seem close to good enough in its execution. There are good reasons bands normally don't release albums this size. It's because albums are just way better with fewer songs that are all high quality. Just select the 15 best out of these 69 songs and you'd probably end up with a great record. There are a couple of gems on here. It's simply not worth wading through the chaff to get to them though.
Some very OK British new wave
Stevie Wonder was pretty great and that includes this album. It's definitely on the long side and could have benefited from cutting some of the less exciting songs. But there are some fantastic tracks on here such as As or Another Star and the album has a lot of variety going for it.
I was looking forward to listening this one, but it turned out to be quite a mixed bag. Some of the songs are really quite good, while others are pretty miserable, such as the opening track. Special mention goes to American Girl which is the sole reason I was looking forward to listening to this album. That one alone is an amazing classic of a song and lifts this album from a 3 to a 4.
With some of these albums I don't have the slightest clue why they might be on here. This is one of those albums. This was a complete waste of time. Not interesting in any kind of way and not really good in any way either.
While this album does have a tendency toward the pretentious, it still sounds really good. There's not a lot that stands out, but all of the tracks are really solid. That is no small feat considering the diversity in songwriting and the amount of different influences blended into coherent songs.
When I was a wee lad of 12 or so one of the very first CDs I had and listened to on repeat was an Iron Maiden compilation with three songs off this album. The sound of this album is pretty much the definition of nostalgia for me. It still has a couple of strong points. In particular, Bruce Dickinson is simply a fantastic singer and the guitar solos are A+. But on the other hand, you can really hear this album's age, most of Iron Maiden's songs sound pretty samey and tend to go drag on for a bit too long and the lyrics are somewhere between angsty, cringey and completely ridiculous. Early Iron Maiden will always have a place in my heart. But tastes change for a reason and this album is definitely not the masterpiece 12-year old little me thought it was. It's still very solid though.
I've listened to the first 10-25 seconds of the first five songs and that was enough to conclude that, for me, this is probably the worst album on this list so far. This is basically the pure essence of what I can stand the least in music.
Not the kind of Jazz I'm into at all. I enjoy smooth and comfortable jazz, perfect for a comfy chair and a sip of whiskey. I don't enjoy this dissonant, 'jerky' and discomforting jazz.
This is our second Megadeth album. Like for the other one, I surprisingly like Megadeth a lot more now than when I was a full-on metal head but just wasn't into old school thrash metal. Funny how tastes change like that. This one just wasn't quite as good as 'Rust in Peace' though, which got five stars from me. It's really solid, but not an amazing standout album.
Pretty nice. Good music, great voice. Couldn't see this as much more than background music though.
Ok, I honestly don't understand this album, but I think I love it. It's just so out there in terms of mix of styles, lyrical concepts. Viewed as an album, the sheer scope and ambition of it is fantastic. Viewed as a collection of songs, it's hard to believe this is all one album. The best thing about this is the seeming ease with which Janelle Monáe pulls off all of the different style on this album - with all of them sounding good. I even enjoyed the rap on this album - something I enjoy only very rarely.
This is the third Rolling Stones album we got and probably the best one. Their blend of blues and classic hard rock just works out really well on this one. As always, the difference between their best and worst songs is huge. You Can't Always Get What You Want is fantastic. All of the rest of the album is in a lower league, but still absolutely decent.
Rating this a 3 just like the other two Prince albums I've listened to. Was probably innovative and modern for it's time. But fails to grab my interest today.
Sounds good, but it's pure background music to me. Really can't see why this is on the list.
The third Elvis Costello album we got and another 3 stars from me. Unlike the other two, Spotify has a remastered version of this one. That helps a lot, considering my main criticism of the other two was horrible production. Most songs on here were decent (and with very good vocals) but unremarkable. Sunday's Best and Moods For Moderns stood out as being annoying, but that's cancelled out by (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding being a five-star song.
After a couple very mediocre albums this was finally a pretty nice one again. I like me some quality classic soul and the funk influences meshed pretty nicely. I especially liked Papa Was A Rollin Stone and Mother Nature. the ballad I Aint Got Nothing was pretty boring though. Still, a very enjoyable album.
I guess it's really very OK. It sounds very decent and it's easy to see how it may have inspired some current days popular musicians. But I just really can't get into it that much. Just nice background music for me and nothing more.
I don't think I've heard much Peter Gabriel era Genesis so far, but I digged it. It sounds like it may have influenced quite a few of the later prog metal and rock bands I'm into. Pretty highbrow prog rock, very artful, Perhaps a bit too much for its own good though. Could definitely be more accessible with less intentional dissonance.
This was definitely the easiest 5 of this list so far, as I've listened to this album quite a number of times the last few years. Pink Floyd in general and Wish You Were Here in particular is one of the most biggest influences for some of the bands I love most today, especially in progressive rock & metal and atmospheric metal. Despite its now considerable age its still a fantastic album in its own right. It's soothing yet moving, accessible yet deep, haunting yet uplifting. It's an album that has a soul. The title track is among my favorite songs of all time, but I also really love all parts of Shine On.
The third Simon & Garfunkel album we got. I rated the other two as 5's but found this one a little weaker in comparison. It's still soothing, the arrangements are still wonderful, the lyrics still poetry. But the overall quality just seemed a bit lower to me compared to Bridge Over Troubled Water and Bookends. Some of the standout tracks such as the fantastic Scarborough Fair or For Emily were clear 5-star songs to me and the album as a whole is still a very good 4.5. But I'm rounding it down because it's not quite as good as the other two albums.
I enjoyed this one a lot, although it did lack real standout tracks. 3.5 rounded up.
This one was a real slog to get through. They may not really be 'The Worst Band In The World' but they are damn far from being among the best. This album just really seems like mass-produced rock, made to fit for easy-listening radio or as representative but not too distracting background music for sappy movies. They get some creativity points for Clockwork Creep, but there too the execution is lackluster and bland. Glad to have this over with.
This album was really a mixed bag. I was hoping for some nice triphop and then quickly disappointed. Then after a couple of songs of not really feeling this aIbum, it started to grow on me. I really loved The Rip. But then I started to feel like I've had enough of this album again. It's honestly sort of depressing in the way it drags you down as it slogs along. The best parts of this album are 4.5 stars for me, the worst parts of this album 2 stars.
Glam rock sort of feels like the musical equivalent of McDonalds-esque fast food. It's mass-produced, impersonal, quick to go in, quick to get out and what's left are some greasy stains and the feeling of having indulged something that really wasn't worth it. Just like those soggy fries this felt stale and unsatisfying. Just like those tasteless burger buns and boring standard condiments, this cardboard cutout rock with cringey "shocking" lyrics and imagery might have sufficed or even impressed my little kid self. But as an adult, I really want to ditch this for some proper food with any sort of sustenance.
Artful but still sort of boring.
I liked this one a lot less than the other two Jimi Hendrix albums we've had. It felt a bit too chaotic and not entirely fleshed out to me. Just not really convincing.
It's somewhat dark and brooding with just the right amount of oppressiveness and then a bunch of catchy hooks mixed in. I really liked this one and listened to it twice in a row. However, the only song that really stood out was Pimpf for being overly dramatic and not really fitting the rest of the album.
So this was half electronic ambient meets world music and half drum n bass where the bass is replaced by traditional music from India or other parts of Asia? It started out really OK with the long and nice ambient track Traveller and then went downhill fast when the album continued with it's weird drum n bass-ish fusion electronica. I guess this gets a couple of points for originality. But those couple points are not enough, since I still hated all of it. Sorry Talvin Singh, but I never want to hear your music again.
There was a time when I really liked the best of compilation of Billy Joel and listened to it quite a lot. That was pretty long ago and I now realize how super cheesy Billy Joel and his songs are. Still, there are a couple of pretty good ones, he has a very good voice and occasionally I like the storytelling of his songs. I think I might have rated this a 3 or 3.5 on its own merits, but the nostalgia factor pushes it up to a 4.
Hm. Well. What this lacks in terms of being interesting it tries to overcompensate with being overly dramatic I guess. Anyway, I really didn't care for this one.
After rating one of the other Sonic Youth albums we've gotten so far 1 star and another one 4 stars, my expectations for this one were pretty uncertain. Unfortunately, this one is a major dung heap again. It's just chaotic noise to me.
Honestly, this isn't the worst rap we've had from this list so far. Not by a long shot. So I guess it merits at least 1.5 stars. However, I'm still rounding it down. I really don't like rap and this album isn't doing anything to change my mind about that.
Well, this is not a Simon & Garfunkel album. I'm really quite disappointed by this one. It gives me the feeling that S&G together are either more than the sum of their parts, or that the greatness of S&G really is pretty much all Garfunkel. Together they're usually 4.5-5 stars for me. This one is a solid 3.5 but really not more than that. Rounding it down for the disappointment.
While I do like the idea of adding half an orchestra to a new-wave pop outfit, both the singing and songwriting are pretty bad.
This one was a major disappointment. Almost all of the songs are really sappy and boring. The album feels completely uninspired and pretty much devoid of personality. The only standout is Superstition which is a good track, even though it feels really dated by now. I Believe also had at least a little personality with its funky guitar tracks. But definitely not enough to lift this album out of tedious mediocrity. Sorry Stevie, I like your voice, but that's not enough when your songs are this boring.
Seriously, why is this on this list? I guess it would be good if someone were actually playing this around a campfire, but as an album this sounds pretty half-arsed. Maybe with a backing band and some proper production this might be good. Also, it may have been good and influential in the 60s, but it doesn't feel like it has any sort of staying power to keep it worth listening for modern audiences. I guess the most interesting tracks for me were the instrumental ones. Jansch actually plays quite well when he focuses more on the guitar and gives it some spotlight. I guess that makes it a 2.5 instead of a 2, but I'm still rounding down.
At least I know what Lorde sounds like now. First time I've actively listened to her and also the last time. I just don't care for this music.
This one is wildly unspectacular and I have no idea what merits its inclusion on this list. It's just unobtrusive, radio-friendly rock that goes in one ear and out the other without leaving much of an impression. But it's better than most of what I've had to listen to from this list for the past week.
Wow, this one might take the cake for the most dated album on this list. It's almost hard to believe nowadays that Disco was ever really a thing. Nowadays this sounds more like 80s porn music than anything else. Still, this wasn't bad at all as background music. There were also a couple of very decent tunes on here such as the funky Le Freak and the groovy I Want Your Love.
The first impression of this album was a bit misleading, as it opens on the only bad track of the album, which made me restart the album after a few songs to give it the proper listening it deserves. And that was well worth it because it's actually very good. Good enough to make me curious about the rest of Fiona Apple's catalogue. Fiona Apple is a pretty ridiculous artist name by the way - but what's in a name.
I would have way preferred this to be an album in Willie Nelson's trademark outlaw country style. Instead we get a bunch of covers of sappy, old, popular love songs. Still, even though it's not what I'd hoped for, this is pretty got. The songs may be more than sappy and the performance seemingly sparse, but the execution is flawless. It's not one that I'm likely to return to, but it was a great album for background listening during work.
Not being very familiar with the genre, I find it hard to review classic grunge in any other way than through the lens set up by Nirvana. In a direct comparison, Mudhoney lack Nirvana's catchy choruses and Kurt's iconic delivery thereof. Nonetheless, I enjoyed this one a lot more than I thought I would. It has some pretty good hooks and isn't too chaotic and certainly not mindless (my usual complaints regarding grunge and punk-inspired genres in general). The album length was perfect too, as I stayed engaged throughout. Good album.
Just recently (and this project helped) I've been really getting into guitar-driven blues and Muddy Waters is right up my alley (and on some of the playlists I've been listening to). Great album, I really enjoyed it. It wasn't exactly good for my productivity at work though.
This one sounds a lot more intelligent and way less annoying than most rap albums I've heard. Giving this one 2.5 stars. Rounded down because I still didn't want to listen to more than half the album.
Pretty good. I've long liked classic soul and am of course familiar with Otis Redding, whose voice is top notch on this album. I particularly like his renditions of the two Sam Cooke songs A Change Is Gonna Come and Wonderful World, as well as You Don't Miss Your Water. It's not interesting or spectacular enough for 5 stars in my book, but certainly a good listen.
I've been really looking forward to this one since I first saw it on the History list a week ago (I'm a bit behind, OK?). Layla is a guitar classic masterpiece and I've had other songs off this album popping up on my Spotify playlists now and then. Eric Clapton's guitar-playing is at its absolute best on this album, with the backing band providing a great framework for it. Clapton's vocals could certainly be improved on, but that's not what we came here for. In the end it's all about the impeccable guitars. Admittedly, the album is on the long side and there is certainly some filler on here. It would be tighter and better as a whole by dropping the snoozers I Am Yours and It's Not Too Late and maybe 1 or 2 more as well as by shortening Key To The Highway, which seems to ramble. Nonetheless, most of the album is of such high quality, that its length and the few sleepy parts can be forgiven. Highlights: Layla, Little Wing
Well, I was curious if Lennon's solo career was more (of note) than just Imagine. After listening to this that really doesn't seem to be the case. Imagine is a fantastic song. Nothing else on here is in any way noteworthy though. It doesn't sound bad, just completely uninteresting. It's a 3.5 for me, but I'm rounding it down because I don't really remember any of the tracks a couple of minutes after I've finished listening.
Really enjoyed this one a lot. It's prog rock in it's purest form. The usual criticisms that can be made of the genre are applicable to this one as well. Songs go on for pretty long, focus on instrumental virtuosity over easy accessibility, etc. But I found the album very coherent and well-crafted. This is especially true when considering how long ago this one was made. It never felt like it became too meandering either. In terms of quality this is more of a 4.5 than an amazing 5. But I'm rounding it up for being an important part of the foundation many of my favorite modern bands built their own careers on.
This sounded very decent, but also absolutely unspectacular. 3.5 rounded down because I can't remember what the album sounds like a couple minutes after it's finished. The songs from the extended version really didn't fit with the rest of the album.
This is definitely not the most remarkable album on this list, but I did find myself thoroughly enjoying it. The music has a sort of gentle, fleeting or ephemeral grace to it that I find soothing yet also stimulating.
Pretty cool, I enjoyed this one. More of a 3.5, but rounding up because of how consistent the high quality of this album was.
I started out sort of liking this one, thinking of it as a 3.5 star album. But it got significantly worse during the second half. The Party was pretty bad and Stress was so annoying that I had to skip it to remain sane.
My brother got this on CD when it came out. I must have been 12 or 13 at the time and always listened to all of his CDs. I didn't get this one. It seemed sort of weird and then I never listened to it again. Seeing the album here made me think "Oh yeah, there was an album like this! I heard it. Some strange alternative rock or something like that." Listening to it yesterday and giving it a second spin today, I've been loving every moment of this album. Progressive rock and alternativ rock get together for a twist that still sounds fresh and original almost 20 years later. I can't claim that the lyrics seem much more than associative stream of consciousness, but that's OK. As is not uncommon in alternative rock, the vocals are frequently off-key and sound whiny at times. I'm not the biggest fan of this style of singing, but here it fits quite well. The bigger draw, for me, is the undeniable instrumental virtuosity on this album and the elaborate and unpredictable structuring of the tracks. This one really caught me by surprise but I will be sure to revisit it and check out the other Mars Volta albums as well. Favorite tracks were the two Esp songs.
Well, it's some electronic dance music. I guess that for what it is, it's pretty good. I liked the various musical influences and found some of the tracks enjoyable for background music. That's miles and miles ahead of how much I like most other dance music, so I'm giving this 3 stars.
Neil Young wrote a couple of fantastic songs throughout his career, but most of his songs are chaf or filler at beast. On Harvest, Heart of Gold is fantastic. All the rest however, is somewhere between fine and pleasant. The album was definitely better (tighter songwriting) than Tonight's The Night, which we already listened to from this list. But it's still not much more than fine background music.
Wow, the first Iron Maiden album. It's definitely not their best (in particular regarding vocals), but it's still pretty solid. I really liked Strange World and Phantom Of The Opera was pretty good too. This might honestly be more of a 3 than a 4. But, well, the nostalgia factor.
1-2 weeks ago we had the pretty unspectacular John Lennon album Imagine. Unfortunately, Paul McCartney's solo efforts really aren't any more spectacular. The Beatles also had their ups and downs, but it is clear that the individual members really aren't all that hot on their own.
OK, cool. At least that what you might think if you're highly a conservative-minded teen in the early 70s.
This is absolutely decent. But I really can't wrap my head around what could make this album relevant enough to warrant inclusion on the list.
The Joshua Tree was OK but otherwise I really don't understand the hype around U2. completely overhyped band for no reason at all. This album wasn't horrible, but not very good either. I was glad when it was finished. Probably more of a 2.5 than a 2. Rounded down because we've already had two U2 albums before this one and that's really more than enough for this band.
Sort of a mixed bag. The song that I knew best going in was The Passenger, which is a pretty awesome song. However, there were a couple sinkers too. In particular Sixteen and Turn Blue which I had to skip halfway through. Most of the album was OK. Not bad at all, but no other song came near to the quality of The Passenger.
This takes me back a bit. I had a phase of being very into this brand of indie-pop during the early to mid 2010s. I don't care much for the style anymore, but this is still a pretty good album. The difference between the best and the worst tracks is a bit too big. But the worst tracks are also still very listenable.
This album has quite a lot going for it, but also has a couple of point in which it could be a lot better. It's pretty nice classic prog rock with jazz and folk elements. For that I'd like to give it a 3.5 but will round it up because I did quite enjoy it. But the vocals could definitely be a lot better and don't do the instrumentation justice. Also, the mixing is pretty weak. All of the instruments would benefit from a fuller sound, especially the guitars. If those two issues were resolved this could be a 5-star album.
A fun little album, giving this a 4 just like the other two Kinks albums we got so far. And just like the other two it's really hard not to compare them to The Beatles. The album is pretty solid in every way and there are no bad tracks on here, but it doesn't quite rise to "fantastic" status for me either. I didn't know that Sunny Afternoon was by them, good song.
Not sure if I've never heard of the band before, or just didn't recognize the band name as a band name. The latter seems more likely. It's a pretty recent album and I really don't think it's inclusion is warranted. The singer has a good voice and the album probably takes up a particular niche in the music scene of the last years. But the reason that niche might still have been free might simply be that it's not very interesting. Previous decades had more than their fill of this sort of album and most likely with more interesting instrumentation. Yes, the minimalist bare bones approach in instrumentation and mixing help highlight the voice - but they are also very boring. Please turn that war up a couple of notches next time guys.
So I really don't care for rap and hardly know anything about the genre either. Like the other Tribe Called Quest album this more intelligent, less annoying and all around better than most rap I've heard. It seems like quirky than their debut album though and frankly, to me as a genre outsider every track sounds exactly the same as a result. So while I recognize some quality here, it still results in an album I only listened to half of and really don't care about.
I don't really know any other reggae than the stuff Bob Marley and his sons put out which I hate with passion (seriously, how can anyone stand any of that ***?). Turns out it's not all that horrible. This album was a lot jazzier than what I'd think of as typical reggae and with a much stronger focus on instrumentation, rather than on sluggishly delivered vocal hooks. It's still not something I'd actively seek out and listen to, but it was perfectly fine in the background and even enjoyable at times. Definitely a good experience to listen to this one, as it was the first time I've ever heard any reggae without instantly thinking "wow, this sucks so much". The one song that stood out for being horrible was Madam Medusa though, that one really sucked. All the rest of the album was fine though.
First off, I believe this band's moon landing was faked. Called it. All in all this was a pretty weird one. Quite modern and quite oldschool at the same time and pretty quirky all around. I enjoyed it, although it's hard to say how much I enjoyed it and that seemed to change with every song. The songs that stood out most were the opener for making me think "I don't know what this is, but I like it", Lovefool for making me think "Ohh I've heard this one before, but never the original, I believe" and Iron Man for making me think "This is a pretty weird cover, the style really doesn't fit the song".
I simply don't like rap. These two definitely don't have the most annoying voices in rap, so this is at least 1.5 stars instead of 1, but I'll still round it down for being super boring. I didn't make it past the fifth track. The pseudo-intelligent-sounding lyrics don't help either.
Absolutely love Santana and was looking forward to this one. Unfortunately, it seems like this is pretty much his weakest record. The three opening songs in particular are rather weak (especially the massively overrated Oye Como Va). From Incident at Nashbur on the album was pure fire however, right up to the outro which was a bit of a stinker again. I'd really like to give this a 4.5. The amazing parts are absolutely amazing and tracks 4-8 are a straight 5. But tracks 1/3/9 are a 3 at best. Rounding this down because Santana really can (and did) do better than Abraxas.
I was looking forward to listening this one when I saw it on the list, but then enjoyed it even more than expected. The voice and songwriting are top notch and this album is easily among the best singer-songwriter albums I've ever heard. I listened to it a second time right after finishing the first spin. The instrumentation is sparse with bare bones arrangements, but every note is exactly where it should be to showcase the pure feeling distilled into every track. I can see how people may be disappointed, as it starts off with the stellar American Pie and then every other track on the album seems to be a lot less energetic. But it makes up for that with serene, melancholy beauty and feeling.
This thrash metal and hip-hop crossover album really seems like the worst of both worlds. The trash metal side is overly simplistic, chaotic and annoying, while the hip-hop side of the equation is badly performed and also annoying - maybe it's the reggae influences, a style I find badly performed and annoying almost by default. Every part of this mash-up is a mess. And the result is even more of a mess than the sum of its parts.
Not the first time I've listened to this album, but it's not one I'd revisit by myself. It's good, but I don't think it's as good as it's made out to be. In particular, too many of the tracks just don't sound like they're going anywhere. Being a showcase for instrumental talent is just not enough when songwriting is this loose. Also I generally prefer the bluesy side of Eric Clapton over his psychedelic rock side. All of that said, it's still a good album.
This was a really boring one. It had some parts that were pleasant background music, but really never much more than that.
Finest guitar-driven southern rock. The only song I new so far was the fantastic Free Bird, but the entire album is just highest quality rock.
So from what I'm reading there seems to be a mess with differently mixed versions and Spotify only has the "Iggy Pop Mix" versions. I'm basing my review on that, but since the mixing seems like one of the worst things about this album to me, I'm not sure if that's fair/accurate. Anyway, this is a horrible, noisy mess. I only listened to the first half of the album but I'm stopping here because I can't concentrate on my work with this playing. I guess by itself this album might be closer to a 2 than a 1, since there are some decent guitar tracks hidden in this chaotically scrambled mix. But I'm tending to the 1 because this album enabled the abomination that is punk music. At least now I know which album to delete from music history if I ever manage to travel back in time.
While it's not entirely as horrible as Marley, it's still really horrible. I really just don't understand reggae. It's almost always soooo boring paired with being played sloppy and being really sluggish and it just irritates the crap out of me. I can't wrap my head around how people can be capable of enjoying this. Oh wait, yeah, probably the answer is drugs.
Wow, I really don't understand this one. It's a wild mix of styles, yet, the band is bad at every single one of those styles.
Wow, this one was really really lame. I understand that this soundtrack is historically relevant in terms of what movie soundtracks can be. But I really don't care for listening to nearly any soundtrack as an album. The point of a soundtrack is to accompany something. Without the accompanying something you're just left with context-free yet context-specific background sound. I liked Soulsville. It was one of the only tracks with lyrics and to me the only track that could stand on its own (apart from Do Your Thing if it were 6 instead of 19 minutes). The guy has a nice voice, so I'm all for a proper album by Isaac Hayes. But please no more soundtracks.
On a long string of bad albums. It's getting sort of frustrating. Too psychedelic, not interesting enough, not good enough. Don't care about this one either.
The instrumentation and songwriting are dissonant, chaotic and frankly, all over the place. But that's nothing as compared to the vocals which are straight up absolutely horrible.
Definitely not what I expected, although I honestly didn't really know what I was expecting. I'm generally not a fan of hiphop, but then again, without the Wikipedia article I wouldn't have thought of this as instrumental hiphop. In any case this was highly enjoyable background music, even though it's difficult to pinpoint, what exactly I enjoyed about it so much.
Wow, kudos to this for being perhaps the most early to mid 90's sounding rock album I've ever heard. I didn't think I had ever heard of this band before, but Silence Kid sounds pretty familiar. 3 stars for being pleasant enough but otherwise unremarkable.
To be honest, this is the Nirvana record I like the least. It just doesn't jive with me in the way the others do and there aren't really any big stand-out tracks on this one for me. That said, it's still pretty good and I enjoyed re-listening to it as a whole.
This is a pretty weird one and it seems all over the place - but in this case, that's a good thing. Usually I like my music a bit more coherent, but The Pretty Things seem to really have hit some sweet spots with this one. Just the right amount of psychedelic, just the right amount of folk, vocals just not weird enough to still be cool.
An absolutely fantastic hard rock album and a classic for good reason. Fast and dirty, yet with enough technical appeal and interesting song writing.
This gets 2 stars because it's one of the most listenable punk albums we've had from this list. And with most listenable I mean that's it's still actually quite bad, but it's not completely unlistenable.
I don't really know what proto-punk is, since I absolutely hate punk and hated the last proto-punk album we've had as well. But I thought this one is actually pretty awesome. For a debut album it always sounds extremely confident and straight-lined. I should also add that the rating is based only on the 9 tracks of the original album. I also listened to two of the bonus tracks and those were 2 star songs at most. So I guess also kudos for knowing which tracks to include and which to exclude...
More of a 2.5 than a 3, but rounding it up because there were no actually very bad parts. I can't say there were any really great parts either though. This is just a nice-ish, mellow, ambient background electronic album. No more and no less.
Definitely better than most rap I've ever heard. I listened to 8 full tracks without needing to skip any. That's way ahead of the vast majority of rap albums. Still, I see absolutely no reason to listen to the rest of this. I can't understand why this album is supposed to be particularly relevant (the Wiki article offers no clues) and although it's better than most rap, that doesn't make it good for me.
There were some instrumental aspects of this album that I quite liked. In particular the erratic organ sound of the keyboard was pretty interesting and I enjoyed the heavy bass lines too. But that's no compensation for how much I loathed the vocal delivery. It's not the sound of the guy's voice itself that get to me, but the godawful songwriting of the vocal lines. I guess it's supposed to be so jarring on purpose, but I absolutely hate it.
The previous Björk album we had got 5 stars from me. so I was looking forward to this one. Turns out not all Björk albums are created equal. It still has some very interesting parts and I still like her voice. But there's also a lot of unpleasant, dissonant weirdness that just doesn't come together as well as it should.
Well, now I know that The White Stripes really are mostly just Seven Nation Army after all. And if anyone were in doubt that rock albums benefit from a bass guitar, here's an album to show them. I did enjoy The Same Boy You've Always Known and We're Going To Be Friends. But those are not enough to raise the score to 3 stars.
I'm very split on what to say about this one. It's from last year, so it's still up in the air if this one can become a classic or if it will never be listened to by anyone again a few years from now. I find the concept and themes applause-worthy for the strong stances they take on relevant social issues. Women deserve to take their sexuality into their own hands and perhaps this album will give some women the courage they need and deserve. But on the other hand, I absolutely hate the music. It's really not for me and I had to stop the album after a couple of tracks.
A pretty solid, fun rock album. Nothing amazing, but certainly a good listen. More of a 3.5 than a 4.
Why this atrocious mid-90s punk album could ever deserve a spot on this list is completely beyond me.
Wow, this is so absolutely horrible. Some of the instrumentation and samples seem like they could be nice, if they weren't the background for some of the most annoying rap I've ever heard.
No idea why this one should deserve a spot on this list. Certainly one of the most unremarkable albums we've listened to so far. Boring songs, adequate execution, subpar production. I did like Soul Free, the only track that stood out to me.
Most rap albums get 1 or (rarely) 2 stars from me and I only listen to about a minute of the first 4-5 songs. This album on the other hand I found absolutely decent and only skipped forward once or twice and otherwise listened to the whole album. I'm still not a fan of rap and I wouldn't actively listen to this album again. But it was totally fine and I didn't mind it at all, which is more than I can say for 95% of all rap.
Loved this one! Possibly the best brit-pop album and one of the best British new wave albums I've heard. The music doesn't stand out all that much by itself and there were no real standout tracks. But it was just excellent as a whole. All of the elements really come together to turn elements that could be drawbacks into strengths - it's sleazy, but just the right kind of sleazy, it has an air or self-importance, but is convincing enough to pull it off, the vocals are frequently off-key, but the singer is skilled enough to make clear that it's on purpose. Count me a fan.
The other Velvet Underground album we've had was fantastic, but I'm a lot less enthusiastic about this one. It definitely had some good moments. But the horrendous production really doesn't work for me. Lady Godiva's Operation would be pretty nice, if not for the really weirdly mixed vocal lines thrown on top of the track and I Heard Her Call My Name was a chaotic mess.
This was the third Nick Drake album we got and the third that got 3 stars for me. He's OK, but really nothing more than that.
As a non-rap-fan I guess I can still recognize that Eminem is pretty talented and has a way with words. That said, I still don't like rap and his lyrics pretty horrible despite his way with words. At least half of everything he has to say is a mixture of swear words, homophobia, domestic violence and "I'm white, deal with it". Stan is a good song and I spent the album hoping for another track with such high quality, but couldn't find it. I liked Kim and the D12 parts of Under The Influence. But that was it.
Split on this one in so far as I really liked the instrumentation and really hated the vocal style. I also enjoyed the second half of the album a lot more than the first half.
First time I listened to an album by the Beach Boys and probably the last time (depends solely on if there's another one on this list). The first half of the album is 2 stars. Completely forgettable, badly aged pop rock with bad singing. The second half is more interesting and merits 3.5 stars. I could have done without the last track though.
I understand that this live album was Frampton's breakthrough, but I really don't understand why some people prefer to hear live recordings over studio recordings. It's simply the inferior version to me. That said, even though I'd wish these were the same songs but in studio quality, I really like Peter Frampton and enjoyed listening to this album. While the studio versions might be 4.5 stars to me, this is still 3.5 stars. Rounding up because most other albums from last week were a lot worse than this one.
Usually I strongly dislike world music, but this album really hit some of the right spots and I really enjoyed it as background music.
Weird and unpleasant.
The synth-heavy tracks and pop tracks on this album such as Jump, Panama and I'll Wait are pretty obnoxious and are 2-star songs in my book. The best of the rock tracks are very decent or even pretty good, going up to 3.5-4 stars for me. All in all, too much annoying pop for me.
I have to say, I'm extremely surprised by how much I liked this one. At the time of the album's release I was very dismissive about it: being 14 years old and just getting into heavy metal, I saw this as a lame, mainstream pop-punk album. Listening to it now, I still don't think it's a "real" punk rock album - but I see that as a positive. In particular, the album is far and beyond the very low musical quality and production standards of true punk. I do however appreciate the sentiments of generalized dissatisfaction with society and politics (particularly American, but also globally), which I also didn't share or understand to this degree at the age of 14 - and which are common in "real" punk, but rarely expressed anywhere near this well. Instead of a punk album, I see this as an accessible yet very good alternative rock album, built on the legacy of 80's hard rock concept albums / rock operas and incorporating the best of the (few) good elements of punk. 18 years after its release, I'm glad I re-listened this album and learned to appreciate it. Will definitely revisit. 4.5 stars.
Since I already knew and liked a couple of songs by Suzanne Vega, this album was rather disappointing. It has some pretty good tracks like Marlene On The Wall and The Queen And The Soldier. But most of it is rather boring.
Very nice background listening to tap your feet to.
I've always liked Elton John and I still like Elton John - a strong album. Tiny Dancer is one of his very best songs.
Good enough, quite pleasant. Now at least I know what Amy Winehouse sounds like. I've hear some of the tracks on this album before, but wouldn't have been able to say it's from her. 3.5 stars rounded up.
Another pretty good album by The Who. It does sound pretty dated by now, being almost 60 years old. But it was clearly way ahead of its time when it first came out and paved the way for a lot of the heavier rock and metal that came after. Favorite track on the album: The Kids Are Alright
This is the third PJ Harvey album we've had and listening to half of it was enough to give this album the same rating as the other two. It's weird, unpleasant and I can't hear any justification for this album's inclusion on this list.
I really don't like hiphop. I can't really comment on the musical quality of this album within its genre, but to me it's unlistenable.
Pretty good singer-songwriter fair. I like the wide range of influences and styles but also the consistent dreamy quality and undertones.
Sort of weird somewhat-psychedelic late 60s guitar rock. Not bad. 3.5 stars, rounded down because I liked the other 3.5 star album I listened to today a little more.
I generally don't like rap, but do think that Dizzee Rascal is definitely among the better rappers I've heard. I liked the no frills electronic accompaniment as well and also the rather dark sound of the music. That said, it's still a style of music I generally dislike. Additionally, the nervousness and angstiness of the music made a couple of the tracks really hard to listen to. The album was also very long, which led me to skip a couple of tracks, especially around the middle of the album. 2.5 stars rounded down because I did quite a bit of skipping.
I'm not sure if this album really deserves the 5 stars. It's not really original, nor is the musicianship particularly outstanding in terms of songwriting. But Dolly Parton just is and always was a treasure to warm the heart. It feels like a sweet, pure and simple pleasure listening to her music and that's enough for me to round up my rating from 4.5 Now I'm going to listen to some more of her stuff.
Of course I knew White Rabbit and Somebody To Love - both good songs. I was quite surprised they're this old though. The album seems ahead of its time. As a whole it's not quite good enough for 5 stars either though.
This is my first time consciously listening to My Bloody Valentine and I have to say I was somehow always convinced that they're an emo band or at best a nu metal band - two styles I have little interest in. I had no idea that this is some sort of weird ambient shoegaze soundscape-rock. That said, I mostly enjoyed having it on. A bit too dissonant for more than one album at a time, but I liked having it on while working.
A very easy 5 stars. It's crazy how such a massively versatile album can be so consistently excellent. Apart from the somewhat annoying middle-part of The Prophet's Song (not quite the lightning in a bottle that is Bohemian Rhapsody) and the sub-par Good Company, every single track is worthy of the 5 star album score. '39 in particular is a longtime Queen favorite of mine.
There are a couple of Springsteen hits that I like, but this album didn't contain any of them and seemed very lukewarm at best. Too much mumbling and the sax solos are nice by themselves, but get old quick. Definitely not bad, but not quite good enough either.
So according to Wiki the band fought hard for creative freedom... and then this is what they did with it? It's sort of crazy how cheesy and dated this one is and I really can't fathom a reason to listen to this, except in a museum sense of "this is what people liked almost 60 years ago".
Wow. It's staggering how absolutely anti-feminist the lyrics on this album are. That alone would be enough to ensure this one doesn't get a good rating. The music really isn't doing anything to change my mind either. It's boring, unimaginative and cringey. It doesn't hurt my ears which saves it from a 1 star rating, but just barely.
This is the dreamy kind of music that sounds pleasant while it's playing, but it doesn't really go anywhere and you forget what each song sounded like as soon as it's ended.
I had no idea Coldplay's debut was comparatively speaking so recent. Somehow I thought these guys had been around for ages. It's really very decent and was pleasant to listen to. But really nothing more than that. Giving the album a 3.5 but rounding up because I'm in a good mood.
Well. It's ambient music for airports. Totally fine for work. But absolutely nowhere near where I'd actively listen to it.
Our first Clapton solo album, but to me the worst album with Clapton on it. His singing has improved, but more importantly, the songwriting is lukewarm and his guitar-tracks are not nearly as good/interesting here as they were with Derek & The Dominoes, John Mayall And The Bluesbreakers or with Cream. That's a sort of recurring theme of the album. It's all ok, but just not nearly as good as it could/should be. The songs seem sort of half-baked and simply aren't interesting, despite the band's obvious potential. The album gets better during the second half. Let It Grow and Steady Rollin' Man for example are quite good. But as a whole, the album is still rather disappointing. Also: I Shot The Sheriff is a super annoying song.
God I hate reggae singing so so so much. The sometimes nice-ish trip-hoppy background music isn't enough to make the horrendous singing bearable. How can people stand, let alone enjoy this? Wikipedia also doesn't offer any hints on why this album might be relevant in any way.
I was really happy to see Faith No More pop up on this list and thoroughly enjoyed this album. It's been many years since I last listened to them, but I should obviously start doing so again. They're rock solid in all of their versatility and their catchy, funky alternative metal mash-up is simply a ton of fun to listen to. Highlights: Falling To Pieces and the very good War Pigs cover
Decent, but kind of lame. Definitely way too long and would have greatly benefited from some of the chaff being cut from the album. 2.5 rounded up.
I have rarely heard an album oozing 80s as hard as this one. Unfortunately, I'm not a big fan of 80s sounds and this album really doesn't have much more to offer than that. Boring to me, didn't finish it.
Our fourth Neil Young album. Turns out Neil Young really is all about his couple of great hits. Albums that don't have any of them, like this one, are just a collection of "it's alright I guess".
So today we're reviewing... *checks random word generator* ...superfuzz bigmuff. Giving this 4 stars just like the other Mudhoney album we got. They're both super decent, hard-hitting, fun & dirty grunge albums. They might not be quite as catchy as Nirvana, but otherwise not all that far behind.
I found it hard to get into this one. Maybe it's an album that requires more attention than I was able to give it today. But despite sounding pleasant, it was really just some nice background noise to me. Not much of a lasting impression and nothing to care much about either way.
The fourth Rolling Stones album we got so far. This one's a lot bluesier than the previous ones. It's quite good, although not amazing. It would surely be better if they'd cut some of the less exciting tracks, as the album is very long. Giving this 3.5 stars but rounding up because it's better than the previous album I listened to today and gave 3 stars.
D&B isn't really my style of music, so I wouldn't have listened to this on my own. It was mostly not unpleasant and totally fine in the background, so I guess it was a good experience to expand my general music knowledge. That said, it was never much more than "not unpleasant" and there were a couple of unpleasant parts or tracks, especially on the first disc. Speaking of multiple discs, this album was definitely also way too long. I'm pretty surprised at myself that I finished it, I wasn't expecting to when I started listening to it. Some of the individual tracks were too long considering how repetitive they were and the album quality would certainly be higher by just cutting some of the less interesting tracks.
Glad to get a non-live Johnny Cash album this time! It starts off fantastically with two songs I'd already had marked as favorites on Spotify. Unfortunately, those were the highlights of the album and it doesn't continue at that level of quality. It's still very enjoyable though. Cash's voice is iconic and the selection of covers is great, although I don't think all of them are executed equally well. As a whole, a good album. But I can't quite justify 5 stars.
Honestly, I expected to hate this one, so I'm giving it bonus points fot being way better than expected and for not hating it. The vocals are occasionally annoying, but fit the music well and I got used to them after a while. The instrumentation is actually nice - I like the funk-rock influences apparent in the music. Usually I listen to at most a minute of the first 5-6 tracks of rap albums before giving it 1 star. But I listened to this album from start to finish and it was totally fine. Probably a 2.5 for me, rather than a 3 but rounding it up because it's so rare that I can listen to an entire rap album.
Pretty weird, pretty distorted, sort of edgy and dissonant. I liked it though. It hit the right spots. Like the other album by them, nothing that I can listen to for too long, but nice for a while.
It's a really weird, mostly instrumental jazz/funk/prog-rock mash-up and I love it - that is I absolutely loved the first 4 tracks and wasn't that keen on tracks 5 and 6 which were a bit too dissonant for me. Easy five stars especially for the first 3 tracks but the last 2 bring the album down a bit.
Definitely still not a fan of Iggy Pop and/or The Stooges. This album was mostly just somewhat noisy, unappealing and uncomfortable without redeeming qualities to speak of. Dum Dum Boys was fine and I liked the saxophone on Tiny Girls.
To be honest, this one was way better than I expected. Perhaps my expectations were low because two of the best known songs from the album (Photograph and Rock Of Ages) were by far the worst tracks in my opinion. But the less poppy parts of the album were a lot of fun and I ended up enjoying the album quite a bit!
Nice, I enjoyed this one. Good vocal delivery, good guitars and decent songs. A fun album that can justify more than one spin. However, it's not all that original or creative enough to really be great.
Sort of alright. Quite pleasant background music for work. Can't say that I really understand what merits this album's inclusion on the list.
I enjoyed this one quite a bit. Not for any one particular reason and I don't think it's brilliant in any way. But it's just all-round pretty good and sounds very nice.
Industrial rock/metal has never really been my style. I tend to like the riffs themselves, but to dislike the jarring and tinny sound with which the music is typically played/produced. The symphonic metal elements in the music make some tracks a bit more interesting, while the cabaret elements make some of the tracks more annoying. All in all, definitely not the album for me. This is probably also the most abrasive I've ever heard French.
This was a really nice one. I enjoyed it more than the other Massive Attack album we've had (which I rated 4 stars). Much more of the mellow goodness and less of the hip-hop or reggae elements I don't much (and better executed when it was present). A great listen.
I seem to be mostly alone with this opinion, but here goes: I find Led Zeppelin overrated. That said, this is still a really good album. I like it much better than the other two LZ albums we've had. And Stairway To Heaven and When The Levee Breaks are great songs. But I really can't see this as a masterpiece and tracks 5-7 were pretty weak.
This is the first time I've listened to a rumba album. I sincerely hope it was the last time I've listened to a rumba album.
This album truly had a couple of great tracks during which I thought "wow, I'm loving this, might be a five star album". The music is interesting and frequently beautiful. But in the end it doesn't quite get there. There aren't any positive standout tracks and a couple bad apples (wtf was The Conference?). Still a very nice listen .
I had no idea what to expect, but ended up really enjoying this one. It's a really nice, soothing pop album to have playing in the background. I can't quite give it 5 stars though.
The album has a couple of high points (such as Higher Ground) and of course Wonder's voice is great. But still, it's not really convincing as a whole.
I was looking forward to listening to this one as Tighten Up really is a pretty amazing song. Unfortunately, the rest of the album really doesn't keep up with it and is pretty samey and uninteresting. Doesn't sound bad in itself, but definitely nothing to get excited about.
The third album by The Band that we got and it's another good one, although not quite as great as Music From Big Pink. Still, it's a pretty great mix of americana, folk rock and rock'n'roll that hits the right spots. Good songs, good musicianship and enough variety to stay engaged throughout the album. This gets a thumbs up from me.
Honestly, I didn't know that Rod Stewart is so folky/country. That's not a bad thing though. I enjoyed the album. Songwriting, singing and musicianship are very solid. It's not an album I'd play on repeat though.
Yay, more Pet Shop Boys! And this one has my two favorite songs by them (Heart and It's A Sin; Rent is really good too though). I gave this one two spins and enjoyed the first couple of tracks a lot more on the second go than the first. To be honest, this might be more of a 4 star album than a 5 star album... but Heart!
Mixed on this one. There are some tracks and parts of tracks I really liked, but others were horrible. For example My Friend Goo was absolutely atrocious, as were the endings of Mildred Pierce and Cinderella's Big Score.
I like Rolling In The Deep and Someone Like You, neither of which is on this album. Still, I thought this album has some potential to be a nice one. Turns out, I really don't care for any of her other songs than the two aforementioned. Adele has a really good voice. But her songs are soooo boring. It's just cookie-cutter pop music. A complete waste of time.
This one was leagues better than the other two Beastie Boys albums we had the misfortune to listen to. Now, leagues better means 2 stars instead of 1 in this case. But I actually listened to the full album while only skipping half of 2-3 songs. That's a really massive improvement over the other two B-Boys albums!
Like Infected, the other The The album we've had, this one is also very good, although it lacks a top standout track such as "Heartland". In terms of songwriting, it's absolutely top notch post-punk / dark synth pop. Might even be five stars if the mixing were better.
I think this is the first time I've listened to Van Morrison. It's very good singer-songwriter album with a lot of versatility and a strong, full-bodied sound. Still nothing to get overly excited about though.
According to Wiki this album was pretty hyped three years ago. As I hardly listen to contemporary music, I haven't heard of it before. The individual tracks sound quite good in themselves, but they're not really engaging enough to fully capture my interest.
House music is definitely not for me. I started out thinking "well, this is not my cup of tea and sounds sort of boring, but at least it doesn't sound too bad in itself, so I can have it play in the background". But it's suuuper repetitive and the longer it went on (and it goes on for way way too long), the more annoying it got for me. I made it to track 7 and then had to stop.
This one sounds a little edgy. Juuust a liiittle. It actually sounds like it had a lot of potential to maybe even be great with some tweaks and definitely with big changes to mixing and production. But as it is, there's too much dissonance and unpleasant noise around the edges for me to able to enjoy this album.
Never heard of this band before and I really don't feel like I missed out on anything. Parts of the album are fine and chill but unspectacular and other parts are unpleasantly weird and annoying. The instrumental parts in particular are unbearable.
Always fun to listen to Metallica. This album has a couple of good ones that would be worthy of 5 stars, but doesn't quite get there as a whole. It has some lame filler that drags the album down too such as Don't Tread On Me or The Struggle Within. The album is pretty long too, so would have greatly benefited from simply cutting the chaff. All of that said, it was still a highly enjoyable listen, but it's definitely not on the level of ...And Justice For All.
This album has a couple of very good tracks and I generally enjoy RHCP's funky guitar and bass lines. But there are a couple of pretty lame tracks here too and all in all it's a bit too mainstreamy for me. I enjoyed Blood Sugar Sex Magik a lot more.
The fourth Led Zeppelin album we've had. I still highly respect their musical legacy but have very little interest in actually listening to them. While loving the style they were at the forefront of, I just find LZs songwriting extremely unexciting and rather dislike the singer's voice.
I've heard a couple of tracks before, but this was my first time actively listening to CSN. It feels like this one must have been pretty good when it first came out, but it didn't age well. While they may have sounded fresh in 1969, it all sounds fairly "standard old rock" today. And I'm not sure if it's because of the Youtube upload quality, but the production sounds pretty terrible as well. That said, it was still a decent album, but not more than that.
I liked this one. It was pretty interesting how it simultaneously sounds reminiscent of old-school garage rock and of modern day alternative rock - despite falling in between the two eras. Actually a 3.5, but rounding up because I like it better than the previous two 3's.
I enjoyed this one a lot. In general, I'm not all that big on gothic rock or metal. But this one really hit all the right spots as the perfect mix of dark new wave in the vein of The Cure, classic rock and the emerging gothic scene. The production was fantastic as well.
In some ways, this was a very awkward album. It's the re-visiting of a 60's album in 2004. At the same time it's a boy-band album sung by an aged man. At times it's also more psychedelic than how I imagine anything related to the Beach Boys should be. All that said, it doesn't sound bad. But despite it's weird aspects, it does not sound very memorable at all.
This was some high quality jazz. I enjoyed listening to it.
Don't know this. Don't like this. Don't care about this. For me this whole project is about listening to groundbreaking or influential albums or even masterpieces that have shaped their respective styles. So why bother us with a random dime-a-dozen modern rap album?
The fifth Led Zeppelin album - but the first one I actually thought was great. While respecting their influence, I always found them quite unappealing to listen to, with the exception of a few songs. This album seems to be a welcome exception too! It seems much faster and harder than the others, with just the right amount of blues mixed in and almost none of their annoying parts (the drum solo on Moby Dick was pretty tedious though - which sort of fits with the book, incidentally). But enough criticism. This was actually a great album!
I enjoyed this one. This debut album is a good mix between where Nirvana left off and the poppier, accessible alternative rock songs I knew from Foo Fighters.
As someone who really doesn't like rap, I found this one of the most listenable rap albums I've heard since a long time. Not something I'd actively listen to, but I listened from start to finish without skipping or getting bothered at all. The lyrics I paid attention to were funny.
Truly a very funky album. One way you can tell is by how often they use the word "funk" in song titles and lyrics. Speaking of song titles: Night Of The Thumpasorus People really is a pretty amazing title.
Never heard about mod revival before and I can say I'm really not feeling it. The songs are pretty lame and the execution is sub-par.
I'm not the biggest fan of disco music and therefore I both prefer MJ's early Motown stuff as well as his later pop hits along the lines of Thriller. That said, this is still a very good album and I enjoyed having it on.
Our fourth Elvis Costello album. And it really doesn't change the opinion I have from the first three in any way. So here goes - my opinion on Elvis Costello, applicable to at least 4 of his albums: Good singer. Mostly boring songs with a few standout tracks or part of tracks. Unfortunately, not enough to carry the album though. Too much filler. Production pretty bad (although better than on the other three).
My first impression was a pretty negative one. But after two or three tracks it started growing on me (or maybe they started off with their worst). Still not an album I'd actively listen to. But absolutely fine for background in the right mood.
A nice album with one amazing song on it (Born To Run). Admittedly, Springsteen's raspiness and mumbling can get a bit annoying after some time. But for the forty minutes duration of this album it was totally fine. I enjoyed it for a change of pace.
A weird one. But one that I enjoyed quite a bit more than I expected. A few parts were a little jarring and distracting. Mostly it was very good as background working music though.
I'm halfway convinced that this must already have been really boring and unimaginative by the time it was released 66 years ago. The vocals (which this one is supposed to be all about) aren't even good. Time has not made this record any more interesting or worth listening.
It was an OK album with some parts I enjoyed (the jazzier parts) and some parts I did not enjoy (the ones with stronger proportions of African music styles). On the whole it was a good experience with listening some not unpleasant music in a style I'm not familiar with at all. But in the end, it's not really my type of music and.
Never heard about these guys before. Nothing really special and I probably won't revisit it. But I enjoyed this as a very solid alternative rock album. Fun to listen to and not too abrasive for background listening while working. 3.5 rounded up.
Never listened to this one in its entirety before and I must say I'm pretty surprised. It's a lot heavier and more complex than I expected and actually more reminiscent of late Queen albums than of the well-known Beatles pop-rock hits. I also had some difficulty in rating this one. At first I was a bit confused because it didn't fit my expectations of what it would be like. At the same time I found the album composition pretty weird. The individual tracks seemed like they don't fit together and some of the contrasts seemed to jarring. Still, I thought the individual tracks were mostly pretty awesome. Right after it finished I gave it a second spin and it seemed a lot more organic when I knew what to expect. It's a great album. Maybe more of a 4.5 than a 5, but great nonetheless.
The musicianship is pretty good, not going to deny that. But I definitely didn't enjoy this one. Being the precursor to the whole annoying bleh glam rock / hair metal / pop-hard rock scene makes them more original than the plethora of copycats of a thoroughly unoriginal style, but it doesn't make them any less annoying. I did enjoy the short guitar instrumental at the beginning and I liked Little Dreamer as well - a solid highlight on an otherwise lame album. Ice Cream Man started annoying, but turned into the only actually interesting track. The rest of the album was a slog, boring and galling. Luckily it was quite short.
Leonard Cohen is pretty strange to listen to. Some parts of his music can be fantastic when you're in the right mood. But it's all very 'meh' when the mood is even a bit off. We've had two other albums of his so far. I gave one of them 5 and the other 3 stars. While The opening track was strong, I lost attention very soon after. Making this a very forgettable but not unpleasant 3 for me.
Very noisy. Not much more to say. It wasn't horrendous but I definitely didn't enjoy it.
Definitely not my usual cup of tea. In particular, I strongly dislike most rap. They pull off their peculiar combination of styles quite well though and I had no trouble listening to the entire album without getting annoyed at any point. That's a good effort. Still it's not one I will ever revisit.
I really digged the first half of this album as a super chill, really relaxing and stimulating background jazz record. Then the second half of the album added annoying samba elements into the mix and that sort of ruined it for me. In particular, So Nice and Bananeira were so bad that I had to skip them. Those tracks alone are enough to bring this down from a solid 4 to a shaky 3.
This is a pretty weird one. Not entirely sure if I liked it or didn't like it. But it was interesting and now that it's finished, my ears feel just a little bit too empty.
Nope, I just don't like hip hop. Listened to about half of the first six songs and decided it's enough. For sure not the worst hip hop out there, but I still don't like it at all.
This album is a perfect example of a style I don't like being done well. There's a few parts I like, and there are no parts I hate on here. This is probably a pretty good album. But what really bothers me about this kind of electronica is that it is soooo repetitive within tracks. The loops sound good, but they repeat every 1-2 seconds over a 5 minute track without much else of anything going on. This can be OK for background music, but gets pretty annoying really fast when paying too much attention to it. That said, I really enjoyed the tracks that didn't follow this typical set-up. Specifically the only actual 'songs' on the album (Setting Sun and the beginning of Where Do I Begin) as well as the way more varied closing track The Private Psychedelic Reel. I can see myself awarding a full album like that an easy 5 stars. Most of the rest is worth a measly 2 stars in my book though.
This album feels like it really couldn't decide what it wanted to be, so it ended not being that much of anything. Some of the individual tracks sound pretty good, but as a whole it's just not good enough.
Wasn't sure what I was expecting, but it probably wasn't this. So this album seems to be a mix between a much tamer version of contemporary darkwave and oldschool folk rock songwriting. While the album seemed unexciting at first, it started growing on me after a while. It's definitely a rounded up 4 for me, rather than a solid one. But I enjoyed it more than the last few 3's.
I guess it's my fault for thinking that an album called "Guitar Town" would be an awesome guitar album to look forward to.
3 might not seem like much, but this is a punk album more than anything else and it's rare that I give a punk album more than 1 - let alone 2 - stars! It's very pop-ish and good-humored, not too angry, not too simple, not too abrasive. Just some easy listening. On the flip side it's not much more than that. So I'll just go and listen to something actually interesting again.
Great voice, good songs, very solid album. Instrumentation is very bare bones which allows Adele's voice to shine, but the songs could be a little more interesting with a bit less of a minimalist approach to the instruments. Also the entire album is pretty emo - still good though.
Usually I'm not a fan of live recordings at all - but this one has me convinced in some ways. I've always liked Sam Cooke as a great singer - but not overly much, as I always found his songs a bit too polished, a bit too controlled. Here he's really letting loose and some songs just sound so much better this way. For example Twisting The Night Away really benefits from the live rawness at the harlem square club and Cupid doesn't sound nearly as sappy as on studio recordings (although I think it's sped up a bit too much in this live version). Still, there are aspects of live recordings I just don't like. Sure, crowd interaction is great when you're part of the crowd at the concert. But I just don't care for hearing it in recorded when I want to listen to music - and there's way too much of it on this album. Still, a very good record.
Some pretty high quality blues-infused old-school hard rock. Really not much more to say. I enjoyed it a lot and had fun having it on. On the other hand, there's nothing on here I haven't heard before from other bands.
The good parts are pretty good, but there's also too many annoying parts on here. Not one that I'm interesting in revisiting. 2.5 rounded up.
It's been way too long since I listened to Lana Del Rey, although I really like her and used to listen to her quite a bit. I hadn't heard this album or the previous one yet actually, so I was excited to dive in. It turned out to be the treat I hoped it would be! This album feels musically much more mature than her previous ones which can be both a good thing and a bad thing. Overall, the quality of this album is high throughout. Ethereal, light and beautiful compositions set the background for Lana's iconic as well as laconic voice. On the flip side, there are no immediately catchy potential hits along the lines of Young And Beautiful. This is an album to listen to as an album instead of picking out a couple of greats for playlists and ignoring the chaff. I can't say for sure if I prefer mature or developing Lana Del Rey more. But this was a great listening and I'll go ahead and enjoy her 2019 album next.
I think if dance music were still like this today, my disposition towards clubs would be a lot more positive. The album was quite enjoyable to have playing. But also totally forgettable. rounded down to a 3.
Only listened to parts of the first five tracks before fleeing this assault on my ears. Usually the only good thing that can be said about songs and albums like these is that they're really short. Not so this monstrosity.
Only listened to half of the album. It's not that it was so bad. In fact, I guess I found it more enjoyable than unenjoyable. But it was just too distracting during work.
Just two or three weeks ago I raved about Abbey Road, noting that it was much heavier than I'd thought. Now this is the polar opposite of the Beatle-spectrum. So much poppier, so much less interesting, so much sappier. This album truly shows that The Beatles should always have been predominantly a rock and not a pop band. It has some really nice, fun rock songs such as I'm Happy Just To Dance With You and some of the sappiest stinkers such as If I Fell and And I Love Here. A lot of it comes down to the vocal performances which have bite on the rock songs but are extremely lackluster in the poppy love songs.
This one wasn't nearly as bad as I'd expected. I usually hate punk rock, hardcore even more so. But this was at least listenable without skipping more than two or three tracks. That's quite something! I guess it's because the guitars are actually quite good. Not good enough to enjoy the music, but good enough to not hate it. That's something.
This one really took me by surprised. My experience with the newest albums on this list has been pretty negative so far. The album cover also didn't look too promising to me and I didn't like the beginning of the first track too much either... but the sheer quality of this record pushed those preconceptions and first impressions straight out the window. This is a wonderful album full of feeling and delicate beauty. After the first spin, I had to give it a second spin free from negative preconceptions and loved it. Now I'm listening to his 2016 record and loving that one too.
Wasn't really looking forward to this one, because I'm not a fan of their best known hits and not a fan of "pop metal" or arena rock in general. It was a lot better than expected and I actually quite enjoyed it as background music. My enjoyment varied between songs, with their hits being rather annoying (You Shook Me All Night Long being particularly annoying) and some of the deep cuts being the best (for instance the very bluesy closer Rock And Roll Ain't No Noise Pollution with a fantastic guitar solo).
There were some parts of this album I really liked, but there were just too many, too long, too dissonant parts that were just a bit too unsettling and unpleasant for me to really say I liked this album.
I'm really, really not a fan of rap music. So with very exceptions, 3 stars is about as high as it gets. But I did find this album very listenable and didn't skip any songs (very rare for rap albums). The music sounds smart, sophisticated and varied. I didn't pay any attention to the lyrics.
I really liked the first song as an awesome mix of blues and funk but then found the rest of the album extremely disappointing. All the pluck just went out of it and doesn't pick up again until the last song. I like this style, but not this sappy, weak version of it.
I liked this one more than I expected. Very soothing, fantastic for the background while working.
Back when I was a metalhead I didn't really like Pantera and I still don't, although the reasons might be different now. The guitars on this album are pretty nice, but I find the vocals quite annoying. Despite the nice guitars, the music gets pretty repetitive. That makes it not interesting enough to pay too close attention, but it's still too intense and abrasive for pure background listening.
This is our fourth Stevie Wonder album and I've been pretty mixed on the others (rating them 4, 3 and 2). My main criticism of the 3 and the 2 were that while the best tracks were great, all of the non-best tracks were really boring and utterly devoid of personality. On this one that's luckily not the case. The opener is a bit boring, but apart from that the album is great. Stevie Wonder at his best. I particularly enjoyed Heaven Is 10 Zillion Light Years Away, You Haven't Done Nothin' and Please Don't Go.
It was ok. A lot less unpleasant dissonance than the previous Miles Davis album we had just last week. It's good for background listening and has some pretty good moments. But it's rare that I can get excited by jazz.
The guy seems like a good singer and a good performer - but I really don't care for live performances of 60's chansons. If I read the lyrics and done my utmost best with the rusty French skills of my high school days I'd probably understand the themes and broad content of the songs. But I really don't care enough. And I think understanding the songs is sort of prerequisite to caring about them for this style of music.
This one started out fantastic with five strong songs and on track for 4 or even 5 stars. Then thing completely broke down for the second half with three 2 or even 1 star tracks that were a huge drag to get through before the final minute was nice again. A real shame.
Sigh, two live albums in a row. The music is really pretty boring. Could very well be a 3 without the annoying live bla bla or if it were at least mixed much better, with clearer and less background instrumentation and less dominant crowd cheering.
Quite enjoyed this one as background music. If I hadn't read the wiki first I would never have guessed that this was the frontman for Steely Dan. With the versatility of SD it's not that much of a stretch for their frontman to also be convincing in a completely different style of music. To be fair, this is more of a 3.5 and not actually interesting enough for a clean 4 or more. But it's much better than the three other records I listened to today, so I'm rounding up.
First I wanted to say this album HAS quite a mood. That's not entirely accurate though. Instead I'll say this album IS quite a mood. Was thinking way too hard about if this is a 4 or a 5. But who cares. I listened to it twice and enjoyed both spins.
A really pleasant album for background listening. I very much enjoyed having it on while working. What kept it from being really great though was the lack of standout tracks or moments. The track that came closest was The Well And The Lighthouse.
As far as techno goes, this was pleasant background music which makes it better than the vast majority of techno to me. However it was never any better than pleasant background music and the album was definitely too long. Consider the rating a generously rounded up 2.5
Wow. It's a blend of free jazz and hardcore punk. It's very original, very creative, quite an interesting idea and not badly executed. And I absolutely hate it.
A very pleasant soul-infused jazz record. Great background listening. And quite amazing in contrast to the previous record, which was also jazz fusion and a possible contender for worst album on this list. That contrast gives this album the push to round it up from 3.5 to 4.
Seems like a pretty decent hip-hop album, focused on high quality basics instead of fancy overcompensation for lack of skill. That said, I simply don't like hip-hop. Still giving it three stars though, because it's a rare case where I didn't feel an aggressive urge to skip tracks after the first few seconds and dismiss the whole thing after 5 tracks.
Just before this one I listened to another WTC member solo album and gave it 3 stars because I didn't have the urge to skip songs (which is saying a lot for me for a hip-hop album). This one is also definitely not among the worse half of hip-hop albums I've heard. But I do still have the urge to skip songs and stop listening after a couple of tracks.
This a pretty weird one and most definitely not what I expected. I remember getting some songs by Cocteau Twins on spotify playlists related to atmospheric/ambient trip-hop music. Therefore, I had them mentally pegged more in that corner than in any post-punk corner. Maybe they are very different album to album, maybe they're just doing their own thing and are hard to classify. Be that as it may, I quite liked the instrumental but found the percussion rather tinny and didn't like the vocals too much. Dreamy, yes. But not not in the 'floaty', relaxing manner I'd prefer. Definitely OK background music and I know that I quite enjoy some of their other tracks on playlists that I like. But this album isn't really right for me.
The band leader seems to have been a pretty tragic figure and according to his lyrics, a very angry person. The album was ok, definitely not horrible but also nothing worth re-listening to me.
The previous album was also a post-punk that I rated 3 stars and there have also been post-punk albums I've rated 4-5 stars. Turns out, the simple rule of thumb is, the closer to punk rock a post-punk album sounds, the less I like it. This one is very close to punk rock, and I hate it.
CCR has always been the definitive swamp rock band. As an album, this one sort of lacks consistency between songs. Graveyard Train is a boring snoozer but then the cover of Good Golly Miss Molly and Penthouse Pauper are real bangers with some fantastic guitar lines. Overall, not their best, but a good album.
A strange album in that the music is clearly a couple of decades older than the album. It sounds like the soundtrack to a couple generic but wholesome movie classics. Definitely comforting background music. Hard to see it as more than that - but sometimes that's enough.
Not the biggest fan of jazz but quite liked this one. Found it both accessible and with enough technical depth. Pretty close to prog rock in some parts... Maybe that's why I liked it?
While this album isn't nearly as easily a 5.0 star album as The Dark Side Of The Moon, The Wall or Wish You Were Here would be, but it's still a solid 4.5 that I'll be rounding up. As most psychedelic rock albums, it does have its unpleasant moments. Interstellar Overdrive in particular was a bit challenging at times. But the combination of psychedelia and instrumental mastery is what pushes this one over the top for me.
Something completely different but actually quite pleasant to listen to. Probably a lot more interesting when you can easily understand the lyrics - my french isn't good enough without a lot of effort, so I didn't even try.
Definitely not among the worst country I've heard. But also very far from the best I've heard. Quite OK and El Paso is a nice track.
Definitely not the worst rap - but I don't like rap at all.
Really couldn't get into this one. It sounded really boring. The very weak production didn't help. Also, fish cakes.
Good album - Like A Rolling Stone and Desolation Row have long been on my "liked songs" playlist on Spotify. Bob Dylan absolutely deserves his reputation as a master song crafter. Now if only his voice had been a bit better. Still rounding this up from a 4.5.
A very nice album with a couple of standout moments (an in particular the brilliant Locomotive Breath). However, some parts also feel a bit uninspired and meandering. In particular, some of the more folk pieces don't work that well for me. Still, very good, just not quite enough for 5 stars.
Not a bad album at all. Pretty pleasant modern alternative rock. 3.5 rounded down because I have no idea what makes it relevant enough to be on this list.
Not the worst Sonic Youth album we had to listen to so far, but still pretty bad. Too punkish, too jarring, too annoying.
You can really hear this one's age. It's OK for what it is, but good that it's so short. If it had went for much longer, it would have started to get annoying.
This one is really a mixed bag with a variety of styles across the album which are all performed convincingly but still feel like they have common threads. My appreciation of the tracks also varies wildly. Punk and M1 A1 were absolutely atrocious punk songs, Sound Check on the other hand was a great, chill trip hop song. Clint Eastwood is a pretty cool classic and I also enjoyed the Soulchild remix of 19-2000 a lot. In general, this is not an album I'd revisit, but I like the concept and applaud the musical flexibility.
This was a bit of a strange one. I'm not sure if it's inclusion in this list is really justified - but I did enjoy it, despite having a hard time pinning down, what exactly I enjoyed about it. The album definitely has some depth to it.
Wow, this album really sucks. We already had the misfortune of two albums by The Fall, both of which got 2 stars from me. Although this is one is apparently worse than the others, my sentiment stays the same over all three - jarring, unpleasant and without any serious redempting features.
Wow. This one is weird, completely over the top and not in the tiniest bit serious-takeable - and I absolutely love it. It sounds like an old school heavy metal singer pretending to be Bruce Springsteen who just heard (and loved and got inspired by) Jesus Christ Superstar. Definitely going to re-listen this one!
An interesting album mixing a wide range of influences - ethnic and international. The Beatles also seem to have left clear marks on this album such as in Nuvem Cigana. There were parts of this album I really enjoyed but others which just didn't sound right to me. In particular, I couldn't warm up to most of the singing. The vocals aren't good enough and they don't always blend well with the music. There are also tracks that just don't go anywhere such as Os Povos. The album is fine background listening, but not good enough for more than that.
I found this album very listenable, considering I usually hate rape. I never really enjoyed it but I also never felt the need to skip a song. That doesn't sound great, but rap really doesn't get much better than that for me and I respect that - what I don't respect is 2pac as a person. Can't we stop idolizing sexual predators and violent criminals?
A very enjoyable, little soul album. It seems to have more depth than is apparent on the first spin and I might give it another listen in the future. Haven't listened to much classic soul since a while so it was a nice throwback for me.
I quite liked it as a very solid alternative rock album with some depth and feeling to it. Not one I'll actively re-visit. But I definitely don't mind having it on.
Not bad, but ultimately lacking depth and emotion. I guess it was pretty modern 44 years ago when it came out and I do like the varied influences, but in the end it's still not much better than mediocre.
I actually listened to the entire album, which is a huge accomplishment for an album that's predominantly punk. What's more, the non-punk elements were actually interesting and even good at some individual points of the album. Still, definitely not enough to make a mostly-punk album enjoyable though.
I used to listen to The Eagles quite a lot - but usually to all of their tracks mixed together, so I didn't know these tracks are from their debut. And you wouldn't hear it without knowing - the tracks are amazingly polished and mature for a debut effort. However, they don't completely come together in a organic way. The styles of the different songwriters are still a bit too distinct. As a whole, it's still a very good album and The Eagles' success was well-deserved. That said, I almost took a star off because of the jarring, abysmal Earlybird. No idea how that made its way through production. But the rest is good enough to look past that mistake. The two biggest highlights of the album are the two Henley songs for me - Witchy Woman (a longtime favorite of mine) and Nightingale.
I was torn between giving this one 1 or 2 stars. It seems like a mix of the very worst of the backlogs of Michael Jackson and Elton John with a few snippets of half-assed jazz and funk thrown in. Definitely not the worst, but still very bad.
I don't really understand why this album was chosen, since it's not very representative of Marvin Gaye and doesn't contain any of his hits and according to the Wiki page wasn't successful either. But I did enjoy it. The subdued disco-funk touches compliment Gaye's more introspective style of soul on this album very well. It took me 2 tracks to get into, but then I enjoyed the album a lot.
While I didn't really dislike it, I think The Who took themselves too serious and created an album that works fine as a rock album but that doesn't have the musical quality necessary for it to work as a rock opera. The story comes with an intended pathos and gravitas that simply aren't backed up by enough technical skill to have much impact at all.
This one wasn't as good as "Close to the edge" and in general this album doesn't seem like one of the best progressive rock has to offer. It's still fine and was a pleasant listen though. Rounding up from 3.5.
So, according to Wikipedia, the only reason for this album to be considered in any way is due to the influence it had on some bands that are more worth listening. Also, it is most notable for combining some elements of artists that are more worth listening. Got it.
I honestly didn't expect to enjoy this one. But it hit the right spots between harder techno and industrial I find very unpleasant and electronic ambient I usually find unimpressive and irrelevant. I can hear the influences on some of the better synth-pop acts that might have taken this album as a starting point and traded in some of the high-quality instrumentals for catchy pop hooks.
A very enjoyable folk rock album! In particular, it nails a particular aspect bands in this genre frequently get wrong - not sounding to samey. The consistent quality in their musical variety also hints toward a somewhat rare skill that is confirmed by the Wiki article: they wrote a whole lot of material and then managed to separate the highest quality ones from the chaff so that every track adds to the album. This is confirmed by listening into the bonus disc - definitely not on par with the album material.
Now this is one I REALLY didn't expect to enjoy. Some random French rap? That would usually get a resounding no thanks from me. But I liked the guy's voice and the instrumental is really good with some very pleasant jazz and scattered funk elements. I did think Ragga Jam was horrible to listen to, but otherwise great background listening which more than I can say about 98% of all rap.
Very easy 5 stars for some of PFs best work. The Great Gig In The Sky and Brain Damage are two of my longtime favorites and there really aren't any low-points on this album. The transitions between tracks are also masterful and make for a great, continuous listen.
I really have no clue why this list loves this woman so much. After giving the other three albums of her I had the misfortune to listen 2 stars, this one is even worse than the others and only gets 1. Unpleasant, sludgy noise. Fourth-rate garage band vibes.
I don't really understand why this is on the list. It was pretty nice, easy listening though.
Unfortunately, this album is rubbish.
Her voice was absolutely phenomenal - but I just can't get excited by the music. A bit too dated, songs not interesting enough, hollow production on the instrumental side.
This is a somewhat tough one to rate because the high points of the album (particular the more blues and jazz inspired tracks: 5 stars) and really high and the low point of the album are really low (the jarring, psychedelic instrumental parts: 1 star).
Generally speaking, I greatly appreciate both post-rock and math rock - so I would like to thank these guys for their contribution and for laying some groundwork. That said, the groundwork they laid was for vastly better bands. Knowing these vastly better bands, I really can't get into these album. Too jarring, too dissonant without any really interesting or rewarding parts, bad vocal performance.
For most part, I find The Who quite overrated. Their big ideas just seemed outsized compared to their average level of talent. The result was usually just not all that interesting. This album seems to have been their best though. On a technical level it has a lot more to offer than say, the preceding album, Tommy. As a result, their big ideas come across in a much more convincing way and the album is a lot more interesting and enjoyable. Baba O'Riley in particular is a standout track.
Absolutely sure I've heard quite a few of these songs before. But if someone had asked me what Donovan sounds like, I wouldn't have had any clue whatsoever. Turns out, I quite like his music. Not sure if I should round the 4.5 up or down - but let's err on the positive side for the obvious influence he had on a lot of later music I enjoy a lot.
Not his best one, but among his better ones - at least from the four or five Dylan albums we've had on this list so far. The album starts with the best song and can't keep up that same quality unfortunately - but still a very good listen.
Wow, I absolutely hated this one. There are some hip-hop albums on this list that make me think "hm, maybe I don't necessarily dislike hip-hop after all". And then there are ones like this one that just suck so much.
Pretty much the same review as for the other Paul Simon album we had. Simon by himself is nowhere near his collaborative work with Art Garfunkel. An OK but completely unremarkable album - 3.5 rounded down.
Nope. Nope nope nope. Noooope. I listened to about half a minute of 5 tracks. That's more than enough Dead Kennedys to last me a lifetime. Clearly a very representative album - but for my #1 most disliked style of music.
A pretty pleasant americana singer-songwriter album. Good musicianship, nothing to complain about from a technical point of view. But also shallow, hollow and ultimately, not interesting enough.
So, my final opinion on this album is a lot more positive than my initial opinion - but my initial opinion was that it's complete junk. I still think it's rather painful to listen to. But I do applaud these ladies' musical creativity, variety, dedication, energy and vision. There were also some things (mostly the 80's synth-pop vibes) I enjoyed about the music itself, but not nearly enough to make this album an enjoyable experience.
While Prince was clearly ahead of his time - that time has long since passed and the music feels quite dated. And while I do appreciate the wide variation in his music, it frequently feels all over the place and sometimes lacking in coherence.
Pleasant jazz. Something that could be playing in the background at a chill café while talking to friends. But that's about it. Not much personality, not much to grab attention, nothing to really remember when the track has finished.
It's not really the kind of music I like, but it's definitely not bad and there are some parts I quite liked. In particular, I enjoyed the jazzy/bluesy guitars which are somewhat untypical for the style. The guy also has a good voice. Giving this 3.5 stars, but rounding down as it didn't really grab my attention.
I'm not really a fan of tango, but I did enjoyed this blend of classical music and tango very much. The breadth of variety, coupled with depth of feeling and intensity made for an exciting spin. The second track, which was mostly xylophone was almost a pain to listen to - but the rest was good enough to still warrant a good rating.
Our fourth album by The Kinks and their best one for me so far. I rated the other ones 4 stars - but this one is a cut above them in terms of songwriting and musicianship. Still super close to The Beatles, but to The Beatles at their best.
This album is definitely something of an interesting experience. Somehow it manages to sound more like a playlist broadcasting the variety of early 2000's rock, rather than an album. How convincingly they manage to pull off the range of styles is enough to warrant four stars. However, it would also be fair to stop and wonder why they're even doing this - if it wouldn't be better to just focus on the couple of styles they're best at instead of trying to do a bit of everything, seemingly for no other reason than the sake of it?
This sounds like pleasant music to have pattering away in the background when you're busy preparing a lavish meal for 10 guests who're coming over in two hours. Or maybe to have playing in the background while sharing a couple of glasses of fruity red wine and it's raining outside, so everyone wants to stay and continue chattering on. Either way, I can't consider this as more than pure background music, pleasant as it may be when you don't pay any attention to it.
Unfortunately, this isn't Bowie at his best for me. Add to that the fact I've always enjoyed Bowie more as a songwriter than as a performer - in general I strongly prefer covers of his songs over the original versions. Not bad, but also not convincing enough.
Definitely one of the most straightforward Queen albums. Solid quality, clean hard rock / heavy metal with some eccentric touches here and there, but nothing close to their later experimentation. It's good music, good musicianship, good songwriting. However, it simply isn't all that interesting (yet). It doesn't have any of my favorite Queen tracks on it (Sevens Seas Of Rhye is very good, but not quite a favorite) but on the positive it doesn't have any of their unfortunately horrendous hits either (like the horrible We Will Rock You or the even more horrible We Are The Champions *shudder). Wrapping up: good music, good album but by a band that definitely could and did do better.
I enjoyed this one more than expected. In general, I'm not much of a fan of what I'd call pop metal. But Aerosmith are just on top of their game on this album. They know exactly what they're doing and do it really well! Also some heavier bits on here than expected. Unfortunately, there are a few stinkers on here as well such as Water Song/Janie's Got A Gun. But still a very nice album on the whole.
Seems a bit ironic, that Harrison's first album after The Beatles seems to harken back to some of the earliest and least interesting work of The Beatles. This is not a bad album. It's just very far from being an interesting album.
First off, I have heard and loved some of Eddie Hazel's solo work before, but had no idea that he was part of Funkadelic. That explains some of the excellent guitar work such as on Super Stupid. Unfortunately, a lot of the superb guitar work gets lost in the subpar production. Unfortunately, this duality holds true for my entire opinion on Maggot Brain. There are some really fantastic tracks that I feel absolutely deserve 5 stars such as Super Stupid, but then also very annoying/unpleasant parts such as the last two tracks. 3.5 stars for me. Easy 4 if the production were better and easy 5 if the last two tracks would live up to the previous ones along with better production.
Definitely not unpleasant music, but I really didn't care about it too much either. Just some old, background-listening folky pop rock.
While I actually truly enjoy some of the instrumentals and song structuring, I think that Lou Reed's particular brand of talk-singing is plain horrible. Some of his songwriting and influence throughout his career was admirable, but I really don't like him as a singer and performer. This was the first time I listened to one of his albums in full and it only cemented my opinions of him.
The first track felt like an intro to something potentially promising. Unfortunately, it wasn't. It's just very basic, boring electronica with some splashes of tango and french cabaret music. I was hoping the Zappa cover would be interesting (I do adore Frank Zappa). But again, it wasn't. I skipped the last three tracks.
I'm really not sure if the album I heard on Spotify is the same album the Wikipedia article raved about. What I heard on Spotify sounded like a minimalist production quality, unpleasantly dissonant, angsty emo/indie/art-school rock mash-up where they overcompensate for average-at-best musical skill with over-dramatic presentation and delivery.
To be honest, I started this one with the assumption that I would strongly dislike it, after reading about the album on Wikipedia. I expected an extremely angry, chaotic and dissonant punk record that I wouldn't stand and skip out on after half of the first four tracks and a single, lone star. Turns out, it really wasn't nearly as bad as that at all and I listened to the entire record and even enjoyed having it on during some parts. While it is angry and dissonant and also very, veeeery angsty; it's not a chaotic punk record at all. It's much more industrial than punk, more artful and controlled than a mere vomiting of pent up, energetic frustrations. In the end, I didn't truly enjoy this album and I don't feel any desire to listen to it again. But still, I was pleasantly surprised.
Usually I only give 1 star to music that is actually, physically painful to listen to for me. That's not the case with this album. But it is sooooooo uninteresting, repetitive, minimalistic and meaningless that I just really longed to turn it off toward the end of the fifth track. So that's what I did.
Very enjoyable! I liked this one more than the other two Miles Davis records we've had so far. Both relaxing and stimulating.
Amazing album, absolutely love it. For me, one of the very best so far out of these 1001. Even though I usually dislike both hip-hop and the majority of electronica, mellow trip-hop just hits a lot of my sweet spots. This album is fantastic at everything it sets out to be. It's mellow, dark, sad, interesting, beautiful, adventurous, relaxing, touching, stimulating and more. Roads in particular has long been on my 'liked songs' list.
Not actually unpleasant. Just absolutely unremarkable background music. Come to think of it, I can't actually remember what it sounds like, even though I'm still listening to it...
This album keeps oscillating between mildly interesting and aggravatingly annoying.
I'd never actively listened to Jane's Addiction before, but this is a pretty nice album. Good guitar and bass, engaging songs.
I didn't dislike the synth-pop parts of this album (and even enjoyed Sometimes) but feel like this style of music had already passed its prime 10 years prior to this album's release. Most of the album was more electronica focused and although it's admittedly quite danceable, I'm not much of a dancer.
Seems like this is one of those bands that you don't think you know but then you go "oh yeah, I've definitely heard this track before". I enjoyed it. Mellow folk rock with just a sprinkling of psychedelia.
I didn't know this band at all and my expectations weren't all too high. After two-three tracks these guys had me hooked though. Under the right circumstances I'm a sucker for well-positioned melodrama and oh boy, do these guy deliver full-on tongue-in-cheek first-class-kitsch melodrama. I'll revisit this one.
Blergh. Just some regurgitated punk. I listened to the first 40 seconds or so of the first 6 tracks. That was more than enough. On some tracks the instrumentals sounded absolutely decent, such as on the 3rd and 5th. But then the vocals kick in and well. Blergh.
Yeah, no. I thought this was trash when it came out almost 20 years ago and I still think it's trash now.
I'm quite split on this one - split along vocals/instruments. As a pop-singer album I don't like it; 2 stars. Elis' vocal delivery has some pathos but really not much else. On the other hand I do enjoy the latin easy jazz / bossa nova instrumentation. As an instrumental album I'd rate this 4 stars.
The fourth Leonard Cohen album we've had. I'm always a bit back and forth on his work and find my level of appreciation wavering and influenced by current mood. As a songwriter, I think he's absolutely fantastic. For instance, from this album, I really love Joe Cocker's cover version of First We Take Manhatten and also appreciate Don Henley's cover version of Everybody Knows quite a bit. I'm a lot less certain regarding my feelings on Cohen's own performance of his songs. They often sound like deliberately flatly performed Disney movie songs. 3.5 stars rounded up.
Ew.
The fifth Bob Dylan album we've had so far. Not as good as Highway 61 Revisited, but still a nice album with a couple of very good tracks such as Visions Of Johanna.
A pleasant album for background listening during work. But not something I'd actively listen to and towards the end I was getting quite tired of it.
Bruce Springsteen has a couple of actually fantastic hits. Most of his output, however, is just chaff. The songs are cheesy, melodramatic and completely worn-out before they're halfway through. This album has one fantastic standout hit in the form of Dancing In The Dark and pretty much all of the rest is chaff. Possibly, rounding this up from 2.5 stars might be too generous. But the album is at least reasonable as background music.
I quite liked this album. It was mostly background listening to me - but background listening of the very best kind. The album is a very nice mix of soul & funk with a sprinkling of R&B & disco and some psychedelic shading to finish the picture. The original version of the album was a bit too short in my opinion, but it worked very well with the 2001 version extras.
While this album has a couple of good moments and a few pretty nice guitar parts in particular, I'm not a fan of "pop metal" or "party hard rock". The title song was quite obnoxious and most of the rest of the album also felt pretty superficial and soulless. It wasn't horrible, but I preferred the quiet when it was done.
5th Neil Young album. Some more diversity would really have been appreciated, mister Robert Dimey. As always, I don't mind any of his output too much, but it gets kind of samey and the difference between his best and the rest is pretty huge. As always, rating somewhere between 2.5-3.5. The final two tracks stood out as uncharacteristic but interesting rock songs.
What a voice, Lady Soul indeed! I do enjoy me some classic soul when I'm in the right mood for it and Aretha Franklin is among the best of her generation. The album is definitely shorter than it should be and a lot of the instrumentation is either a bit weak, or got lost in production. Those are my only criticisms though. Rounded down from 4.5
Not a bad album for background music, quite pleasant and with a few interesting moments. I really can't see it as any more than that and I have my doubts about if it really deserves being on this list. I quite liked Queen Of 1959 from the bonus tracks - with tracks like that on the actual album, this could have been a solid 4.
A live album by what appears to be a radio-friendly rock band. To break that down a little: the songs sound like absolutely uninspired, dime-a-dozen AOR. No particularly memorable hooks and not that much technical prowess either. I never really got the appeal of live albums either. Maybe it got cut out of the mix, but there doesn't seem to be much crowd interaction going on. That means the only thing the live-ness adds to the album is worse sound quality and some cheering to break up the track flow. It wasn't horrible, but I could have done without this one.
The fifth Leonard Cohen album we've got and certainly the one I enjoyed the least. It sounds like a mix of French chansonnier and Christian church music to me - both not styles I'm a fan of. I guess the direction makes sense for the point of life Cohen was at. But it's not something I care to listen to.
An ambitious album for sure - and hard to rate on account of that. On one hand, Todd Rundgren has an impressive breadth as an artist. On the other hand, reducing the 25 tracks to the 10 best ones would have resulted in a way better, tighter album. Way too many tracks (in different styles, nonetheless) on this album are well executed, but without much soul. The few buried gems aren't really worth the slog.
I remember when the follow-up album Meteora came out and I was a 12-year old kid trying to figure out his tastes in music and I heard Numb on MTV and it was the best thing ever. Some years later, I derided Linkin Park as way too mainstream and "Not real metal". A few years after that, my musical horizons expanded again. "Real metal" was not the defining criteria for good music anymore and I rediscovered Linkin Park for what they were: a very good band that produced an accomplished mix of styles and put them together into an angry and angsty, yet shining and mass-appealing package. Now, it's been quite a while since I last listened to them. And I don't think this will ever be a record that I spin on repeat - too shallowly angry for that. But I enjoyed this one spin a lot and still think they were a great band. Now let me revisit Meteora as well.
I just knew Anthrax by name and reputation, but I was looking forward to this one. The first few seconds started great, but with the first vocal lines, the album became a disappointment. To disentangle that: all of the instrumentation on the album is great - similar to Metallica at their best (not quite there, as the guitar solos were definitely worse than Metallica at their best, but close enough where riffs are concerned). The bland vocals (more garage pop rock than anything else) ruined the album though. The few punkish hook lines sprinkled in were a further detriment to the album. It would have massively benefitted from trying to run after Metallica in vocal style as well. Of course, it would never have won a prize for originality, but it's not winning that like this either and it would definitely have been better.
Very nice blend of soul, disco, r&b and a little bit of blues. I enjoyed it very much as background music - although not quite enough that I'd actively and regularly listen to it.
I quite liked this album. Of course, I wasn't as awed by it as little, 13-year old me was by its predecessor, Vol.3 when that came out (before I disowned it as "not serious metal" -ahem), but I quite liked it. I especially enjoyed the accomplished blend of quick and dirty but technical modern thrash metal and the softer touches such as in Vendetta - but not the actual ballads that bog down the second half of the album.
Definitely A LOT more ambitious than I'm used to from pop. Progressive orchestral pop does fit quite nicely. I definitely liked it, although it did go on a bit too long for having just a bit too little oomph to fully keep my attention.
Big YES. I definitely like myself some good post-rock or shoegaze. Really enjoyed having this one on while working and bopping along to the rhythms in my office chair.
A very enjoyable rock album. More sophisticated than stoner rock often ends up being. Still, the album tends to get a bit too boggy and droning toward the end. I'd enjoy it more in smaller doses.
The album started off with what was clearly and easily the best track on the album for me and I thought I might be in for a treat. The rest didn't quite deliver on the first track's promises though. Liege And Lief generally contains more traces of psychedelic rock influences than I expected on an album so relevant to the folk rock genre (according to Wikipedia) and. These tracks are also the strongest ones on Liege And Lief. Unfortunately, it's not all we get though. We also need to slog through some real snoozers such as Reynardine and Quiet Joys Of Brotherhood.
A mix of some of the more unpleasant sides of rock. Not sure why this band ever made out of the garage or out of the local opening act league. The album is versatile, I'll give it that. And nothing is reeeeally bad as in painful to listen to. But none of it is good in any way either. I'd Give You Anything in particular made me sort of sad. Ripping off riffs from Black Sabbath (MIB) is one thing thing, but how can you then proceed to make it sound that bad?
I like Dolly Parton, but I definitely don't like this collaboration. Frankly, the songs are just really boring. It doesn't sound painful or anything like that, but I can't understand why someone would like to listen to it.
A solid folk album, but not all that interesting if you're not particularly fond of the style. I do like the occasional jazz influences. But on the whole the album was simply pleasant, but unremarkable.
I definitely like me some Muddy Waters, but with the non-live bonus tracks attached to this live album (depending on the version, I guess) it's a good demonstration of how much more I would've enjoyed a collection of non-live version of the same songs. To me the additional "energy" simply doesn't make up for the massive reduction in sound quality or additional possibilities provided by sound engineering. 3.5 stars rounded down for just the live version, 5 stars for the non-live bonus tracks.
It's very rare that I find rap music bearable to listen to, so this being the rare listenable rap instantly gives it a lot of bonus points in my book. Now, the horrible skits and the agonizing slog of the last track take some points off again. And of course the fact that Ye is a horrendous pile of shit -turned car accident is not factored into this rating at all.
I like me some good dream pop now and then. Based on the Wikipedia article, I was looking forward to listening. Unfortunately, I don't understand the hype. While the music was mostly pleasant and totally fine background listening, I found it to be very shallow.
I was so torn between giving this one 4 or 5 stars that I gave it a second, consecutive spin. My appreciation grew a bit more on the second spin, so here we are. As a solo effort, the scope and vision of this album are extremely impressive - as is the variety. The tracks on the first side of the album don't even really sound like they're from the same band. A bit more consistency would have been nice here. In general, I like the first side (4 stars) a bit less than the second (5 stars). Whereas the first side contains more psychedelia and folk influences, the second side is more clearly progressive hard rock. The exception is the fantastic Solsbury Hill. Gabriel seems to have taken all of what he liked most about Genesis and given it a bit of personal spin - adding some inspiration from Pink Floyd into the mix (not that that's ever a bad thing). Definitely enjoyed this one. Highlights: Solsbury Hill, Waiting For The Big One, Here Comes The Flood
Although I greatly enjoy progressive rock as a style in general, I found this album very disappointing. It's a perfect example of one of the golden rules skilled musicians need to keep in mind: that music is played well from a technical point of view does not mean that it sounds good. Where most prog bands opted for multi-layered or even many-layered songs or alternatively for a wall of sound approach, ELM had a pretty minimalistic approach to prog rock. And well, it just doesn't sound good. And without any particularly good or catchy songwriting to back it up, technical prowess only gets you so far. Especially when vision and ambition are sort of limited in scope as well. Of course, the album never sounds "horrible" and there are a bunch of good solos and other nice parts. But as a whole, Tarkus seems like a one-and-done.
I went into this one expecting not to like the music at all, since I usually dislike R&B. It wasn't quite what I expected. Definitely very high quality, with an accomplished mix of styles. The jazzier parts or more trip-hop leaning songs were my favorites on the album and really pretty enjoyable to me. Still, as a whole, it's simply not my style of music and I have no desire to revisit. I do strongly support the messages though, and tip my hat to accomplished musicians - just not my style.
Singer-songwriter music has seldomly sounded so vapid and completely without purpose. It's still not abrasively painful to listen to as the albums I rate 1 star. But still, this is some of the worst singer-songwriter music I've had to listen to.
I didn't dislike the songwriting at all, although instrumentation was a little subpar. Those aspects together get 3 stars from me. What really kept this album from being enjoyable, however, are the horrible vocals.
Pleasant background music. I liked it while it was playing and would give it 3.5 stars if I could. But I need to round that down because now, right after finishing the album, I don't really remember what it sounded like anymore.
Better and smarter-sounding to me than the majority of rap, but still not better than 2 stars for me. It's simply not my style of music and it went on for too long. I did make it to the 11th track.
Usually I like psychedelia in hard rock to a certain degree and then it sort of gets a bit much for me. A bit much weirdness, unpleasant dissonance, lack of direction, etc. While it definitely has some parts I enjoy (notably the parts where they sound rather similar to Genesis), this album crosses that line for me. 3.5 rounded down. Definitely not horribly - but I'll rather just listen to Genesis instead.
1.5 rated down. It's not among the top worst albums on this list, but I tried so hard to enjoy some parts of the album and I really didn't manage to do so. There's the occasional few seconds that make me think "oh, this chord sounds pretty decent" "hey, this bridge is actually nice" - but just a few seconds later I'm fighting the urge to just run away from this album again.
It's a legendary punk rock album! I hate it! This album isn't nearly as angry-sounding as punk rock usually tends to be. That made it less physically painful to listen to than most punk rock. Still, it's nothing more than chaotic noise to me. Sounding happy doesn't make these guys any more skilled as musicians. Short as the album is, I couldn't stomach more than half of it.
Against my initial fears, this one really wasn't all that bad and I managed to listen to the whole album. There were even a couple tracks I enjoyed somewhat such as Check Yo Self. A couple others got pretty close to needing to be skipped though. In the end, it's just really not my style though, even though it wasn't so bad as I'd thought. And I pretty much hate the intros/inserts/skits on this kind of album.
Not unpleasant as background music, but also not interesting in any way. Swift is a good singer, but the songwriting on this album (the only songs by Taylor Swift I've ever heard, apart from 2-3 radio hits) is pretty vapid and meaningless. I don't mind it, but have no reason to listen to it. Why is it on here?
Yey, finally a nice album after a long string of mediocre at best albums. This one definitely has a few bangers and some nostalgia value associated with those as well, but it's the first time I'm hearing this one in it's entirety. The album does get weaker on the second half and I'm a bit on the fence about rounding the whole thing up to 5 stars. But the first half really is pretty great and the album seems like it has quite some re-listening value.
Doesn't sound bad at all, but it's just not my style of music. Especially the instrumentation just sounds too sparse for me. Nice for the background, but can't really get into it deeply.
I quite liked this one. A nice blend of styles for engaging background listening. Good voice and pleasant songs. The only ones I didn't like were the more lounge-esque Raised On Robbery and Twisted at the tail end of the album.
The fourth Talking Heads album we've had and my lowest rated. No idea if this album was considered cutting edge at its time, but in my book, being eclectic and unpleasant in the late 70's is by itself not enough to remain relevant 45 years later.
My first impression was a great one, but that didn't last unfortunately. The first couple of tracks sound almost exactly the same (just not as good as the title track) whereas the second half peters out quite weakly.
Nope, not a fan of rap. Surrounding it with overly simple lounge jazz loops doesn't make the music any less annoying either.
I've always liked The Smiths (at least their hits, embedded in playlists) and definitely enjoyed this album. Morrissey's vocal delivery is great and his tongue-in-cheek lyrics provide some counterweight to the dark (but never oppressive) mood of the music.
My first thought is that it seems very self-absorbed for an artist's second album (after the first was a flop) to refer to his own full name and include not just one but two songs also referring to his own full name. I was also not aware that Bob Dylan was still so young, when he already sounded so old. Other than that, this is not the best Dylan album we've had on this list so far, but not the worst either. I'd like to give it a 3.5. Rounding up, because most of our last albums were pretty bad, even though this album also has a couple shortcomings (mostly that it gets pretty samey after a few tracks).
As far as synth-pop classics go, these guys are nowhere near Pet Shop Boys. It wasn't so bad that I couldn't finish the album, but I really can't see myself listening to this album of my own volition. The songs I recognized I've probably heard in sappy movies - the only place I can see this music belonging.
As someone who really doesn't like rap music, I found this album very listenable - in large part to the jazzy accompaniment, I'm sure. The skits were a bit annoying, but still I listened to the entire album - quite a feat for a rap record.
Maybe this one just aged badly, but I don't understand why it's on the list. It doesn't sound bad as such, but it's really boring and I don't know why someone would want to listen to it.
4 stars like the other Aretha Franklin album we had so far. Great voice, good songs (although I disagree with considering Respect one of the greatest songs ever, very good but not THAT good) and also some good covers of soul hits. A pretty nice album, but not one I'd have spinning on repeat.
A bit torn on this one. It does have its fair share of unpleasantly dissonant section and I'm certainly not impressed by the lead vocalist. But after finishing the album, the impressions that remain are of the interesting ideas throughout the album. It was clearly quite ahead of its time, even if the execution was certainly not perfect.
I loved this one. Quite varied as well with the first half of the album being more blues-rock and the second half psychedelic rock, but easier to listen to than psychedelia sometimes tends to be. Also amazed by how much the first minute of "Ever Since The World Began" sounds like early Black Sabbath. Must have been a huge influence for them. So yeah, The Yardbirds are somewhere between The Beatles and Black Sabbath, combining some of boths' greatness. With the appropriate skill to back it up, that's a 5 in my book.
OK so this one was rather weird for me and I'm not entirely sure what to think about it. There were some parts that I liked musically - in particular the more gothic parts. But I found the lyrics, titles and imagery, as well as the martial sounds, disconcerting and unpleasant. I also really don't know where to place these guys on the political spectrum. According to Wikipedia, that seems to be their goal, but it's definitely unpleasant. I'll give this 3.5 if I don't include the 4 Baptism bonus tracks. But definitely rounding down for those. They're completely unlistenable (1.5 star).
I really don't understand how people can enjoy this drivel. Sure, it's not as aggravatingly painful to the ears as other 1's on my list. But it's soooooo boring that having it on drives me absolutely insane - as compared to silence which is massively more interesting. I wasn't able to stand half of any of the first five songs. Gosh, I really hate Bob Marley. Even if I were stoned out of my mind this wouldn't be anywhere near listenable.
While I respect the influence this album seems to have had on hip hop in general, I still just don't like the style and didn't finish a single one of the tracks before skipping to the next. I found the sparse, DnB-like music rather annoying and the back-and-forth nature of the rapping very annoying. I did like the background guitar on Rock Box, but that's about it.
I'm a bit mixed on this one. On the one hand, it was pretty nice background music and most of the albums lately have been pretty bad. On the other hand, in terms of hard rock or even heavy metal, it's hard to take this album serious. Bon Jovi sounds like a fictional rock/metal band in a romcom movie about a rocker and a girly girl falling in love - made to sound non-offensive to the moviegoers who don't like rock music. The music doesn't have any depth at all. But I do get the appeal of the easy stadium anthems and there are few hard rock songs that work so well in karaoke as Livin' On A Prayer or You Give Love A Bad Name. Rounding up from 3.5 stars, mostly because I gave the last two albums 1 star and this is still so so much better.
This one started out with a really nice psychedelic rock track and I was looking forward to the rest of the album... which then turned out to be more punk than anything else (and I really hate punk). That said, it's not entirely punk, there are still some healthy doses of psychedelic rock, new wave and even progressive rock sprinkled in. In addition, even in the sections that sound more like punk, they sound like they actually know how to play their instruments - putting them far ahead of the majority of punk musicians. A shame the same can't be said for the vocals. In the end, I'm pretty torn on this album with some songs being horrible, but individuals and the general musicianship being pretty good.
I enjoyed this one. A bit more focused on the electronic side than I expected, but a nice album nonetheless.
As someone who is very much not a fan of hip hop, I was able to listen to the entire album (despite it's length) and even found it interesting at times. Turns out that ditching the forced gangsta shtick and using interesting samples and instrumentation really helps.
I remember Dirrty being considered "shocking" at it's time, for being overly sexual. I guess the times have changed... what didn't change is that I didn't care for the music as a kid and I don't care for it now. While I admit the songs show a wider musical variety with Aguilera staying true to her voice - she manages to make every song sound bland, soulless and mass-produced in every style she uses and her voice sounds trained but without personality, regardless of style. The music is never so terrible that it's painful, but I did start skipping parts on the second half. It's simply not interesting in any way and goes on for way too long. I do like the lyrical themes from what I've heard. So kudos on some of the messages. Now, if only the music were interesting...
Not my style of music. Interesting as a new listening experience, but not something I enjoyed, unfortunately.
Not bad, quite pleasant. But not super interesting either. One and done.
Our fifth Rolling Stones album and the fourth one I give 4 stars. Again, it's a lot bluesier than their best-known hits and it makes for a very solid, enjoyable album. But it's not amazing either. More of a great background listen than a real headturner.
Yeah, no. I just don't like rap. I did like the first track and thought this might be an exception. And indeed, the instrumentation is actually pretty good (and varied too) across the entire album. But rap is still just annoying to me at least 90% of the time and I skipped most tracks half-way through. And I really hate whoever came up with the idea of putting all of these "intros" or "interludes" on rap albums.
This was a lot more interesting and enjoyable than I'd expected. Not the most memorable album either, but definitely a pleasant listen for me.
The descriptions on Wikipedia sounded promising: ABBA but darker and more ambitious than usual. That promise apparently needs to be judged in relative terms. The album didn't have any really annoying songs and was absolutely fine for background listening, but nothing more than that.
I enjoyed the album quite a lot. Not stand-out enough for me to justify five stars. But then again, I was listening to it more in the background and am not entirely certain I did the record justice.
Quite enjoyed this one for background listening. Nice instrumental prog rock. What kept this from being a real attention-grabber was mostly the sameness and slow progression within the two titular tracks. In that regard the second part was a bit better, not just because of the vocals, although those also helped in making the piece feel more varied.
I'm not a fan of britpop in general, which is why I didn't expect to enjoy this album. Sometimes it's nice to be mistaken. While I did find the vocals a bit annoying at times, it's the instrumentation that makes this album actually interesting and gives it a lot of variety.
When I saw this one pop up on the list, I was pretty excited because I had been meaning to check Hawkwind out since a while. Then I saw that this is a live album and my enthusiasm instantly dropped. But in this case, even though I consider live recordings strictly worse versions of the tracks (unless you're actually there and enjoying the atmosphere and energy of the live concert) the music was so good that it's still fantastic as a live recording. And there's nothing stopping me from listening to more - studio recorded - Hawkwind.
Loved this one. I already knew and loved the fantastic I Feel The Earth Move and You've Got A Friend but never got around to checking out more by Carole King. Seems like I've been missing out. What makes this album is special is not just the good songs and great voice of King, but also the fantastic instrumental accompaniment which is of a quality seldom heard on singer-songwriter records.
Yeah, I really didn't enjoy this. Not just because of the style but also just for the fact of this being a movie soundtrack. Why would I want to listen to music that was made to accompany a very specific context without that context? This list waaayyy too infrequently ventures outside of US and UK and even more infrequently outside of North America / Europe. So at least it was something different. But I'm sure you could've found something better to represent this style of music.
Not really my style of music, so really more a 2-star album in terms of enjoyment. However, it was a good experience in terms of learning about music from different cultural backgrounds and definitely not an album I mind playing in the background - so, rounded up to 3 stars. Even if it's not always my preferred style, this list would really benefit from some more cultural diversity like this Khaled album.
After the amazing OK Computer, Radiohead decided to take things into new directions and experiment with a range of styles. As such, some experiments may have been more or less successful than others. This album does have a few low points that drag it down and were frankly hard to listen to such as The National Anthem (how fitting) and Idoteque. Most of the album, however, is very good.
An interesting album with a couple of fun and quirky parts. I can see how it may have been influential in shaping early 2010's electro pop. That said, it's also frequently weird in an unpleasant way and my appreciation while listening was mixed.
Great album, I enjoyed it a lot. But the one criticism I do have is that it's definitely a bit too long.
I simply don't enjoy rap in general and Lupe Fiasco is no exception. I managed to listen to about half of the songs halfway through and the one and only thing I enjoyed were the samples on Daydreamin'. That just isn't enough.
I didn't have any expectations going into this album, but was surprised by the quality. It's not the top most memorable record, but definitely an enjoyable one for me. Pretty varied as well.
This was much better than I expected. I'm not a fan of glam rock in general, but the sheer quality of the rock music made up for that on the first half of the album. Things get a little more unusual on the second half where Brian Eno's experimentation gets added to the mix. I'm not a fan of Eno's solo work either. But combined with quality glam rock it somehow works. More of a 4.5 rounded up than a solid 5, but still I enjoyed this album a lot.
Going in, my expectation was of rather uninteresting, radio-friendly pop rock, with a chance of quality in the deeper cuts. Turns out, this was a lot more reggae than I'd thought - but combined with uninteresting pop-rock. I guess that's absolutely fine for people who're into both. But to me that sounds like an absolutely horrible taste in music. Unfortunately, I find reggae absolutely aggravating. Mixing it with bad rock music makes the reggae less insufferable, but it's still far, far removed from any positive qualities. 1.5 stars. Rounded down because I wasn't able to finish the majority of tracks.
Pretty weird, but not unpleasant for the most part (some exceptions). On the other hand, even at it's best, it never really went beyond pleasant background music either.
Whimsical and occasionally interesting. But on the whole, not pleasant to listen to and I found myself skipping the second half of 3-4 of the songs. A shame, since I enjoyed the other Fiona Apple album we had.
Like it's predecessor, Kid A, an interesting album that has its ups and downs. On this one, I definitely enjoyed the tracks that followed a bit more traditional rock structures more than the more experimentally electronic ones. I can imagine that this one might grow on me and get 5 stars on a subsequent listen. But after a first spin it's a 4 for me. Highlight: Life In A Glasshouse
My relationship with post-punk is usually quite linear - the further removed it is from simple, traditional, angry punk, the higher the probability of me enjoying it. This album is pretty far removed from typical punk and I quite enjoyed it - some songs more than others, however. There were also just a few tracks that were pretty difficult to listen to such as the reggae-inspired Hokoy, which I had to skip after a minute.
We had a couple of Bowie albums now and I find this one to be very solid, probably among his better ones. At the same time, it doesn't have any super convincing standout tracks either. Middle of the road, solid Bowie.
Definitely enjoyed this one a lot more than I'd thought. I was afraid this would just be unlistenable hardcore noise, but it was certainly more varied and interesting then that. There were a few tracks that were a bit hard to listen to, but then some were also worthy of five stars. Rounding the total up from 3.5 And Kurt Cobain really liked this album I guess, which is also something at least.
Based on the Wikipedia description, I really didn't expect to enjoy this album particularly much. But it ended up hitting all the sweet spots and I listened to it twice in a row. It boasts a lot of variety with very nice vocal performances and instrumentation that seems simple, but is rock solid and reveals depth on closer listening. I also quite enjoyed the lyrics' wit and humor - although there are a couple of lines that are a bit... let's say 'outdated' in terms of communication of consent versus 'playing coy'.
This is our fifth Elvis Costello and my opinion is exactly the same for each one. There are a few Costello tracks that are really, really, really good. But I couldn't care less about the vast majority of his work. Let's hope this was the final Costello album on the list.
While there were aspects of the music I found quite pleasant for background listening, this is definitely not an album I can get excited about in any kind of way. No idea why it may have been included.
This one was a huge disappointment. Knowing and liking the single edit version of the title track, I was eager to dive into this one. The first five tracks are just too far on the jarring, dissonant side of psychedelic rock for me and lack interesting songwriting. Really bad production absolutely doesn't help either. Then comes the title track and indeed, the familiar beginning is pretty good, despite the much worse than expected production. But then, two thirds of the track are nothing more than filler. Certainly not the worst album on here, but rounded down from 2.5 stars for the disappointment value.
No idea why this would make it to someone's top album of the year. Totally fine background music, but essentially boring.
This is pretty far removed from what I usually listen to, but I very much enjoyed it for background listening at work. In terms of expanding my understanding and appreciation of different styles of music, this one was definitely a success. Also, this is surely the sexiest album cover we've had so far.
A bit mixed. I enjoyed the album, but not as much as I thought I would. There are a couple of pretty great songs here such as World Leader Pretend or Orange Crush. But also a couple that border on the boring and on the whole the album doesn't seem very cohesive. REM can and did do better than this, so I'm not sure why this one is so popular. Worst of the 4 REM albums we've had so far. Still rounding it up from 3.5 stars though, but just barely.
The live setting recording is an interesting gimmick which seems to work out. It gives the album character, yet, production still sounds great, as compared to regular live albums. That said, I don't enjoy the music. It just sounds like a Disney movie gruffian rambling on and on and on with some light jazz accompaniment. Definitely not the worst on here, but also definitely not something I would listen to on my own.
In some ways, I can see some appeal of this album. The blend of styles seems natural and the raw approach in production and self-made vibes of this album give it a bit of personality. That said, I would greatly prefer this album with more accomplished musicians rather than one solo, sub-par multi-instrumentalist and I would also greatly prefer it with production being at least a bit better. Despite the mix of styles, songwriting also simply isn't interesting, with few examples such as I Build This Garden and most notably, Flower Child (the only track I actually enjoyed). This one really doesn't cut it for me.
In a previous review I've criticized the presence of a movie soundtrack on this list. While I still hope there aren't too many, this is one I can get on board with. Soundtrack or not, this is a legitimately good one that can be enjoyed without knowing the movie - although it does give an idea of what the movie might be like. It's cohesive, sufficiently varied and can stand on it's own as a good album.
While hugely influential 65 years ago, it's still simply good music and fun to listen to today! I enjoyed this one a lot.
DP's playing on this record is pretty much flawless both in technical terms and regarding the energy they apparently brought to the stage. For a live recording, especially from the early 70's, production is stellar. That said, I still just don't get the appeal of listening to live recordings at home. Studio recordings of the same songs would have garnered an easy 5 stars from me, just like the other DP record we go from this list.
Unfortunately, I absolutely consider this album to be, in fact, the bollocks. I listened to a bit less than half each of half of the tracks, that has to be enough. While respecting the influence this album I had - it's still the archetype of a style of music I can't stomach. To me, the 'rawness' of the music translates to unlistenable, badly played chaos. So, good on these guys for pushing and re-defining boundaries and public sentiment. But bad on these guys for making horrible music.
While not really a bad album (on the boring side though), this is the epitome of the album I wish we had less of on this list. I can't see why it would be particularly relevant, it is not well-known and doesn't teach me anything. It's simply an American indie rock album - that's all (and it's not enough).
Well, this didn't sound aggravating, but it was a far cry from something I was able to enjoy. The genre mix seemed pretty contrived and the international influences seemed more like shallow representation than true ethnic music. That the South African musicians were apparently not credited correctly for their contributions fits the picture. As for the more familiar elements of hiphop and simple electronica - I'm not a fan of those styles anyway and they didn't seem particularly well done either.
Just like the other Beach Boy albums we've had it's not all that bad, it's just not all that interesting either. On this album, I quite enjoyed tracks 4-7 but they were sandwiched on both sides by 3 absolutely bland snoozers.
While I appreciate that this album may have established a couple of standard aspects of glam metal going forward - it just doesn't seem like a good album by modern standards. Vocals and songwriting in particular are greatly subpar. And glam metal just isn't my jam in general. The nice, strong blues rock elements are what saves it from a 2star rating.
I'll just repeat what I wrote about the other two Tom Waits albums we've had: It sounds like a Disney movie gruffian rambling on and on with light jazz accompaniment. It was a bit better than the last TW album we had just two weeks ago. But definitely not great and hoping this is the last one.
Definitely more Country than I'd thought. While it's not offensively bad in any way, there just wasn't anything I enjoyed about this album and I occasionally found myself rolling my eyes a bit and hoping it would end soon. Can't understood why this one was popular or in what way it should be relevant.
This one was both good but also a bit of a disappointment. I knew and loved the title track going in, but most of the album can't quite keep up with it. Still the best album since a couple of days, so rounding up from 3.5 Highlights: Wild Wood, Shadow Of The Sun
Just some female-fronted radio friendly country music. Not sure what the justification is for considering this a must-hear album before you die. It's not painful to listen to, but I could very well have died without hearing it.
Definitely not one of the absolute worst, but also definitely not good. No idea why this is taking up a slot on this list. Half-baked music with horrible production.
I have to say it was definitely not as good as I'd expected. The organ and Jim Morrison's voice were nice throughout, but songwriting was a mixed bag. The first half, including the overrated Light My Fire, was just not exciting at all. The album picked up steam from Back Door Man on and ended pretty solid. Rounded up from 3.5
6th Neil Young album. Some more diversity would really have been appreciated, mister Robert Dimey. As always, I don't mind any of his output too much, but it gets kind of samey and the difference between his best and the rest is huge. As always, rating somewhere between 2.5-3.5. That said, this seems to be one of his best, with Cinnamon Girl, Down By The River and Cowgirl In The Sand all being prime Neil Young. Some excellent guitar work on here.
Same conclusions as for the other Chic album we've had: not at all unpleasant in the background, but also not interesting. The music just sounds extremely dated and I don't see any reason to listen to it other than for understanding historical context.
A very comforting listen, a nice blend of styles and a good voice. That said, the songwriting is sort of forgettable and the record doesn't leave much in the way of a lasting impression. Nonetheless, a very pleasant background-listening album.
The "neo-soul" parts of this album were quite passable, although not particularly engaging. On the other hand, I skipped the hip-hop tracks halfway through. Definitely not the worst out there, but I don't like the style and the tracks sounded so repetitive within themselves - if you listen to 10 seconds of it, you've basically heard the whole song. I can see some people liking it and I don't fault them for it. But for me it's a pass.
This was an unexpected pleasure and the kind of album that makes participating in this 1001 albums project worthwhile. Great musicians playing in a combination of styles I haven't heard before, helping expand my musical horizons - rather than the 53rd half-assed britpop outfit.
In general, my enjoyment of punk-related albums is inversely correlated to its similarity to punk. This punk-precursor didn't sound that punkish and was thus somewhat enjoyable. The guitars were even pretty good, although the vocals definitely weren't. Would give this 3.5 stars on its own merits, but rounding down to its influence on horrible music through the decades.
An interesting, smooth and chill album. Not my absolute favorite styles of music, but fine enough once in a while if the quality is right. Rounding up from 3.5 because this specific blend of style with "exotic" accents is new to me.
An absolute highlight on this list and an album I've listened to many times before in the past. While I'm usually not very appreciative of live albums (worse-sounding versions of familiar songs), this one is definitely special. Instead of worse versions, these are just entirely different versions of familiar Nirvana songs and the intimate setting allows for great sound quality (although the spoken bits could definitely be louder). I also love that this is not a re-hash of Nirvana's greatest hits but a blend of own material and some of Kurt Cobain's greatest influences. I've always loved Nirvana. But funny enough, the highlights of this great album are not Nirvana songs. The rendition of Where Did You Sleep Last Night in particular is fantastic. The Man Who Sold The World and Plateau are not that far behind though.
Mind-numbing in its repetitiveness.
I expected this to be a nice one but enjoyed it even more than I'd thought. While some of Elton John's hits are truly fantastic, it was the consistent quality throughout all 17 tracks with the exceptional quality of some of the deep cuts that surprised me. This Song Has No Title, Grey Seal and I've Seen That Movie Too were particularly strong. The only low-point on the album was Jamaica Jerk-Off - but if that's the only one out of 17 tracks that isn't great, I can live with that.
Unfortunately, I fail to see how this is a masterpiece.
I really didn't expect to like this. Ska and Punk are pretty much dirty swear words to me. But to my surprise, Fishbone manages to get a lot of things right and delivered an enjoyable genre mash-up. They're not quite on the level of Faith No More, but I can definitely see some parallels. Interesting album!
Not Peter Gabriel's best material in my opinion. In fact, I rated PG1 5 stars and one of his Genesis albums 4 stars earlier on. PG3 seems to be a bit too artsy (and too edgy) for its own good. There are some good ideas, but the whole thing just doesn't quite come together well. I've heard quite good covers of Games Without Frontiers and Biko in completely different styles though.
A solid album and still leagues better than the vast majority of radio-friendly rock that followed it. More of a 3.5 but rounded up partially due to the strength of Thirteen.
Better than the majority of rap I've heard. Almost gave this 3 stars, but rounding down for the super annoying skits and for the lyrics.
Never having listened to this band before, I didn't know what to expect. I then read the wiki page and my expectations were pretty low. But this weird genre mash-up that actually does feel like the soundtrack of a hypothetical movie actually works and sounds pretty good. It probably helps that it isn't actually a soundtrack and thereby not bound to the needs of the film material. Be that as it may, I enjoyed it.
After listening to parts of the first 6 tracks I have concluded that the atrocious vocals make the record completely unlistenable. The instrumental parts aren't great either - partially OK but too repetitive to sustain interest throughout an entire track. I also gave the previous PIL album 1 star, and hope this was the last one.
Like the other two Roxy Music albums we've had, I quite enjoyed it. It sounds pretty cool and the saxophone and synths definitely helped in making this an interesting album. The Bogus Man was a bit hard to listen to all the way, due to the combination of dissonance and the length of the track.
As someone who really doesn't enjoy rap, I found this album to be very listenable. Trading the whole gangsta shtick for more positive messages definitely helped. The soul elements on some of the tracks was a nice touch as well. Still not something I'd listen to by myself, but it was absolutely OK as a change of pace.
Definitely not a fan of live albums - even less if they're 50 year old live albums. And absolutely not a fan of punk music. Luckily, this proto-punk mostly didn't sound like punk yet. The guitars and vocals were way too good for that. Motor City Is Burning even stood out as a pretty good guitar track. Taken together, I was definitely positively surprised - rounding up from 3.5
A pretty weird but quite enjoyable progressive pop record. The concept of the album might have been a bit too ambitious and abstract - or put another way, it went over my head without leaving any coherent impression. Nonetheless, I found it very enjoyable background listening - rounded up from 3.5
So this was definitely a strange one that I couldn't decide how to rate. Basically, I was stuck anywhere between 2 and 5 for the first few tracks - the cover of Comfortably Numb, the original of which I absolutely love, was actually painful to listen to the first time. Given these mixed feelings, I gave it a second spin the day after. This second spin let me enjoy the most enjoyable parts more and see the other parts in the context of the whole - important for such a strange album. It's actually some sort of wild pastiche, somewhere inbetween Elton John, Appollo 440, Dire Straits and Depeche Mode. All artists I enjoy, but vastly different from each other. It took time to get into Scissor Sisters. But after the second spin, I'm convinced.
Knowing and loving some of ZZ Top's hits, I was excited for this one. While it was still pretty enjoyable, I was a bit disappointed. There's definitely quite a gap between their best songs and the rest. What struck me in particular is that a few of their arrangements simply sound too sparse. Excellent as the guitar-play and percussion are, the arrangements would benefit massively from a secondary rhythm guitar.
My opinion is pretty much the same as for the other album we've had by this guy. It's pleasant background music. No idea why it should be something I needed to hear before I die though.
Not bad, quite nice at times. But it didn't move me as much as the other Tim Buckley album we have and it's not leaving much of a lasting impression in general.
Well, I'm not convinced. While it's never aggravating, there just wasn't much too like about this album. What may have seem fresh in 1990, feels contrived and unsatisfying now. The vocals are too sing-song and the sparse arrangement make the music sound quite weak as a whole, not to mention the super tinny drums.
Not convinced by this one. Usually, I'm all for genre mash-ups. This one just doesn't feel like a coherent whole though. It seems more like an automated spotify playlist of pleasant but not noteworthy background listening tracks from different styles.
I honestly didn't expect to like this very much, but then found it really nice, easy listening during work. Relaxed but fun - nothing challenging, but good vibes.
I don't think I've ever heard of these ladies before, but apparently they made a pretty good album in 1999. Good vocals, varied songwriting, solid instrumentation. The occasional funk influences were a nice touch as well. Not a masterpiece by any stretch, but I certainly enjoyed it.
Middling psychedelic brit-pop-rock. If I was wondering if any of The Verve's backlog was close in quality to the stellar Bittersweet Symphony, that question has now been resolved. There were some parts I enjoyed quite much, especially some more shoegaze-oriented parts. On the whole, this was pretty forgettable though.
Fourth Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds album we've had. All three of the previous ones received 3 stars from me and in all of them I saw potential and interesting idea, but the pathos just wasn't convincing enough or the album didn't come together as a cohesive whole. This time, it seems these guys made true on their promises. Basically, these are two distinct albums. The first, I didn't quite know what to make of (the fact that it opens with the worst song of the albums doesn't help) but the second one I loved from the get-go. After that, I gave the first one another chance as well and enjoyed it a lot more during the second spin. It's pretty hard to describe the music accurately, but I really enjoyed it.
This is an exceptionally dated, early 2010s album. I enjoyed it, but that said, I don't see it as any sort of standout among early 2010s indie-synth-pop of which there is a ton of nice but interchangeable bands.
As someone who generally doesn't like hiphop, I found this album very easy listening. There's something very oldschool about it, yet at the same time, the mix of other styles makes it fresh and interesting. This is actually more of a 3 for more, but I'll just add on another star because it's so rare that I find hiphop enjoyable.
Radiohead was a weird band. I've given one of their albums 5 stars and another 2 stars. The rest, like this one, fall somewhere in the middle, but more on the good side in general. On this song, my enjoyment between tracks varied, although there was nothing horrible on here. But I definitely enjoyed the tracks more that followed more standard rock structures, rather than being fully experimental. That's sort of strange, considering I love post rock. I guess their "standard rock tracks" are already pushing the boundaries of rock, whereas their fully experimental tracks tend to be insufficiently fleshed out, not fully coherent, and sometimes sort of half-assed. Still better than the average album on this list though.
Maybe if I knew more about Americana, Western and Country music, I might understand why this album was included on this list. Maybe I would recognize novel approaches that shaped these styles in the decades to come. But I don't know much about these styles and I don't really care about them. Lang seems to be a good singer, but I couldn't care much less about the songs.
An interesting spin on 80's pop with soul vocals. Quite pleasant and a nice listen during work. But ultimately, rather forgettable.
Growing up as a young metal fan, I knew about System Of A Down but never actually listened to them outside of MTV-level hits such as Chop Suey. It turns out their instrumentation in particular is actually much heavier than I'd thought. It sounds like pretty raw and occasionally sludgy thrash metal, with some deeply buried blues undertones. The instrumentation is actually pretty good. However, that doesn't hold up due to the highly dissonant and abrasive songwriting. What really get to me though, are the vocals. They sound highly inconsistent, with the only consistent thing about them being that they tug at my nerves. They're somewhere between chaotic anger, childish whining and flat, toneless disarray. I did not enjoy this album. I planned to give this 2 stars but I really couldn't bring myself to finish the final 3 tracks.
With this being the 7th Bowie album to review, there's nothing new to say: -The quality gap between his biggest hits and the rest is huge -Rocky Bowie is usually more effective than fully experimental Bowie -I prefer Bowie as a songwriter rather than as a singer Still a good record, but I'm all for this being our final Bowie album.
I don't know much about electronic music in general and without any relevant information on Wikipedia I have no idea what makes this one stand out or what may make it historically relevant. But here goes. The album is quite varied between tracks, but not many of the different styles present here are very convincing and most tracks sound very samey in themselves. The more hiphop-oriented tracks such as Bandelero Desperado, MJ FM Interlude, Slime King were absolutely atrocious and I had to skip them halfway through. The random 80's disco track Rough Out Here, while certainly not the worst track on the album, felt very out of place. The soulful crooning of Elisabeth Troy really was the only saving grace of this album for me. But with such a boring backdrop, it wasn't enough.
Quite a nice listen, although the album might suffer a bit from trying to do too many things instead of doing a couple of things really well.
My main problem with jazz is not that it sounds bad, but rather that it just patters along without going anywhere. At the same time, it's marked by too many jarring changes to blend into a nice but unobtrusive background listening mode.
It's dirty, chaotic and angry, which can make it hard to listen to at times. At the same time, it has a certain freshness and some pretty interesting guitar and drums sections. Mixed on this one. I don't have a desire to re-visit, but I do see the appeal.
Here's one we definitely don't need to question if its inclusion on this list is justified. The whole thing is definitely on the long side, but it never gets too old, through the sheer variety between tracks, all of them executed quite well within their style. This also gives the impression that there isn't much chaff or filler here / just different tastes. The only tracks I would cut out of all 30 are the last two. Great album.
I don't think Muse are a bad band and this album was totally fine as background music. But I really can't warm up to the vocals, which just sound extremely whiny to me.
A prime example of how weirdness, eccentricity and genre-mixing does not necessarily mean being interesting, let alone enjoyable. The only track on here I can actually consider a song in a traditional sense is the cover Le Premier Bonheur Du Jour. Now, I'm all for shaking up traditions, but I'm also for actually enjoying music. That said, certainly not the worst thing we've had on this list either.
Definitely not what I was expecting, as I wasn't familiar with Keith Jarrett at all. I also find it misleading to label this as a jazz performance. From my perspective, this clearly seems like a performance of contemporary classical music, with slight jazz influences. The only other jazz aspects here is in Jarrett's past experience and that full improvisation is typically associated with jazz. Be that as it may; Jarrett's playing and compositions are fantastic and recording quality is sublime and in no way behind studio quality. This is a wonderful record and deserves its popularity.
While I applaud a willingness to experiment, to challenge existing conventions and to push the boundaries of what is considered music, I did not enjoy the outcomes of these experiments in this instance. I only listened to the first half of half the songs on the album, but why I did hear was pretty much unlistenable. I guess that the influence this album had on later was music was mostly on music I don't enjoy.
This album really is all over the places with a lot of different sounds, instruments, influences. But despite variety of elements and vocal range, the album is severely lacking in any kind of soul or any aspects that make it actually interesting.
The shoegaze, proto-post-rock version of Hawkwind. I quite enjoyed this album, but have to admit I don't see any justification in considering this a 1001 must-hear-album.
Morrissey's voice and style works extremely well in a certain kind of musical context (embodied by The Smith's particular and very effective brand of mopey indie pop-rock). This solo album is a lot more experimental and varied than The Smiths... and it doesn't work. There's nothing really 'bad' on here, but apart from the handful of tracks that do work (Everyday is like Sunday, Treat me like a human being; the tracks that sound most like The Smiths) the music sounds weirdly unsatisfying. Most of the songs just don't sound like they're going anywhere.
Back when I was an angry little 12/13 year old, I absolutely loved Soulfly. I never managed to get into the frontman's preceding band, Sepultura though. I don't know what it was that made Sepultura less accessible for me. Maybe the higher density of sound, maybe the lesser amount of groove, or the growls instead of shouts as with Soulfly. Whatever the case, 20 years later, I am a lot less angry and definitely enjoyed the musical juggernaut of an album that is Roots. The highlight of the album is probably the fantastic drumming which seems infused with ethnic rhythms. Somewhat less convincing are the vocals, which nonetheless absolutely fulfill their purpose. The last couple of tracks peter out a bit weakly compared to the beginning of the album. On the whole, this album was a fantastic ride though, encompassing everything metal is supposed to be and then just a little bit more - ethnic influences to make everything more interesting.
The combination of pretty standard 80s pop (with a nostalgic twang) and post-punk distortion works better than expected and is interesting enough. 3.5 rounded up.
Well, that was 80's British post-punk album number 126 on this list. At least that's what it feels like. Nothing new, nothing interesting, next.
I really tried to like this and I do think there are a couple of good ideas spread across the album. But mostly the music is just so extremely inconsequential. Why this would be included on here is completely beyond me.
This was.... strange... I really looked forward to this one when I saw it on the list, as I absolutely love Frank Zappa's solo work. Somehow, I'm extremely hard pressed to even call most of this album music. The short and scattered parts that were music, mostly sounded great. But I'm not even sure what the rest was. I considered work such as the entirety of Joe's Garage an absolute masterpiece, including all of the weird sounds, voice-overs, etc. But this was just too much, unfortunately. Or too little. Or too ??? Who knows, really.
This was an interesting one. It's astonishing by how much rap music can be improved if you take out the cringey, forced toughness/gangsterism/toxicity. Still not sure if it can actually be called rap, but since I usually don't like rap, pushing the genre boundaries seems like a good thing to me. Rounded up from 3.5
As far as rap music (not my preferred genre) goes, this was actually very listenable. Much smoother, mellower, funkier and massively less annoying than most rap I've heard. I'd even go as far as calling it quite enjoyable. Still rounding it down from 3.5 because the lyrics were just so damn stupid (when the content was even understandable, which was mostly not the case)
The album started really strong and always remained at least enjoyable. But I found that it lost focus in the second half and just meandered away after that. With some more uptempo energy, this would have been a 5 for me. On the best tracks, the blend of blues music with traditional instrumentation and chanting is a real pleasure.
I found this to be much more pleasant than expected, based on the descriptions in the Wikipedia article. Still, pleasant as it was, this could never be more than absolutely forgettable background music in my book.
Well, this album was an experience for sure. I definitely enjoy the more accessible material of King Crimson more. Nonetheless, it was not at all a bad experience.
I had never heard of these guys before and based on the description, I really didn't expect to enjoy this album as much as I did. In terms of musicianship, this was even a good album and in terms of songwriting it was pretty standard. But what truly shines about this album is the stellar production. The way all of the sounds are brought out and contrasted is a piece of art in itself.
Wow. Why exactly was this popular? Abrasive yet uninteresting. The lyrics are edgy nonsense too.
Hrm hr grumble grr, 4th Tom Waits album hrrmgrr. Disney-ruffian-style cabaret grrr. Mmrrrmh. Grgrgrr smokey bar backrooms. Hrrrr grumble grumble.
I honestly didn't expect to like this - but a positive surprise is never a bad thing. Definitely quite varied (in terms of songwriting and instrumentation) for a solo effort!
While for the life of me I can't see why this might be a must-hear before dieing, it was a pretty nice album and I enjoyed it, especially the guitars.
Wow. Why would anyone enjoy this album? It's a solo album by a singer who seems to be able to sing in only one single, constant tone and with extremely sparse, yet badly executed instrumentation. The strings and flut make for some of the most bland, tepid and shallow classical instrumentation I have ever heard. The rest of the instrumentation is worse, when it's present at all. The obvious German accent makes Nico's singing even more grating - as if it weren't droning, dragging and moany enough by itself. I understand that Nico herself did not think this is a good album. I absolutely agree with her. To be fair, there are worse-sounding albums on this list. Often that comes down to personal taste though. For this one, I can't hear any redeeming qualities whatsoever.
I was surprised to see I rated the other Echo album (which I rated 725 albums ago) 3 stars, even though I'm sure Spotify has put a few of their songs on random playlists for me and I enjoyed them then. Just the same, I really enjoyed the Crocodiles album as well. So maybe that's evolving taste, maybe it's evolving rating standards and maybe Echo And The Bunnymen need the listener to be in an appropriate mood to hit just right. Because this album really did hit just right. More of a 4.5 rounded up, rather than a clean 5, but a very good album just the same. I particularly enjoyed the textural depth of the instrumentation.
A band that sounds very emblematic and admittedly high quality (relatively speaking) for a style I can't stomach. The vocals are pretty bad but somehow better than what punk rock usually has to offer. The guttural rawness definitely sounds more genuine than what most punk bands force on us. The instrumentalists (and the drummer in particular) also seem to know what they're doing - rare enough for punk.
I guess you have to play to your strengths. This band's strength seems to be starting writing songs - but not fleshing them out. There really isn't all that much else to say about the band's music. Not bad, very listenable. But really nothing special. An album with 28 songs is likely to have some stinkers like Little Whirl, but there weren't really any positive breakout songs.
Immaculately crafted clean, brand-new, gleaming, perfectly packaged pop music - and absolutely bland and boring.
Just four albums ago on this list I reviewed Echo And The Bunnymen's debut album and rated it with 5 stars. That led me to wonder if the quality was really so different to the fourth Echo album, which I reviewed more than 700 albums ago on this list and rated 3 stars. Was the quality really that different? Or did my tastes change in the roughly 2 years inbetween? Was it just a matter of mood while listening? This, the third Echo album and my third to review seems to hold some of the answers: not all Echo And The Bunnymen albums were made equal. Crocodiles impressed me by depth, feeling, mood, instrumentation and overall quality. Porcupine seems to be lacking in every one of these categories. What happened? How did Echo forget how to make good music between their first and third album? Do the answers lie with their second album? Will their second album show up further along this list? One question answered - more have arisen.
First off, the whole concept of releasing a bootleg live album with a really strange split of a half-length acoustic folk concert and a half-length rock concert seems extremely strange to say the least. I'm not a fan of live album under the best conditions. This album does not have the best conditions. Being a bootleg recording - production is simply not good, period. Unfortunately, the music is not really good either. I enjoy Bob Dylan as a songwriter, but not as a musician. There are a couple BD songs (some of them on this live album) that I thoroughly enjoy - but it's because they're very well-written and multiple studio takes, post-production and dense instrumentation make up for BD's shortcomings. In particular, that he is not a good singer. Here, production is raw, instrumentation is extremely sparse (especially on the first half) and it is painfully obvious, that Dylan just doesn't sing well. I cringed so hard during the rendition of Like A Rolling Stone - the studio version of which I truly love.
I guess this must be an artist that is popular due to performance/messaging/image/lyrics rather than due to quality of the music. That's all good and well if you know their background and attend their concert - but hearing about Christine for the first time and listening to the French album on Spotify, my judgement is based solely on the music, which is lackluster, to say the least. Sounds like it would have been at home in the late 80s rather than just a few years ago - but even back in the 80s a lot of the musicians doing the same thing were simply better at it.
For sure one of the better folk albums we've listened to from this list. We've already had the follow-up Fairport Convention album earlier which was also OK, but which I thought had too much psychedelia mixed in. Unhalfbricking has a much better balance to me and was a solid, enjoyable album throughout.
Positively surprised by this one for sure. My main issues with old country music in general would be weak musicianship and uninteresting songwriting. On this album, musicianship is actually quite impressive. Joe Ely's vocals are solid and the guitar-playing is fantastic throughout. Songwriting does remain uninteresting - but still good enough to make this a very enjoyable album.
Experience with Kraftwerk has been mixed so far, with one of their other albums garnering 4 stars from my side and another a measly 1. This one is somewhere in the middle at 2.5. I'll round it up, because it's not hard to see the strong influences Kraftwerk had on some of the 80's and early 90's synth-pop that I do enjoy. But by itself, I don't really see this album as worth listening, even though it doesn't sound bad as such.
More of a soundtrack vibe than an album vibe. It started out strong and continued to have strong parts throughout, but also a couple rather annoying sections such as the Hawaiian bar sounds (?) on Persian Love. Overall, not a horrible experience, but not something I really needed to hear either.
Our 6th Rolling Stones album and the 5th to get 4 stars (one only got 3 stars from me). Not much more to say. It's good music. They were a good band. Some more variety would be preferable though.
While the predecessing album, Rumours, may have been one of the easiest 5-star ratings on this list, I'm not quite as sold on Tusk. With a massive selection of 20 titles, less might have been more, cutting down on some of the less effective tracks or possibly splitting the double album into two distinct albums, a more experimental one and a more straightforward one. In that case, the more straightforward one would be my preference. The more conventional rock structure of the Stevie Nicks songs (Sara, Sisters Of The Moon, Angel) were definitely my favorites on Tusk. On the other hand, the more sparse yet jagged Buckingham arrangements just don't do as much for me. Maybe I'll just re-listen Rumours or Stevie Nicks' solo material after this.
This is our third Björk album. The two other ones got 5 and 3 stars respectively. Vulnicura is definitely more on the side of the previous 3-star album with the same criticism: jarring, dissonant weirdness distracting too much from a good voice and interesting ideas.
Easy 1 star for me, like the previous The Specials record. The weird thing to me is that I actually do see some good qualities in this record and can understand why people would like it, love it even. But there's just something about reggae - I can't even say what it is - that aggravates me so much. Something about the particular off-beat rhythms of reggae that just annoys me so incredibly much, even when it's over-layered with as many other influences and credible musicianship like on More Specials. I don't even think this is a bad album, but I don't want to hear a single second of it ever again.
Not bad at all. Started pretty strong but couldn't keep that level of quality throughout. Still a good album but nothing amazing.
A 3.5 for me. The music sounds good, but it's just a bit too meandering and doesn't really go anywhere. Some more vocals and additional instrumentation would go a long way. A pleasant listen, but not enough to sustain attention.
It's not the worst-sounding album on this list by miles. There have been enough completely unlistenable punk, reggae and rap albums vying for that position. But really, that's the only positive thing I have to say about it. This album is the epitome of why I'm not interested in radio-pop. There's nothing that is in any way interesting about this. The few times I paid any attention to the lyrics they sounded completely vapid.
Usually I'm not much into party rock, glam rock, etc. But this one, well, rocks. It's impossible to really take this album serious, but that's probably not what it was ever designed to do anyway.
I really enjoy The Smiths and Morrissey was a large part of that (his personality being what it is, but let me just judge his music fro now). But as a solo artist he just doesn't hold up. Making his music rockier doesn't help, since his voice really does work best in a single, specific musical context - apparently the one created by the rest of The Smiths.
Definitely not a fan of rap, so 3 stars is high for a rap album for me. She's definitely good at what she's doing in the instrumentation and samples are good enough to not be annoying. Of course the whole "I'm the best, come battle me" shtick is really dumb, but the feminist twist gives it some welcome flavor.
This mostly sounds like it was conceived during labored fever dreams. According to Wikipedia, that's pretty much what happened. Goals achieved, I guess. Production also sounds very impressive for it's time in achieving what it was supposed to. It's just that the goals apparently did not include creating music that is in any way pleasant to listen to.
I definitely prefer actual music over weird, abstract sound experiments. My cat looked highly confused while this was playing.
I enjoyed this more than I thought it would. It hit the right notes and made for a pretty dreamy, relaxing listening experience. In terms of quality more of a 3.5 rounded up. But that's good enough.
I'm fully aware of the cultural impact of this album - for which it deserves 5 stars very easily. But rating it in terms of my personal enjoyment... it's all over the place and I'm simply not at all a fan of the incoherent, dissonant psychedelia bits. While certainly not horrible, I consider this album among the weakest outputs of The Beatles. It may have its moments, but I'll take The White Album or Abbey Road over Sgt. Pepper's any day.
I truly enjoyed the other Divine Comedy album we had (Casanova), despite and partially even because of all of the shtick, kitsch, and the near overwhelming amount of pathos, with just the right tongue-in-cheek feel to it. This one has all of the same ingredients. But the mix just doesn't quite do it for me like Casanova did. I guess it's hard to tread the line between convincingly over the top with bland kitsch on one side and overdoing the pathos on the other side.
As a young metalhead, I was never interested in RATM as I was very much not into rap and also not too much into the thrash metal roots they draw from. But dang, seems like I was missing out! This album delivers pretty much from start to finish, with only Fistful Of Steel being kind of weak. But the heavy instrumentation with tinges of funk and sludge metal, the vocal delivery, and even the righteous anger (it may be a bit much, depending on the mood - but it's part of the package) make for a pretty potent mix. I'll revisit this one.
What an interesting, creative, quite talented... absolutely unlistenable drivel? I rated two other Kate Bush albums we got so far 3 and 4 stars. So I'm not a great fan of the rest of her work, but I found it at least very listenable. This one was bordering on torture though.
I didn't think I ever heard of these guys before, so when Get Free came around, I first thought it was a cover version. While I don't see the justification in adding this one to the list, I did enjoy it as pretty high quality garage rock. Definitely very impressive for a debut. A bit of a weird disconnect between the first and second half of the album, which started to sound quite Beatlesque from Factory on. But both halves are very solid.
I never heard of these guys before, but what they were doing in 1968 sounds extremely similar to what Black Sabbath (a band I really love) were doing at the same time: heavily distorted, 'sludgy', psychedelic blues rock - the kind of music that was the starting point for heavy metal. Now I'm trying to put my finger on why I like this album so much less than Black Sabbath's debut. Honestly, I don't really know. Maybe the recording quality is not good enough, maybe the guitar hooks aren't catchy enough, maybe the vocals don't stand out from any other rock music of the time. Whatever it is, Blue Cheer just weren't what Black Sabbath was. I guess that's why I'd never heard of them before. 3.5 rounded up.
No idea why this might be considered a must-hear album. It does sound like sort of a missing link between some styles of music and also some bands I do actually like. But the link is between those bands and hotel lobby style muzak. This is basically a toned down version of some of the more boring songs by The Beatles, America, and Creedence Clearwater Revival - alternated with muzak. The parts that have potential also suffer from sounding a bit too cheerful in a way that doesn't combine well with the other influences. It just ends up sounding off.
This was a pretty weird mix of styles and sounds between tracks. While nothing (except for I Don't Love You Anymore) sounded really atrocious, there was nothing that sounded particularly convincing either. It all just sounded kind of watered down, bland, smoothed around the edges. No personality of its own - certainly not a must hear album.
Definitely not a big fan of the style in general, but sounds good for what it is and not unpleasant for in the background. Not more than that for me, unfortunately.
Wow, this is total garbage. How did this ever make it on the best-of list of anyone? It's bad punk rock but without the speed and energy. Not that those would make it good, mind you. But the only thing that's left are the other typical hallmarks of punk rock: bad singing, dumb lyrics, lack of instrumental skill (which the speed and energy typically try to cover up), absolute lack of songwriting skill, tacky teenage angst.
I don't think I've ever listened to or cared about Janet Jackson at all before. So I went into this one without much in the way of expectations. Most of it I ended up liking quite a bit. The album is immaculately produced and pretty varied, with a bunch of different influences but most tracks being pretty nice (the two last songs being an exception, boring). So now I know that JJ is more than only MJ's sister. 3.5 rounded up.
I really don't feel the appeal of this kind of music. Sure, it never sounds particularly bad in itself. But the repetitiveness of just repeating a loop loooong after it has outstayed any semblence of being interesting is just nowhere near enjoyable for me.
Alright. Well, it's hard to say anything really bad about this album. But it's also really hard to say anything good about this album. It exists, I guess? 2.5 rounded down, because I can't remember what it sounded like, since it finished an hour ago.
Second Winehouse album on the list and second time I've ever actively listened to her music. Her voice is very good. But in terms of actual songs, I vastly prefer the original offerings of the classical style of jazz-infused soul that she draws so heavily from. Some of the tracks were kind of painful to listen to, such as the atrocious Fuck Me Pumps. Most of it was absolutely fine/pleasant though.
Hm. Rapping, black "Village People" in outer space - that can only ever have seemed like a good idea in the 80's. This 'futuristic' proto-rap really didn't age well in any regard and the rhymes and vocabulary used are so simple that the lyrics seem like they could have been written by an elementary school kid. That said, it all still sounds less painful to me than the majority of rap and Who You Funkin' With? even sounded somewhat nice.
While I did enjoy this, I don't think the inclusion on this list is justified. It sounded good, but I had never heard of these guys before and they didn't leave much of a lasting impression on me. 3.5 rounded up.
While I quite enjoyed this one - especially the wide variety across the album - I struggle to understand how its inclusion on this list is justified. But well, it sounds better than many of the other albums on here anyway.
Bleh, our fourth album of the intensely overrated u2. Sunday Bloody Sunday is legitimately a very good song and New Years Day certainly has its merits as well. But then again, tracks like The Refugee and Drowning Man are pretty much trash. u2 is basically an outsized garage rock band that would sound impressive (but pretentious) for an amateur band playing at the local pub, but that's it. I was thinking of rounding this up to 3 stars just for the strength of Sunday Bloody Sunday (which really is a 4.5 star song). But nah.
This album is definitely extremely dated. It belongs to a very specific time period and sub genre - but within that time period and sub genre: this is it. The quintessential album. The soul of it's specific niche. While quality may vary between tracks, I found most of this album to be very enjoyable, with Maggie May being a standout 5-star song.
Who doesn't love some German, far-out-there industrial noise experimentation that sounds like a bunch of metal garbage cans being thrown around?
As a professed non-fan of hip-hop, Speakerboxxx sounds chaotic, non-sequiturial and all over the place to me. According to Wikipedia this is supposed to be the consistent half though? After half of the annoying Speakerboxxx album, I skipped the rest to get to The Love Below and well... that one is pretty much just unlistenably annoying. Hey Ya! is a classic at this point and it is kind of cool, although I absolutely hated it back when it was all over the airwaves in 2003. Maybe I just don't 'get it'. But both sides of the double album sound horrendous to me.
There's no doubt that Eminem is among the cream of the crop of rappers from a technical perspective. One problem however, is that I simply don't like rap and another problem is that this is supposed to be a comedic album in a style that I actually did find funny when I was about 12 years old. Eminem definitely sounds best when he drops the vapid comedy act and sounds more serious such as on Rock Bottom. But well, most of the album is stuff like My Name Is, cartoonish-sounding choruses, and half-witted skits.
Never listened to them before and definitely not understanding the hype. Very retro, somewhere in between Bob Dylan and Counting Crows but trailing far behind the highlights of either. They would be pretty decent as a local garage band, frequently playing concerts at bars in their hometown. Anything above that, I consider them overrated.
The album started out pretty poppy and actually interesting and fun to listen to. In the course of the album, things get progressively weirder and more uncomfortable.
Yeah, no. I do see a couple of things going for this album and I could imagine myself liking it back when I was about 13 and a lot edgier and much more into campy rubbish. But luckily, that is not the case anymore and I think Blur are rubbish - decidedly British rubbish with some character though. Parklife is probably better than the other two Blur albums I had the misfortune to rate with 1 and 2 stars respectively. This one might be a 2.5 rated down. It's something.
It's kind of funny to realize that Randy Newman already sounded both old and old-fashioned in the early 70's. That said, it's definitely not bad music, although the arrangements are a bit sparse for my taste. Fine for background listening.
I really don't like rap. I expected to listen to half of 5-6 tracks, write this off as a 1-2 star album, and move on. To my surprise, I listened to all of the 72 minutes of this album without ever feeling the urge to skip anything. Even the 'skits' aren't nearly as dumb as on other rap albums. OK, this dude wants us to know that he's reeeeally hardcore and that he likes swear words. But otherwise, this is actually pretty good, no-nonsense stuff. It figures that Ice T also likes metal music and it shows in the hard-hitting beats. Probably not really 4 stars for me. But it's so rare that I can even stand rap music and this one's a rare exception.
This album was definitely more intense than the two previous Buckley albums we had. Intense in a good way, definitely rockier and infusing his various styles of crooning with some blues-rock elements as well. I enjoyed it.
About time that we got a real banger again. My last 5 star rating was 26 albums ago. ZZ Top just rock, that's all there is to it, but that can be quite a lot in itself. My main criticism of the previous ZZ Top album we've had was that some of the arrangements sounded a bit too sparse. The modest synth accompaniments and added tightness in percussion through the drum machine really pull their weight in solving the sparseness issue. My other criticism of the other ZZ Top album was that the quality difference between the highs and lows was pretty big. This one is pretty much straight fire throughout. If the low-point is something like the unremarkable (but still solid) Thug, that's a straight A in my book. Great album. More like it, please. Song highlight: Sharp Dressed Man
The intro was reminiscent of a overly timid version of the instrumental post-rock I generally enjoy, but it sounded good enough. Things went downhill from there. Seen through the lens that this album was created by a couple of teenagers, it seems impressive. But outside of that lens, it's just incredibly boring. It's somewhere in between the tamest tracks of indie synth bands like The Naked And Famous with some veeery watered-down shoegaze elements scattered in. This album has a couple of ingredients that I really enjoy in music when used correctly. But here they're just watered down to the most boring concoction possible.
I can see why this might appeal to quite a lot of people, but on a personal level, I kind of hated it. It was simultaneously boring and annoying.
Never heard of these guys before, but this album is right up my alley. In terms of folky, British psychedelic rock this is at the top of the game. It doesn't suffer from the common psychedelic music issue of jarring dissonance and comes with a whimsy all it's own. The narration on the second half is a gem in itself. A true shame the lyrics to this album aren't available on Spotify.
Very oldschool chamber music with some modern twists and lyrical subject matters of the day. Not quite interesting or good enough to re-visit, but I'll round it up from 3.5 because it's at least something quite different and unexpected.
I found this quite listenable, compare to the majority of rap which I can't stand. But listenable doesn't equate to good by any means. Both rappers have somewhat pleasant voices, but the rapping itself is quite weak and the frequent attempts at other vocal styles are even weaker. While the lyrics are too edgy to really take serious. It does say a couple of things about the US that valid political criticism from 1992 is just as valid today.
Here's another apparently very popular musician I'd never listened to. Expectations were neutral going in. I was not at all prepared for how good this album is. Every single track is just straight-up quality. I love the voice, I love the song-writing, I don't love the style per se but I do love the execution of it. Definitely planning to re-listen this one and check out the rest of his music too.
OK, pretty high quality garage-style alternative rock from the 90's. Nothing really special, interesting or otherwise standing out though. 3.5 for the enjoyable music but rounded down because I don't understand why they need to be on this list.
This is not a good album. That said, I do understand its inclusion here. It's an impressive example of manufacturing-craft that must be admired in some ways - at least in terms of marketing, persona-building and crafting a phenomena. It's like cheap fruit-flavored bubblegum in more ways than one. It's clearly marketed toward kids and teens, it's overly sweet, mass-produced, entirely artificial, highly predictable while pretending to offer variety, not enjoyable to anyone with an ounce of discerning taste - and yet, it's an absolute best-seller, the taste of which is familiar to everyone. This is the first time I ever listened to more Britney than her big hits, which are admittedly amazing for karaoke as long as they aren't taken seriously. The rest of the album is exactly as I imagined it would be. One notable exception is Soda Pop - what in god's name is this auricular abomination? 1.5 rounded up for karaoke purposes.
I guess when you've already done everything you can possibly do within the realm of creating music, but you still want to do more, the only thing left is to make is experimental weirdness. This is the 8th(!) Bowie album I'm reviewing for this project and it's easily the one I like the least. While I can see some artistic merit in it, I simply don't think it's enjoyable music. The best parts of the album are probably those harking back to his more accessible, straight-up pop rock past.
So, this album seems like it's on here more for representing the cultural footprint of a region and sub-culture, rather because the music stands out particularly (although the music is quite good). More than anything, this is a homage to rock music and to the South. But with how both of these are consistently exemplified by Lynyrd Skynyrd, it makes me wonder why Dimey didn't just give us another Lynyrd album instead. Another thing this album is about is traffic accidents - be these on the road or out of the sky. I don't have all that much to say about the music. It's good, rock-solid southern rock. But there just isn't much more to say about it. It was nice.
Yes. The rap. Very rappy rap. It's simply not my style. At all. And we've had a bunch of it recently, with some albums surprisingly enjoyable to me. This one just sounds like very typical rap to me. Therefore, I don't enjoy it. The jarring samples and loops such as the super annoying phone ringing on Mental Stamina definitely don't help either.
Why do "artsy" bands so often feel the need to make unpleasant music? And why does this list contain so many albums like this? Yes, I absolutely see the point of pushing the boundaries of established musical styles or even the definition of music. But there are also albums that did that and actually sound good while doing so. This album does have some parts that are interesting and pleasant and warrant around 3 stars. For example Paperhouse was fine. But then there's unlistenable noise such as Peking.
Actually chill and relaxing, so I really didn't mind having this on. But at the same time, it's not memorable at all and this really could have been any "chill and relaxing" album.
This one has a bit of a strange duality with jazz-oriented instrumentation but Mitchell's voice which sounds better suited for standard country pop music. Applying that voice to jazz song structures makes everything sound a bit sing-songy and meandering. Nonetheless, the album grew on me during it's spin. It's soothing, pleasant and warm. Probably a great fit for a cozy indoors-afternoon while it's heavily raining outside. 3.5 rounded up.
We've had a couple of chart-topping pop singer albums, of which I (everyone, really) have heard some of the hits, but never a whole album. To name a few, the Madonna, Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake albums were absolutely vapid, soulless, uninspired to the extreme. Good for individual, recognizable karaoke tunes, but otherwise not worth spending any time on. To my surprise, this was actually a pretty good album. Not something to give multiple spins, but definitely solid. Good voice, good performance, solid songwriting. The bad boy act is uninspired, but it's an angle, I guess. 3.5 rounded up.
Same as for the other Prodigy album we got. I enjoyed it much more than I would have thought before this project. Probably that's partially do to the music feeling like rock almost as much as like electronica. Still, my main criticism is that tracks often feel too repetitive within themselves. Might be good for dancing, but not as much for my office job. 3.5 rounded up.
2 tracks in (and until the end of the album), I found myself wondering if I was really listening to the album described on Wikipedia. How can anyone consider this a masterpiece? The descriptions of playing sounds at random and creating experimental sounds pans out - but then just looping them for minutes in otherwise excessively sparse arrangements... how can that be a masterpiece? Interesting on a conceptual level; sure. Influential for fringe genres; quite possibly. As an actual album to listen to and enjoy; extremely boring and utterly soulless.
Although the Wikipedia page makes a big deal of this album re-imagining blues, this is still essentially a post-punk album. As usual with post-punk, I enjoy the parts that are further removed from punk and dislike the parts that are closer to punk. This album treads a fine line, infusing multiple different styles and influences into a punk framework. It works well on some tracks and so-so on others. It does have personality going for it.
Cheap hip-hop-pop polished to the point that it doesn't have any personality at all. The three women are pretty good singers - but the songwriting is so weak that it just doesn't even matter how well the songs are sung. The only spark of good songwriting on this album was the Stevie Nicks sample.
Never heard of them before, but this was a pretty nice album. Great background listening. Sort of trip-hop but somehow both more pop and more techno than most trip-hop. Nothing really stood out to me, but it was nice.
I never really listened to Soundgarden outside of their hit Black Hole Sun - which to this day ranks high among the weirdest music videos I've ever seen. Turns out this was pretty high quality throughout and very enjoyable. More metal than I would have thought. Not quite a straight-5 masterpiece, but good enough to round up from 4.5
Not bad, quite pleasant as background music. But even though Willie makes it work on this record, I'm not a big fan of the extremely sparse arrangements. There's definitely more interesting and captivating outlaw country music out there.
I was fully prepared to stop listening and rate this as 1 star at the beginning of the second track. But during the third track, something remarkable happened: I started to think this actually doesn't sound to bad. And then, during the fourth track: this actually sounds pretty cool. Although it grew on me in a pretty impressive way, this was still a challenging album to listen to and the 'similar music' that automatically played on Spotify after Wonderful Rainbow was instantly relaxing. I'm glad we got their "most accessible" album. Mixed feelings. Although I'd say that interesting new experiences is the entire point of this whole website.
In terms of singer-songwriter albums this is quite good and I enjoyed the lush instrumentation. Not sure if this really deserves 4 stars in terms of that this album could just as well have been from the early 80's... So definitely nothing groundbreaking or in any way original here. Nonetheless, it's a good album and I enjoyed it.
The wiki article and the 1001 albums book blurb make a big deal of this album being a collective effort and I can see why - the quality difference of the contributors is massive. Pretty much all of the Barlow tracks are quite good, solid 4 stars. On the other hand, Gaffney's stuff is absolutely unlistenable, unredeemably 1 star. Loewenstein's tracks are somewhere inbetween, but mostly not bad. In conclusion, this could have been a good album if they hadn't let Gaffney meddle with it.
I'm not that big on techno and mixed on ambient music. So most likely I'm not the right audience for this. Nonetheless, it was certainly not a bad experience. I think the specific combination of styles is a hard line to toe and it worked well on some tracks, but not so much on others. For example Tha was extremely boring, and a few tracks weren't as much a mix as either pure ambiance (I, which I quite enjoyed) or mostly techno (like Green Calx, just after I, which I enjoyed much less). Mostly this is pretty nice record for relaxing background music though and I can easily see it as being quite interesting to people who're more into techno than I am. 3.5 rounded down (but I do respect the effort and am glad it's included in the book).
My expectations were incredibly low, as the only other time I ever listened to Hole was their previous "Live through this" also featured in this book. I thought that one was absolutely atrocious and rated it 1 star. This album is heaps better. It's actually even good! Nothing groundbreaking, so not much to say. Just good, solid alternative rock.
Definitely extremely ambitious for a pop album. But impressive as the fusion of genres and the orchestral music is, I'm not really convinced. It all sounds well enough in the background, but there's nothing much to grab and hold me. To me this seems more like a proof of concept than something I'd revisit to actually listen to.
If this is supposed to be the more mature version of Madonna with increased artistic merit... well. This kind of album is the whole reason why pop music has it's bad reputation as boring, over-produced, meaningless and unartistic. These albums may produce 1-3 recognizable sing-along tunes that get radio airtime and can be sung along to during a car ride. Other than that, it's just not worth my time or energy.
So, I pretty much hate reggae and consider Bob Marley some of the most aggravating artists I ever had the misfortune to hear. There's just something about the particular brand of off-beat that instantly sets me on edge. Surprisingly, I thought the opening track really wasn't that bad. But it was downhill from there, with the majority of the rest of the songs being nearly unbearable to me. Please just let me listen to the Spotify advertisements instead.
Repeating below my previous Tom Waits review with the album number updated. Honestly, there are so many interesting albums in the history of music. And so many artists who don't sound pretty much the same on every record. Did we really need 5 Tom Waits albums? Hrm hr grumble grr, 5th Tom Waits album hrrmgrr. Disney-ruffian-style cabaret grrr. Mmrrrmh. Grgrgrr smokey bar backrooms. Hrrrr grumble grumble.
The Libertines sit somewhere between British new-wave, post-punk and indie pop. All three styles that are massively over-represented on this list. While I mildly disliked the most punk-like tracks on this album such as Don't Be Shy and Music When The Lights Go Out, most of the album is of quite high quality. Especially the guitar work is certainly not bad. Nonetheless, there's absolutely nothing new here. Not a single second of novelty on the whole album. While I certainly understand genre fans enjoying this, I certainly also understand the polling of this album as being highly overrated. 3.5 rated down.
These guys again? I just rated their debut album a rounded down 2.5 stars 25 albums ago. I'm afraid they didn't get much better. They went from a toned down and uninspired yet pleasant shoegaze-meets-indie-pop to what seems to be toned down chill-club-muzak. The instrumentation might have worked with much better vocals. The vocals might have worked with more intense and touching instrumentation. The combination is lacklustre to say the least. This is probably still my most listenable 1-star rating on this list, but I can't bring myself to give it anything higher.
Since the Wikipedia article contains 2 lines of text, one being "included in the 1001 albums book", I don't have any background on this album. It's a weird 00's rap album. Why was it included? Was it influential? Did it offer anything new apart from just blending random old-fashioned musical styles with temporary rap of the time? I don't know much about rap - but I do know that this just sounds really bad to me. His singing isn't half bad when he goes for a more soul-influenced approach. But most of the time CeeLo just sounds like a cartoon character. Do people actually enjoy this?
Rock solid as far as alternative rock goes and vastly better than the majority of britpop. A nice album. Not one that I'm likely to revisit, but I did enjoy it.
This is our 3rd Paul Simon album and we've already had 3 Simon & Garfunkel albums too. At this point, new reviews could frequently be copy/pastes from previous ones. Simon & Garfunkel = Fantastic duo, consistently and easily 4-5 stars Paul Simon = Nowhere near the S&G collaboration when flying solo. Consistently pleasant but uninspired 3 stars. Anything that is interesting on this record is thanks to the contributions of the African artists. Outside of those elements, the rest of the album was likely already musically outdated when it first came out.
OK so this album was a bit weird - but in a good way and probably ahead of its time by a couple of years. While I can't call the vocals good by any stretch of the imagination, I enjoyed the album.
Reading the band name, I imagined one of the typical edgy indie rock or post-punk bands that litter this list. That's certainly not what we got though. This is definitely a pop album, but it's a dreamy, mystical, ephemeral and enchanting sort of pop. It also has it's share of musical variation. For instance The Night I Heard Caruso Sing sounds like The Cure went chamber pop. This album definitely focuses more on a sense of poetry - both in terms of music and lyrics - than on producing the next big hit of the season. But that does also comes with a cost. None of the tracks on Idlewild have much staying power after an initial listen. This could very well change with multiple listens of tracks like Lonesome For A Place I Know. But at least on one listen, nothing stands out as being particularly catchy or memorizable. Not sure if I'll revisit this one or not. But it was interesting and beautiful and I enjoyed it a lot more than the majority of albums on this list. 4.5 rounded up.
A pretty weird album. It has all of the weirdness of pure psychedelia but mostly without that style's typical, jarring dissonance. Instead, Wyatt adds some of the compositional quality and instrumental detail of prog rock into the mix. The result is mostly pretty cool, occasionally quite fun, also occasionally a head-scratcher though. What was he thinking? Was he thinking? Or just fully embracing his inner dadaist whimsy, slapping on layers of musical paint, following some intuitiv patterns, seen only by Robert Wyatt? Who knows - I don't.
Like the other k.d. lang album we got a couple hundred albums ago, I listened to this and simply don't know why I'm supposed to care about it. While not country anymore and rather trying to go for a deep and velvety pop experience, it's still utterly uninteresting.
I heard the name before, but didn't know the guy. So I somehow thought this would just be our 200th random US or UK Indie rock album. Unfortunately, it's much worse than that. According to Wiki, this is Raeggae Rock. While I like rock, I don't like it nearly as much as I loathe raeggae. I listened to the larger part of the first 10 tracks, until I allowed myself to stop torturing myself. Calling the vocals understated is a huge understatement. These raeggae people aren't even trying to make music with any semblence of either skill or passion. The instrumentation, while minimal, has more to offer than raeggae normally does. I guess that's the representative rock component? The one track I already knew, Bongo Bong, is extremely annoying [even more than the rest of the album] - does anyone actually enjoy this, or is it only considered a meme song?
It's old-school country. Very old-school, very country. The Chuck Berry song was pretty good.
I can see this album as an early blueprint for synth-pop that paved the way for much better bands and albums further down the road. In itself, while there are some good parts in the songwriting, it's really not great. The biggest downer is that the main vocalist simply isn't good.
I have to admit, this album was more engaging than the majority of DnB I've heard - which isn't much, admittedly. My main issue with the genre is how repetitive it is. I get it, that's supposed to make it dance-able. But I simply don't enjoy it. This album was very listenable to me as background music, but still not something I'd ever seek out.
I went to into this fully expecting to absolutely hate it. Mixing punk rock with glam rock, really? Is it absolutely necessary to mix the worst kind of rock with the second worst kind of rock? The first track actually surprised me though, by mostly being gritty guitar-driven hard rock, rather than anything else. It was actually nice. Then the second track while still boating solid instrumentation was unlistenable to me due to the horrible punk vocal lines. Track three was somewhere in the middle, with somewhat annoying vocals made tolerable by rock solid guitar work. For example, Prince Of The Rodeo is straight up fire without the vocals - just release it as an instrumental track and it would be awesome. The actual instrumental track, Humiliation Street is the best example of this. It's actually great, by far the best track on the album. I'd probably give an entire album like this 5 stars. This is how the album continues. Excellent guitar work on one side, versus hardly bearable vocals on the other. Which of those sides weighs heavier depending on the track. But generally speaking, I'd massively just prefer to listen to a good hard rock album that doesn't come with any of the punk baggage dragging it down. It was really hard to rate this one. But I was forced to skip too much of it to give it more than 2 stars.
This album is just super weird. While there seems to be some level of musical skill involved, all of the results of the various experiments on this album end up sounding uncomfortable. To top it off, Thundercat's style of singing is really annoying. It's hard to assess how serious or how tongue in cheek this guy is on some of the tracks, but some of the lyrics seem absolutely idiotic (Friend Zone being the tipping point for me; is this supposed to appeal to incels?).
Finally an actually very good album again. We had another Rush album some 600 albums ago on which I criticized song length and pretentiousness (but still ended up rounding up to 5 stars). This one improved on those issues with much tighter song structures. The fantastic musicianship stayed the same. The blemish on this album is the final track, Vital Signs, which somehow blends reggae into their signature power prog rock. I absolutely loathe reggae and am strongly tempted to take a star off for that track alone. But even so, this is the best album we got in a long time.
Going into this album, pretty much the only thing I knew about Moby is that Eminem hated him 20+ years ago. Reading a summary of that "feud" with some retrospective comments by both parties, Moby seems by far the more sympathetic figure. As for the music itself - I really liked it! Usually I'm not into techno, but pretty much every track on this album is a blend of techno and other styles of music. Pretty much every track is good quality and I'm likely to give this record more spins in the future for accomplished and pleasant background music. What keeps it from 5 stars is that I can't see it as much more than nice background music though.
I was kind of excited to listen to this one, as I do enjoy high quality synth-pop. But it seems like the duo may have been a one-hit wonder. The title track is fantastic, but that's about it. The vocals are very good throughout, but the instrumental parts are lacklustre. They're a bit too bare and not melodic enough. As a result, the tracks sound pretty flat. Still OK, just not compelling.
It's a very long jazz concert, what else can I say about it? To my own surprise, I listened to the full thing. It was pretty nice as background music, but not all too interesting and I didn't pay very close attention either.
Listening to this one right after a 150-minute live jazz band ordeal, also from this list. But rather than being fed up with jazz for the time being, the contrast helped showcase the strengths of Getz/Gilberto. For one, it shows how superior studio recordings are to live recordings in general. The wonderful production on this record allows specific elements to be highlighted, playing with different volume settings, and for each component to shine in it's appropriate role within the composition. Speaking of, compositions are stripped down, but tight enough to never sound too sparse. There's a simplicity that knows it can rely on the quality of its individual ingredients. I don't know if it's only the contrast to the previous album, but I ended up enjoying this one way more than I expected. It's definitely more of a 4.5 than a straight-up 5. But well, Getz and Gilberto caught me by surprise and it's simply a good album. And if this record popularized bossa nova, then without a doubt, countless students around the world should be thankful to Getz and Gilberto for pioneering the quintessential study music (+cozy cafe on a rainy day music).
I really didn't think we needed a fifth Bruce Springsteen album (even more mumbling American folk-pop-rock for background listening with the rare arena-worthy anthem buried amidst the chaff?). But this one was actually different and by far the best I've heard from Bruce. The thoughtful, brooding, introspective nature of these songs actually make them much more interesting than pop-rock stinker number thirty-thousand-and-four. It was also a somewhat novel experience to hear a rock(ish) album without any drums whatsoever. If it works, it works.
Reading some of the reviews, I have a hard time truly believing that I listened to the same album as other reviewers. How can anyone hear this collection of sound and think anything else than "wow, this is absolute garbage" ??
Doesn't sound too bad and quite clearly the connecting link between American folk/country with rock elements such as The Byrds and rock music with country elements such as The Eagles (is it coincidence that all three of these band names refer to flying creatures?). That said, while the historical relevance is pretty obvious, the music is not refined and simply not very enjoyable. Interesting listen, but now I'll go on to listen to something better.
Definitely enjoyed this one. Bobby McGee has long been on my Liked list on Spotify and with good reason, it's a pretty amazing track. Janis Joplin was an awesome singer. Her other album we listened to fell a bit flat in terms of songwriting, and/or choice of songs. While better here, it's still the weakest aspect of this album. But Janis made it work.
Similar to the previous Smashing Pumpkins album, I still think the way the vocalist sings is really weird and off-putting. But songs and instrumentation are surprisingly high quality, at least on the first disc. And that's the main problem here for me (apart from the singing): the quality difference between the first and second discs is massive. I'd like to rate the first one 4 stars, but the second one a mere 2 stars. It feels more like a collection of B-sides than an album. Instead of 2 hours of some good stuff and some bad stuff by The Smashing Pumpkins, this could easily have been just 1 hour of only good stuff.
This album is for sure more interesting and pleasant than their other album we had the misfortune to rate, Tago Mago. Still, it's not interesting enough to be memorable and pleasant only gets you so far. Just minutes after the album ended, I couldn't really remember what it sounded like anymore.
We had two Van Morrison albums already and yet, this is definitely not what I expected. In general, I'm not a fan of live albums and most times I would much rather just listen to the studio recordings of the same tracks. But what I didn't expect at all was for this to be a full-on soul concert instead of a pop/folk/rock concert as Van Morrison's studio recordings are. Weird, but also unexpectedly good.
I've long liked classical soul and Al Green is of course a staple of the genre - deservedly so in terms of his considerable vocal skills. But I always felt his songs lack a bit of oomph. More powerful instrumentation would help, or catchier choruses. This album could certainly do with remastering at least to make the instrumentation more powerful. 3.5 rounded up.
Surprising that this is a mid 00's album and not an early 70's or late 60's album. It sounds like it would fit in much better with the psychedelia movement at that time. That said, it doesn't offer much of a new spin on that movement either, so I can't understand why this is even only the list. Perhaps it's noteworthy for reviving interest in a genre that was last popular before many listener were born. Musically, the album may be nuanced, but ultimately, it sounds pretty contrived. The swings in volume make Newsom's singing sound grating, occasional squeakiness in her voice really doesn't help either. The album would probably also have benefitted from fuller sounding instrumentation. All in all, a very unpleasant listening experience. I didn't finish it.
I read a couple of reviews on metal archives and it seems there's hardly any middle ground on this album. Some people think it's absolute genius, while some others seem veeeery upset that it exists at all. The album is at its best when Metallica embrace the essence of what made them popular to begin with (high energy, fast and dirty, yet with technical prowess) and the orchestra then provides additional weight, texture and volume on top of that. On the other hand, the album is at its worst when they half-ass it or get sappy. For instance, these renditions of Master Of Puppets and Battery actually sound somewhat watered down and lack a certain oomph. And I'm not even sure what they were trying to do with Hero Of The Day, but it's certainly best off entirely forgotten. Ultimately I think the project was a great success. It had already been done decades earlier and there are still bands combining metal and classical music today to great effect. Actually, Haggard (who were at the absolute top of this game with Eppur Si Muove) used to be my number one favorite band for quite a while. As for the album as such, the individual tracks are kind of hit or miss. Some are absolutely brilliant, while others could easily be left out. The length works well for a concert, but for the album version, cutting it down from 130 to 70 minutes and simply omitting the weaker tracks would have made this an easy 5-star masterpiece.
What is this even? I'm not even sure if this still counts as music or if it's just a weirdo sing-songing whatever happens to be going through his head at that moment, supported by an unquestioning backup band. This is just really bad in every way. It's not even weird in an interesting way. Just weird and off-putting.
I've heard tracks by Air before on various trip-hop or post-classical playlist. For example, I'm absolutely sure I've heard Highschool Lover before, and it was a standout track on this album. They're definitely good at what they do: mostly understated atmospheric music with a lot of depth and feeling behind it. That said (and I've said it before), why are there even soundtracks on this list? This album would definitely have been better if it weren't constrained by being a soundtrack. Mostly, it's pretty good music. But then you have a track like Dark Messages, which is fine for background sound in a movie but shouldn't be anywhere near a music album. Still rounding this up from 3.5, but I'm pretty sure I would've preferred listening to one of their other albums that's just an album. I guess I'll just do that next.
Apparently I've already reviewed Want Two, but I have absolutely no recollection of it, which says a lot in itself. I also rated it 2 stars. Sure, this album is ambitious. But it is not good or interesting.
Our 7th(!) Neil Young album on this list. Come on. For me, the entire purpose of this project was expanding my horizons. Not listening to the same artists over and over, however influential that artist may have been. The title track is in my opinions one of the very best Neil Young ever wrote. That track aside, the album is possibly the worst out of his 7 I've now listened to start to finish.
Pretty much the epitome of hard rock at it's time. It's still a hard-hitting banger today, with the bombast and symphonic elements, as well as considerable technical prowess giving this album staying power. If the greatest downside of this album is that the tracks are somewhat formulaic, it's because Deep Purple invented the formula.
This is so bad that I was actually glad for the extraordinarily weak production, obscuring at least some parts of this auditory abomination. It's fitting to my understanding of the punk and reggae genres how the band's description on Spotify talks about the band's utter lack of any musical skill or experience and how much they were derided, as if it doesn't matter at all. Sure, if these girls taught other little girls that it can be fun to mess around with instruments and rock music, that's a very positive legacy to have. But in terms of musical quality, this is a top contender for worst of the 1001 albums in this book, and that's saying something.
The only thing I knew about Kendrick Lamar is that he famously has beef with someone. But I forgot with whom. As far as rap goes, this seems to be pretty high quality (to the extent I'm able to judge). In terms of instrumentation and songwriting it's quite varied and complex. But still, rap is just not a style of music I enjoy. This was listenable to me and didn't annoy me, which is quite a feat. But I didn't enjoy it either.
Nothing to add to my two previous 2-star White Stripes reviews: Seven Nation Army is an amazing track, but seems to have been a one-off success. In general, rock music greatly benefits from bass guitars. The music lacks oomph and is ultimately pretty boring. These sound like unfinished demo tracks at best.
Definitely something new for me and an interesting experience. For sure a good singer. That said, it wasn't entirely my style and I didn't enjoy it all that much. But definitely fine to play in the background to set a certain mood or to evoke a culture about which I know much less than it deserves.
OK as far as singer-songwriter music goes. Listenable, but also far from being great. It has some Phil Collins vibes, but not the same quality of songwriting. The synth sounds may have sounded futuristic in the early 80's, but sound very dated today.
Songwriting isn't fully convincing, but there are some moments that click and show a depth of emotion. The harmonies are great. This album really wouldn't work without Emmylou Harris. Looking back I rated two solo albums of hers 4 stars each nearly 800 albums ago. The cover of Love Hurts was really bad. Ooh Las Vegas tries to put a rock spin on things, I'm not actually sure if it was a success or not - maybe with more inspired guitar work. All in all, just another country album. It does have some qualities, but not enough to be exciting in any way.
So I went into this trying to keep an open mind and just judge the music itself. The little I know about Kid Rock, he seems to be a complete and utter little turd of a person. But I never actually heard his music. In fact, I didn't even know that he raps. That said, to my great surprise, I actually really enjoyed this album. Most of the time I don't enjoy rap, but it sounded good to me here and the instrumentation just rocked and was quite varied. The lyrics on the other hand sounded incredibly dumb. This is actually a 4.5 to me in terms of the music. But I really can't bring myself to give this 5 stars, just because of how dumb the lyrics are, as well as the whole persona, and the actual person also being a piece of garbage. That said, good music is still good music.
Pleasant enough, but quite forgettable. If this album was a genre precursor, later artists surely improved on the formula.
I don't think this is a good album at all - but I do think it's a pretty fun album. The lyrics are intensely bad, at least for the 2-3 songs of which I read them. Maybe some 16-year olds will find them touching. The different intensity in vocal delivery between the backing and main vocals on Lick Summer Love was pretty weird. Probably the backing female vocalist being the main vocalist for the whole album would have been a notable improvement, maybe even 5 stars. At least it would go a long way in helping the band sound less like a teenager garage band. For all the criticism, the album still has a bunch of really solid hooks and it seems like fun pub or rock bar background music. So if that was the goal, they achieved it. The instrumental delivery is mostly on point, especially the guitars and occasional keyboard lines are quite good.
I used to think I don't like Motörhead. Attending a concert by my friend's Motörhead cover band changed my mind. They're a quintessential rock band and simply fun to listen to. In terms of production and sound quality, I will always prefer studio recordings over live recordings and the mere presence of live albums in this book is a peeve of mine. That said, the track list being mixed and matched from different sets saves us from too much annoying crowd dialogue, but it also feels less organic. As for the music itself, the bands' playing is extremely tight and they achieve an impressively full sound for a three-man outfit. The guitar work is fantastic, but the compositions would probably have benefited from a second rhythm guitarist. Would have to judge that properly with studio recordings though. A nice listen either way.
I saw "punk" and assumed I would hate this - but sometimes you get surprised in a positive way. This was a fun and well-done album. It sounds like a blueprint for what a lot of folk metal and folk rock (especially of the pirate/shanty variety) still sound like today (which may be a testament to my long-held belief that these sub-genres suffer from a fundamental dearth of originality and creativity).
The band name and album cover made me assume some kind of dark post-punk thing, although that wouldn't have matched the album's release date. Instead this is some pretty standard, jingely 60's rock with psychedelic elements, reminiscent of bands like The Beatles, The Monkees, The Beach Boys, etc. Nothing new, but definitely nothing bad either.
My first thought was "oh great, another old psychedelic rock album no one's ever heard of before". I don't mind the style per se, but I often find it overdone, with good musicianship let by the roadside in favor of uncomfortable experimentation just for the sake of it. This album took me by surprise though. It's excellently executed with great musicianship (especially the fantastic guitar work). The psychedelic elements feel organic and actually enhance the enjoyment of what would otherwise already be accomplished classic rock.
It's certainly not bad, but certainly not memorable either. I just had it playing in the background and thought it was pleasant all the while. But then I didn't really notice when the album ended and the automatic playlist of similar songs started. When I did notice, it was because the songs were more engrossing.
I really don't know what makes this album a must-hear before you die. I don't think it was or is genre-defining or amazing in any kind of way. But I did quite enjoy it playing in the background. Not exactly a top 1001 album of all time (which I think applies to the majority of albums on here) but still a very enjoyable listen. Sometimes that's good enough.
Based on the Wikipedia article, my expectations going in weren't great, but this was a very pleasant surprise. I'm not even sure if I would call the psychedelic, since this is the rare case of psychedelia feeling whimsical rather than just weird (with varying degrees of uncomfortableness). But what really impressed me was the breadth of experimentation and yet, everything sounded organic and accomplished. The only track I was on the fence about was Skeleton Key, but even that one was still OK. A great album with simply good music, in an impressive amount of different shades of rock.
"they wanted the new record to sound like trash" - mission accomplished. The music itself is definitely not the worst from the album's we've had. A number of previous punk album comes to mind for that honor (recently I had to listen to The Slits, that was near-traumatic). In fact, the music sounds actually OK, if the production were good. Possibly 3 stars. -1 star for the production though. But kudos for achieving what it was supposed to.
This is definitely an interesting album from a historical perspective. It clearly presents an intermediary step between classic rock'n'roll and what later involved into punk rock. As clean as these guys look on the album cover, their sound is surprisingly raw for its time. I'd definitely prefer the original versions of the rock'n'roll and R&B covers, they just don't really do it for me in these raw, dirty garage versions. That they still sound somewhat good is a testament to the quality of songwriting of some of these fantastic classics. That said, the original material by The Sonics certainly works better in their transitionary style of rock. Favorite track: Psycho
The choice of album name is exquisite. This is a somewhat pleasant but entirely pointless diversion. The music just tinkles along without going anywhere at all. The one track that has any kind of substance is Dear God - more of this and less of everything else and this could have been a pretty good album.
Oasis is probably one of the top most overrated bands in all of rock history, all the way up there with U2. Their sound is so generic that at the start of more than one track, I mistakenly thought it's an advertisement jingle. It's not just entirely stale and unimaginative, but there's really just nothing to like. The singing is plain bad, lyrics too. The tracks are repetitive within as well as between tracks. I imagine if you asked a generative AI program to create 90's brit-pop album, this is exactly what it would spit out.
This was certainly a weird one, but it was a fun listen.
The music is so overproduced and loaded up with auto-tune and voice effects that it really could have been sung by anyone at all. In addition, it's enough to listen to the first 30 seconds of any of the tracks and you'll have heard the entire song. The entire endeavor is devoid of any personality. Sure, for Madonna this may be consider re-inventing things. But it's just a switch from manufactured-to-death 80's pop to manufactured-to-death 00's pop. I was prepared to give this 2 stars as most of it is inoffensive background muzak. But then the atrocious American Pie cover hit me like a personal insult.
Band name and album cover made me expect some self-absorbed post punk nonsense. The Wikipedia article makes them sound like a garage rock band and also mentions them sounding like brit pop. None of this seemed particularly appealing. Turns out, all of it that was inaccurate and they're rather somewhere in between 70's space rock like Hawkwind and 00's post-rock. That's definitely more up my alley and they're pretty good within this particular niche. As is it sometimes goes, the singles (at least "Not If You Were.." and "Every Day Should..") are the obvious worst tracks on the album - boring, accessible, dime-a-dozen pop rock. But whenever they're doing their own thing instead of trying to please the studio's misguided desire for mass appeal, these guys are pretty awesome.
A good, fun and varied rock album. Nothing really new on here and not an amazing amount of depth either. Just a good mash-up combining elements from different styles of rock. Nice to listen to, but won't really remember it.
The third Elvis album we've had, but in this case, I don't question why this album was chosen for the list. While there's definitely some blatant musical thievery going on here, the fact of the matter is that it was Elvis who widely popularized rock and roll among white people at the time. It was good music, was marketed accordingly, and paved a couple of roads. I enjoyed most of the album, but do have to point out one complete failure of a track: what was Blue Moon even supposed to be?
This is a pretty strange mix of minimalistic, psychedelic, progressive, but musically not fully convincing in any of the three categories. So my first impression wasn't great. Nonetheless, there's something here, something touching which I can well imagine may make some listeners fall in love with this record and which grew on me in the course of the album and had me hooked for a second listen. It's a certain air of vulnerability, of baring your soul to the world. I was close to giving this album 5 stars, but from the technical side it's really not great and there's a few tracks like the closing track Downs which, well, down the album a bit.
I kind of loved this one. The name of Beefheart was familiar through collaborations with Frank Zappa, but I had never heard his music before. It's sort of a wild mix based on blues rock but also with touches of what would later be known as sludge, southern americana, grunge even. At times, this albums also sounds something of a predecessor to the kind of southern-influenced-mash-up indie rock that is still popular today (think Counting Crows and Black Keys). In any case, this was vastly ahead of it's time, and fantastic throughout in terms of musicianship.
I've been consistently rating most "bubblegum pop icon" albums (Britney Spears, Madonna, Justin Timberlake, Christina Aguilera) 2 stars (with 1 star exceptions), finding them overproduced, vapid, and soulless. While I never listened to her much, apart from a couple of enjoyable karaoke songs, Taylor Swift doesn't fit into the same category. I'm not exactly a fan of her music. But it's easy to see that it does in fact have depth, meaning, and soul. Her popularity seems hard-earned and well-deserved. An enjoyable album, even for someone like me, who's absolutely clueless about modern pop music and has close to zero interest in it.
While I didn't particularly enjoy this one, it was absolutely fine, which is way better than expected. When reviewing her previous album, Stripped, I noted she's a good singer, but that everything about the album was entirely artificial and devoid of any soul and meaning. This one is also way over-produced and severely lacking in personality. But Christina stands out much more as a singer and the music and compositions aren't quite as sterile. This is still highly superficial music, but at least the singing is very good.
The first four tracks are mostly indie garage rock and sound totally fine. But starting with Untutored Youth, they are followed by absolutely painful punk rock. That said, it's not the absolute worst punk rock, but I just hate punk rock in general. 3 stars for the garage rock tracks, 1 star for the punk tracks (wasn't able to stand to any of them in full - apart from the final instrumental track, which was totally fine again).
One of those bands I knew by name but never actively listened to. Sounded pretty good, nice music. But not ground-breaking and kind of faded into the background after a couple tracks.
Not bad at all, definitely interesting and creative. But some tracks feel like they're blending styles for the sake of it, rather than for actual artistic merit. I did enjoy it, but it was not inspired or powerful enough to be amazing.
We got this band's previous record just 20 albums ago. Everything I wrote there still applies, so I'll copy it below. Just another point underscoring that this is a fundamentally backwards-looking subgenre, even when it's well executed, as by The Pogues. Although mixing and production are extremely rough, which costs this album a star - Costello's production is horrible. It's also what makes me unable to enjoy his own work; I saw "punk" and assumed I would hate this - but sometimes you get surprised in a positive way. This was a fun and well-done album. It sounds like a blueprint for what a lot of folk metal and folk rock (especially of the pirate/shanty variety) still sound like today (which may be a testament to my long-held belief that these sub-genres suffer from a fundamental dearth of originality and creativity).
I'm not a fan of rap. Me enjoying this album quite a lot might come down to how little of it is actually rap by current standards. There is more funk on here than actual rap, and good amounts of soul and pop music too. These elements are often really well done (such as the Stevie Wonder inspired track) and blend together very well. Rating this 3.5 stars but rounding it up because it was an unexpectedly positive listening experience to me.
Straight from the beginning, there's a stark contrast between the bombastic, jazzy instrumental intro, followed by a mellow pop song with heavily understated instrumentation. Side one continues like this. It's either peppy instrumental jazz, or pop with great vocals but understated instrumentation. Seems like they decided either instruments can be intense, or vocals, but not both. Side two then caught me completely off guard. Every track is in a different style. When the album was done and music by other artists started playing, I didn't even notice, thinking it was just a different track in again a different style. In the end, there was nothing bad on this album. Every single track had its qualities and was well-executed by itself. I could have done without A Gospel, since I don't like rap, but that's personal preferences. But what keeps this record from being really great is that it ends up being a collection of tracks, rather than an album. It's more like a random spotify playlist than an album. Still good, but all over the place.
Sickeningly saccharine. No idea why this deserves a spot on the list. It's not horrible, compared to some other albums on here, but it just doesn't stand out or appeal in any meaningful way.
In the opening seconds of the first track, my first thoughts were that this sounds like the soundtrack to a an indie game in a futuristic setting. Probably a 2D platformer or rogue-lite that pitches you against an evil corporation with a robot army. Most of the album is a bit mellower than the opening seconds, but the image of low-budget background music remains. Of course, the vocals don't really quite fit in with this image. But they never stand out enough to elevate the music above feeling like a soundtrack either. This is absolutely fine for background music, pleasant even. But listening to this as a real album, it just sounds too inconsequential.
The best 60's psychedelic rock album I'd never heard of before.
Seems more like a haphazard collection of sounds, rather than actual music. I didn't hate, as I did the 1-star ratings I give out, but there wasn't anything to like either.
As far as early 00's indie rock goes, this is really solid. Probably ahead of its time. Good atmosphere, and nothing bad on here. Was a very nice album to have on in the background. It didn't blow me away either though.
Rating this in terms of music-historical significance it's an easy 5 stars. This is the one clear and obvious link from punk and early post-punk to the darker and often synth-driven wing of post-punk and new wave such as The Cure, Echo And The Bunnymen, The Smiths, as well as what later became gothic rock and gothic metal. To a modern listener, the album doesn't sound entirely fleshed out yet. It's sort of unpolished and still very raw (a testament to its punk roots). There's a lot of potential here, but it's not entirely convincing and sounds more like 3.5 stars to me. Definitely rounding up for impact though.
I don't feel like I can really judge this album at all. While not unpleasant, it was absolute background muzak to me - when it finished and random similar artists played on Spotify, I didn't notice until multiple tracks later.
This album doesn't sound bad at all. That's not the issue. The issue is that it sounds utterly and all-around unremarkable. Just pure background filler. A wide range of styles also doesn't mean all that much if all of them are performed in a milquetoast manner. Ironically, Suite for 20 G was the only engaging track.
I suppose it's well-executed for what it is. Can't really judge, but I do know I prefer my life without any grime music in it. It wasn't as unlistenable as most other albums I give 1 star to, but I skipped most songs half-way through. The tracks were incredibly repetitive and monotonous.
"This is the soup that I believe in" In terms of albums that don't sound horrible - but also don't make it clear why they should have a place of any kind on a list of 1001 essential albums; this one might just take the cake. The album feels like an unrefined demo tape, a proof-of-concept taped in a makeshift home studio rather than a professional recording. It sounds like it's missing a couple of additional layers, effects, instruments, as well as a general polishing of the songs. And did the outtake really need to be included in Todo los Dolores? The unfinished nature is one thing. But what else? Any particular quality in songwriting, instrumentation, singing? Any innovation? Any new social or cultural movements spawned? Inspiring or relevant lyrics? Nope. Just a collection of amateurish recording.
I was kinda of excited about this one as I do love me some Pink Floyd. But then I was quickly reminded that I don't love all of Pink Floyd's work, least of all some of the early, uncomfortable psychedelic material. Seems like Syd Barrett was pretty much the early, uncomfortable, and psychedelic part of Pink Floyd, both musically and on a human level. While this album did have its good sides, this was rather disappointing.
Honestly, this was just a pretty bad album. For the most part it wasn't in-your-face please-turn-it-off painful, but it really wasn't good. At all. I went into this with an open mind, no specific expectations. And I did enjoy the first track and thought this album has promise. But it went downhill fast. Everything after the first track seemed uninspired, uninteresting, musically plain and strikingly unambitious. It wasn't outright horrendous (with the exception of The Na-Na Song being pure garbage). But without any redeeming qualities, I fail to understand why anyone bought this - let alone why it seems worth even talking about before I die.
I do enjoy me some outlaw country now and then. This isn't quite as outlawish as I prefer my country, but everything has to start somewhere. For this subgenre that seems to be here. While it's not quite where I'd like it to be, songwriting is focused, instrumentation is tight, and Waylon has a good voice. Rounding up from 3.5 due to its influence on later, bolder genre representatives. Got to start somewhere after all.
My first impression of this was pretty good. I'm not a fan of hip-hop and the rock parts were simplistic to say the least, but the singing was good and the sound felt fresh, even though the concept has been attempted many times before. But really, as cool as it sounds to learn instruments just for one album, we can hear that you really can't do very much with it. This album could have been way better with experienced session musicians and not limiting instruments to being played as simply as possible. Songwriting also seemed to taper off on the second half.
So all four of these musicians are considered songwriting geniuses and between the four of them, this is all they could come up with? It's not horrible and there are a couple of adequate radio-friendly tracks on here, especially on the second half of the album. But really, I fail to understand the genius of any of the four members individually and have rated them around 3 stars pretty consistently throughout this 1001 album project. Maybe you had to grow up in the 70's to truly appreciate them - but even if I'm simply 30+ years too young for this, there are so much more exciting albums that were released prior to this one. Par for the course, 3 stars for radio filler music between the actually exciting hits that can be found elsewhere.
Not sure why this made the list. It doesn't seem particularly impactful nor outstanding for its genre, but it's still quite a bit better than some of the other albums these past few weeks. The guitars are pretty good and songwriting is tight and fun. I did enjoy the album, but not to the point that I'll re-listen.
Well, I wouldn't have known that this is a super group, didn't recognize the names of any of the musicians and although I do know their bands, I don't think any of those bands are amazing (although they do all have a couple of good tracks). Nonetheless, this was a good album. Musicianship was great, songwriting was tight and effective. Not even much more to say about it. Just a good album at the top of its genre's game. Enjoyed this one a lot.
So far, I've rated a Björk album 5 stars and two others 3 stars each. Fact is, she's a weird artist. And this is a weird album by a weird artist. But this is one of those weird albums that works - against all odds. In general, I'm not a fan of minimalistic approaches in music. I prefer to be blasted with full-on maximalism. Give me that full, bombastic instrumentation and all of the complex, dense, ever-moving soundscapes. That's definitely not what this album is. And yet, it works. It's cool, it's new, it's fresh, and it sounds good.
This was most definitely no an album I had to listen to before I die. It wasn't the very worst, but I couldn't hear anything good in it either. The Wikipedia page is also pretty empty, leaving me clueless as to why I should care about this one.