0:00:30 (01) Wow this is Tom and Jerry-ish 0:01:30 (01) This is surprisingly listenable for me. Not a fan of jazz but I have a big hope that I'll enjoy this one. 0:07:23 (02) That was pretty good. Only 72 songs left... 0:10:40 (02) *yawns* 0:12:20 (02) Since the 4th disc is just a bunch of alternate takes, I will skip that. Only 57 tracks then, let's hope that we will reach track 57. 0:14:20 (03) Wow vocals! Love that voice, that type of singing always take me to the '50s despite the fact that I wasn't even born during those times. 0:22:53 (05) I wonder why this literal compilation album is chosen for the list. Not that it's bad, it's just H U G E. It has an expected fair share of "eh" tracks, like this one. 0:26:32 (06) Lmao the '50s have at least a couple of weird pop songs too. 0:30:51 (07) That voice does better in the ballads. The pop-ish songs are not my jam. 0:33:18 (08) Just kidding. This one is ballad is it's boring. 0:36:05 (09) I'm considering giving up rn. But let's hold on for a bit. 0:37:35 (09) My favorite Beatles album, "Revolver" is considered one of the best and most influential albums of all time. And it's only 35 minutes long. I mean, I'm just thinking that if this is a rock album, then today's listen is finished now. 0:41:45 (10) I mean hiphop albums are usually 70-ish minutes. And that's why they're usually challenging as a listen for me. Oh wait, I'm still listening to an album right now? Lmao I almost forgot. 0:44:21 (11) It's incredible to think that I'm barely 25% into the album as of now. 0:45:11 (11) Love this track and its instrumental break though. 0:52:15 (13) Wonderful track indeed. Woke me up at the moment. 0:57:47 (14) *yaaaaaawwwnnn* "The Wall" is another album that I love. It's 81 plus minutes long. At this time, Pink is probably going Nazi already. 1:00:00 (15) Achievement unlocked: BOOMER MUSIC OVERDOSE (Listen to non-stop '50s pop-jazz music for an hour) 1:04:06 (16) Should I take a break after disc 1 or is it cheating? 1:09:22 (18) Wow, ragtime aint it? Pretty neat way to end a disc. 1:13:36 (19) Yes, "who cares" indeed. Who cares if this is their "very best" or "most influential". Who cares if I didn't finish this album and rated it anyway? 1:26:28 (23) I figuuuuuured ouuuuuutt thaat lissteniiiing to someoneeeee singiiiiiiiing liiiike thiiiiiisssss maakess me sleeeeepppyy.... 1:37:14 (26) This one's pretty good. 1:42:25 (28) Is this really an album one should listen to before they die? I mean three hours of old music is a unique experience. But is it worth it? Does it provide a whole new way to experience music? Is it a good experience? 1:44:20 (29) The 21st Century Fox theme plays and I thought, maybe Is should put an end on this self imposed torture. So now I will raise the white flag and end this madness... 1:46:22 (29) [Game over]; Mission: Listen to it from cover to cover [Failed]; Mission: At least listen to the first three discs [Failed]; Mission: Appreciate the music despite the ridiculous length of this album [Failed]; Mission: At least appreciate Ella Fitzgerald's beautiful voice [Accomplished].

What is "bossa nova"? Well it seems that the answer is in this album. The title itself (probably) summarizes it all, "jazz samba"! That's bossa nova, jazz samba. I can see why this album ignited the so-called bossa nova craze. It's chill, it's atmospheric, and it's energetic. The very music that one would hear in some tropical themed restaurant or some pub. What a good introduction to the genre. I enjoyed it a lot, despite my dislike towards jazz in general.

With a name like Rod Stewart, a raspy voice, and a rowdy personality, Rod Stewart is very rock-'n'-roll. I discovered him as a soft-rock figure, however. Kinda like Barry Manilow and Elton John. I discovered his popular live videos in Youtube such as his versions of "I Don't Wanna Talk About It" and "Sailing". This album is his second. Early Rod Stewart. Bland and generic Rod Stewart. To be fair, I didn't really expect anything surprising when I saw that cover. I expected it to be boring, and it is. Country-folk covers of "rock-'n'-roll" (according to critics) tracks. A few interesting instrumental feats here and there. Rod's raspy voice. I didn't find it captivating at all. It's dull, it's uninteresting, and I could die without listening to this album.

This one is a very loud opera rock album developed from a musical, a futuristic version of "Peter Pan". It sounds epic, and grandiose. Of course it's not surprising for an opera rock album. But I've listened to a few opera rock albums, most notably "The Wall" and "Ziggy Stardust". But while the mentioned albums are great, both are not as loud and ridiculous as "Bat Out of Hell". It is already evident in the cover, explosive motorcycle ride in nearly all red color scheme. Of course loud isn't equal to quality. The album starts out loud, and get monotonous after a while. But on the latter half, it starts to build-up. The latter tracks are all stellar, and together, the album creates a solid narrative. Which apparently involves teenage angst and all the stuff that comes with it. It's a pop album like no other.

While The Kinks is not really underrated, they're obviously overshadowed by their peers. And like the big names such as The Beatles and The Stones, The Kinks also went beyond the usual cheap pop-rock stuff and made daring albums later in their career. That is not really interesting or surprising. But the sound and the scope of "Arthur" certainly is. It's a concept album about war and politics in the UK. Interestingly, it was originally made as a soundtrack for a TV show, which was never aired. Aside from the tunes and the lyrics, the thing that fascinates me here is the fact that this "concept album" is so carefree and loose sounding. It sounds fun and light oftentimes. As of now, however, it didn't really stuck to me. It has a few stellar moments, especially in the instrumentals. But the tunes are ultimately forgettable for me. But I guess it's interesting enough for me to listen to it again.

Wow, I just began with such an undisputed classic. Thriller, its apparently dark theme a product of Michael Jackson's struggles as a superstar. With disco stuff losing popularity, Jackson was compelled to make a definitive pop album "where every song is a killer". I haven't heard the bestselling album of all time before, but of course I knew the iconic singles. I've always liked "Billie Jean" and "Beat It". But while the title track has an awesome music video (which is apparently the first MV by a black person that MTV aired) and kickass dance moves, I've never been a fan of it. Still, I can see why this album become a household staple. I definitely heard the rock, the funk, and the soul smoothly blending in the disco pop of this album, its crossovers are all stellar. It's such an explosive and influential pop album. I cannot really assert that every song is definitely a killer. Few songs, especially the last ones, dragged the album. But it's undeniably a classic pop album, and one of the greatest pop album of all time.

I never knew there was a king of soul until now. And I did see why Sam Cooke was crowned the King of Soul. Whew! Right after the King of Pop I got to listen to the King of Soul! This album is exploding with energy. And it's not even rock. It's soul! Cooke's raspy vocals, the dynamic band, and the audience interaction all powered the album. I'm not a big fan of live albums, but this one is definitely one of best of them. It might get repetitive after a while. But it has a solid pace. It's a nice thirty plus minute party album.

Reiterating what the critics said, this is blues trying hard to be psychedelic. It has a few great psychedelic tracks, and some blues tracks slap. Never heard of The Yardbirds, and I'm not a huge Beck fan, but hearing this, I can see why they are considered as one of the pioneers of psychedelic rock. The bass line in the first track alone reminds me of some Black Sabbath, early Pink Floyd, and Beatles stuff. Overall, an interesting album. While it has a few great tracks, it's a pretty dull album.

Leonard Cohen is apparently a revered singer-songwriter. And this album is one of those... contemporary folk, according to Wikipedia... albums. To be fair, he has a cool and chill voice, and the instrumentals are gentle. Together, these elements effectively builds a melancholic or even gloomy atmosphere, something that a lot of people, including me, would find boring in high doses. But I guess that's what it's all about. Poetry being delivered with music in the best possible way. I respect him for that. But this album would only work as a lullaby playlist or a background music for me. Not a big fan of super moody stuffs.

This one is a very loud opera rock album developed from a musical, a futuristic version of "Peter Pan". It sounds epic, and grandiose. Of course it's not surprising for an opera rock album. But I've listened to a few opera rock albums, most notably "The Wall" and "Ziggy Stardust". But while the mentioned albums are great, both are not as loud and ridiculous as "Bat Out of Hell". It is already evident in the cover, explosive motorcycle ride in nearly all red color scheme. Of course loud isn't equal to quality. The album starts out loud, and get monotonous after a while. But on the latter half, it starts to build-up. The latter tracks are all stellar, and together, the album creates a solid narrative. Which apparently involves teenage angst and all the stuff that comes with it. It's a pop album like no other.

0:00:30 (01) Wow this is Tom and Jerry-ish 0:01:30 (01) This is surprisingly listenable for me. Not a fan of jazz but I have a big hope that I'll enjoy this one. 0:07:23 (02) That was pretty good. Only 72 songs left... 0:10:40 (02) *yawns* 0:12:20 (02) Since the 4th disc is just a bunch of alternate takes, I will skip that. Only 57 tracks then, let's hope that we will reach track 57. 0:14:20 (03) Wow vocals! Love that voice, that type of singing always take me to the '50s despite the fact that I wasn't even born during those times. 0:22:53 (05) I wonder why this literal compilation album is chosen for the list. Not that it's bad, it's just H U G E. It has an expected fair share of "eh" tracks, like this one. 0:26:32 (06) Lmao the '50s have at least a couple of weird pop songs too. 0:30:51 (07) That voice does better in the ballads. The pop-ish songs are not my jam. 0:33:18 (08) Just kidding. This one is ballad is it's boring. 0:36:05 (09) I'm considering giving up rn. But let's hold on for a bit. 0:37:35 (09) My favorite Beatles album, "Revolver" is considered one of the best and most influential albums of all time. And it's only 35 minutes long. I mean, I'm just thinking that if this is a rock album, then today's listen is finished now. 0:41:45 (10) I mean hiphop albums are usually 70-ish minutes. And that's why they're usually challenging as a listen for me. Oh wait, I'm still listening to an album right now? Lmao I almost forgot. 0:44:21 (11) It's incredible to think that I'm barely 25% into the album as of now. 0:45:11 (11) Love this track and its instrumental break though. 0:52:15 (13) Wonderful track indeed. Woke me up at the moment. 0:57:47 (14) *yaaaaaawwwnnn* "The Wall" is another album that I love. It's 81 plus minutes long. At this time, Pink is probably going Nazi already. 1:00:00 (15) Achievement unlocked: BOOMER MUSIC OVERDOSE (Listen to non-stop '50s pop-jazz music for an hour) 1:04:06 (16) Should I take a break after disc 1 or is it cheating? 1:09:22 (18) Wow, ragtime aint it? Pretty neat way to end a disc. 1:13:36 (19) Yes, "who cares" indeed. Who cares if this is their "very best" or "most influential". Who cares if I didn't finish this album and rated it anyway? 1:26:28 (23) I figuuuuuured ouuuuuutt thaat lissteniiiing to someoneeeee singiiiiiiiing liiiike thiiiiiisssss maakess me sleeeeepppyy.... 1:37:14 (26) This one's pretty good. 1:42:25 (28) Is this really an album one should listen to before they die? I mean three hours of old music is a unique experience. But is it worth it? Does it provide a whole new way to experience music? Is it a good experience? 1:44:20 (29) The 21st Century Fox theme plays and I thought, maybe Is should put an end on this self imposed torture. So now I will raise the white flag and end this madness... 1:46:22 (29) [Game over]; Mission: Listen to it from cover to cover [Failed]; Mission: At least listen to the first three discs [Failed]; Mission: Appreciate the music despite the ridiculous length of this album [Failed]; Mission: At least appreciate Ella Fitzgerald's beautiful voice [Accomplished].

"L' Eau Rouge" or in English... "The Red Water"? Information is limited and I don't know French, but this might have something to do with menstruation, love affair, and probably sex. And what is that lame cover? Is that an amber? I'm a big fan of Rammstein. And Young Gods sounds a lot like the mentioned industrial German band. But for some reason I didn't enjoy the album much. Unlike Rammstein which has a heavy and more slick sound, this album is loose and even inconsistent. The beats and the noises didn't engaged me that much. Still, the tracks that incorporates classical elements are stellar. "La fille de la mort", "Rue des tempetes", "Charlotte", and "Les enfants". I liked those even more than Rammstein's popular violin driven "Mein Herz Brennt". While I'm not whining that my favorite industrial band isn't mentioned in the list, I still wonder why this is in the list. My guess is that this is the beginning or the biggest influence to the industrial music in the '90s. Released in 1989, this might be the turning point from new wave to industrial rock. It has a few great tracks, but not a solid must listen album overall. It's hard to say if I hated it or loved it, but it surely is interesting.

While The Kinks is not really underrated, they're obviously overshadowed by their peers. And like the big names such as The Beatles and The Stones, The Kinks also went beyond the usual cheap pop-rock stuff and made daring albums later in their career. That is not really interesting or surprising. But the sound and the scope of "Arthur" certainly is. It's a concept album about war and politics in the UK. Interestingly, it was originally made as a soundtrack for a TV show, which was never aired. Aside from the tunes and the lyrics, the thing that fascinates me here is the fact that this "concept album" is so carefree and loose sounding. It sounds fun and light oftentimes. As of now, however, it didn't really stuck to me. It has a few stellar moments, especially in the instrumentals. But the tunes are ultimately forgettable for me. But I guess it's interesting enough for me to listen to it again.

It's easy to predict what would this album offer. Just by looking at the simple cover of him hanging on a train can infer that this album will be another one of those country stuff. And my prediction of this being an acoustic country jam album which has nothing special in it is true. But far from the simple songwriting and the overall generic sound, his voice is pretty good. Apparently a bunch of songs written by a woman Haggard didn't even know (probably "The Strangers" in the name "Merle Haggard and the Strangers"), these are songs about being a fugitive, it conjures images of wild west thingy in my mind. Fast paced and action packed. But that's not the case with this album, it's so casual it seems to be sentimental. Perhaps that's why a handful of people wondered if Haggard himself had a little prison history or experience. Overall, not really a bad one, but not a remarkably good one that is worth checking out either.

**2000's** I was just a kid. All those alternative rock one hit wonders amuse me. Forget about that guy rapping about mom's spaghetti, we have songs about being numb, being here without you, being asleep in September, going wherever you will go, having to go and make things so complicated, and of course, crying when angels deserves to die. I have no idea how incredible the '90s were when it comes to alternative rock (aside from something about being a creep, I guess), but nonetheless I enjoyed the 2000's much. . . A couple of buildings from a big country just got destroyed and everyone was talking about it. . . And what's this song about... nobody saying it was easy? It's pretty boring. *2020's* "A Rush of Blood to the Head"? Sounds stressful. The fact that it came from a band that I did not care much about didn't hel- Oh boyyyyy! ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ Okay. First of all, this is amazing. Coldplay is not as bad as I thought they were, lmao. My only issue is that the every single is on the first half. I've heard some other albums that are like that. Unsurprisingly, the first half is incredible, 5/5 in this case. But the second half? Usually hit-and-miss. Still, what a unique experience. . . I guess it's called "A Rush of Blood to the Head" because it can blow one's mind.

If the "retro" that they are selling nowadays is the '80s, often represented with vibrant colors, what is the "retro" in the '80s itself? The answer is, probably, the '60s. Not colorful and bright, just simple. The good old days. And there she goes, the album that attempted to create a nostalgic retro album but ended up creating a painfully generic and tedious pop rock album instead. Not the best retro from the '80s amirite lads? Or should I say... L A' S ?

It's pretty funny that right after a '60s influenced album from the '80s, I got another '60s influenced album from the '80s. But while I hated The La's self-titled album, this one is pretty good (note: The La's self-titled was released in 1990, but recorded in the '80s). It's another pop-rock album, with influences from the '60s psychedelic rock acts, Pink Floyd, Beatles, and most notably, The Beach Boys. As far as I can hear, this is most likely a Beach Boys-esque album. But that doesn't mean that the album only copied the styles and sound of other bands. It's has an entirely new sound. And that alone impressed me. I would love to enjoy this album, but unfortunately, '60s sounding pop-rock vibes are probably not my thing. But I can see why it is included in the list. The production and the instrumentals are all interesting, and it has a few personal highlights, particularly the fun first five tracks, the slightly trippy "The Man Who Sailed Around His Soul", and the originally unreleased and unsurprisingly controversial "Dear God".

The Damned. Machine Gun Etiquette. A bunch of men in the middle of a road in New York City. These elements remind me of an American action film, perhaps by Tarantino. And the album itself is the soundtrack. Punk. Never liked the genre but damn this one is so good. It is perhaps because it is guitar driven. There are fast riffs and solos in many songs. The vocals are not that bad unlike other in punk songs. Gets repetitive after a while but still a super fun overall listen.

It was early 2010's. Life was fairly simple. Youtube and Spotify are not yet swarming with ads so this particular young man decided that exploring new music is more worth it than exploring new porn vids. He discovered "Hotel California," as well as "Bohemian Rhapsody," "Stairway to Heaven," "Nothing Else Matters," and the Glee version of "Hey Jude" because the original was geo-blocked. But all of those infamous songs are nothing compared to what he eventually discovered: "Comfortably Numb - Live at Pulse." His mind was blown away. He was never moved by music in that way before. "Definitely better than porn," he thought. So it went on. He slowly got into some album about the moon, then he got absorbed in a 22 minute colossal song, then something about a wall... But no matter how mind-blowing those Pink Floyd treasures that he found, a particular song still stands out: Shine on You Crazy Diamond. And no, he didn't even know some guy named Syd exists. But there he was, amazed beyond words. The slow build-up, the haunting four notes, the melancholic lyrics and theme, and the incredible and emotional latter parts... he was captivated by it all. ... ... ... Years later, the man remembered those moments. He wished he could experience them for the first time again. The thing with Pink Floyd is, while there are other legendary and influential artists, none of them transformed his perception of what music can be in such degree as Pink Floyd did. As of now he heard things about a piper, as well as the moon, a wall, some bell, a cow, a submerged ear, some animals, and even that "ummagumma" thingy. But that burning man shaking hands with someone still remains the best for him. It has the Pink Floyd equivalent of "Yesterday," and two sharp tracks, sandwiched with the best song of all time. A masterpiece. . . Yeah, it's a bit overhyped. But with such experience, it's understandable I guess?

Why did this album became such a commercial success? A. Neil Young joined the chat. B. D I V E R S I T Y (despite the fact that's it ultimately became inconsistent and messy) C. The previous album by the group was (probably) a good one D. because harmony E. uhmmm... it took them 800 hours to record it

If Black Sabbath's debut is the birth of metal, then this album is it's conception. So how does it sound? Well, it sounds like blues. But not like blues but like... █▄▄ █░░ █░█ █▀▀ █▀ █▄█ █▄▄ █▄█ ██▄ ▄█ Ridiculously heavy and psychedelic, it's not that pleasant as a listen. Not to mention the vocals, which felt like they were mere decorations to the gigantic sound. Yet for some reason, it rocked me hard. And I enjoyed it quite a lot.

I imagine some scenario where a group of teenagers gathered and was like, "lmao let's troll everyone by creating a 15-minute long chain of screaming and speedy instrumental fiddling." And just like that, a new subgenre was born, or popularized: "hardcore punk." As if punk is not annoying enough right? I'm not really allergic to the so-called "hardcore" sounds. This one is just repetitive and bland, hardcore for the sake of being hardcore.

While I listened to a healthy amount of Taylor Swift around a decade ago, I didn't really took her seriously until she stepped into the domain of pop. And recently- wait a second, this isn't a Taylor Swift album? So, okay, this is Kacey Musgraves, a country pop singer and this particular album won the Grammy Awards. This album sounds very Taylor-ish. I could make my Swiftie friends listen to some songs from this and make them believe that this is Taylor covering some unpopular song. But while it does sound generic at some places, it's didn't felt outdated, it actually felt modern, at least for me. But perhaps it's only due to the fact that Musgraves explores a lot of sounds throughout this album. Because of that, most of the songs felt, as they put it, overproduced. But I actually liked it more than Taylor's old country stuff. I especially enjoyed the softer and folksier songs. I don't know much yet about the rest of Musgraves stuff, but I think it'll be good if she explored more of the softer side of her sounds.

Lmao, that cover is hilarious. It looked like something that eight year old me would have done if he discovered photoshop during that time. Is it terrible? I don't know. It's a bit unsettling. Greyscale tribal people on bright pink background. I think it's pretty good. It catches the sound of this album. So I discovered a new specie of punk: post-punk. It's basically punk going avant-garde. This album screams tribal energy and I liked the Doors-y sound that it made in some places. As usual the louder tracks didn't do anything to me. But the overall unique sound is pretty impressive. I guess American roots music is perfect for punk.

I remember watching an old CD my mom brought home, it's "Mamma Mia!" (I can't believe it was released in 2008, I've always thought it was released somewhere in the '90s). It was some light film where everyone sings Abba songs. I don't remember much about that night. I can roughly recall how my mom loved the movie. She's probably an Abba fan. And me? I only remember liking two songs, "Honey Honey," and the iconic "Dancing Queen." I loved the energy and the casual positivity in "Dancing Queen." But I've never heard the original until now. And... I didn't like it much. Because of the mentioned memory, I expected this album to be some standard pop album, but its much more disco than I expected. "Dancing Queen" is still a good song. That and "Money Money Money" are the only good songs in the entire album. The bonus track "Fernando" is also worth mentioning, its incredible. The rest is some terrible disco pop stuff. The mentioned tracks saved this from 1 star. If this album is a hit-and-miss, then those tracks are bullseye.

What is "bossa nova"? Well it seems that the answer is in this album. The title itself (probably) summarizes it all, "jazz samba"! That's bossa nova, jazz samba. I can see why this album ignited the so-called bossa nova craze. It's chill, it's atmospheric, and it's energetic. The very music that one would hear in some tropical themed restaurant or some pub. What a good introduction to the genre. I enjoyed it a lot, despite my dislike towards jazz in general.

From bossa nova to Latin hip-hop. Wow, I think I'm loving Latin music. I'm not a big fan of rap and marijuana culture. So I'm surprised by how much I enjoyed this impressive album. First of all, the beats and the sampling are awesome. Apparently, they made it marijuana-style psychedelic, which explains the trippy atmosphere of the songs. There is also something about their rapping that gets me. I like smooth yet solid nasal delivery, it's not overly angry and it fits perfectly with the beat. Overall, kudos for one of the first rap albums that I genuinely loved. PS. So that's one of the songs RATM covered. PPS. Cover art effort = 1/5; Production effort = 5/5.

So this guy, Stephen Mills, apparently gathered a bunch of people together to restlessly record an album. After a lot of sleepless nights and restless days, his newly formed band created the self-titled album. A considerably huge 70-minute album that tries to touch every realm of the country genre. It has 4 parts, each for every subgenre, rock, bluegrass, folk, and... experimental? I dunno, it doesn't change the fact that none of those parts impressed me. It's pretty boring. One good thing about the tracks is that the length seems to be perfect. At the very moment I decided to push the "next" button, I would see that there are 2 seconds left on the track. But is the album's length perfect? Er... no.

Why Vol 4 is Definitely Sabbath but not... Black enough (?) by some guy who only listened to "Master of Reality" (A shame it wasn't included in the list. Oops, spoiler! But the thing is, I loved em-oh Reality a dozen tunings more than the legendary em-oh Puppets), "Heaven and Hell" (I know there's quite a discourse regarding the two vocalists. While both are fine, I'm not a huge fan of either. But still, I'd pick Dio any day of the week. Sorry Ozzy fans.), and a couple of singles and thinks he can make such statement. (Whew! What a title!) Well first of all, look at that cover. I mean, it's not bad. But thinking about the incredible covers of the debut (my all time favorite album cover, yes even though I haven't listened to that thing) and "Paranoid," I wonder why the covers turned into some boring and generic signages. Orange on black seems cool though, and that image of Ozzy seems almost grotesque. I couldn't make out his face at first. But of course, as cliche sayings go, "Do not judge a book by its cover." Riffs? Check. Heaviness? Of course. Big C? Wait what? Big C! Oh, the speaker box was delivered. Compared to em-oh Reality, this album sounds... happy? I dunno. It's pretty upbeat and while it is trippy (Big C flavored, I guess), it's not as dark and gloomy sounding as em-oh Reality. Sure, "Heaven and Hell" sounds like Renaissance, but Vol 4 (a generic name because the company doesn't want the Big C reference, "Snowblind") sounds hard rocking, upbeat -- too upbeat for a Dark Age Era Sabbath. Of course I might realize I'm wrong (which is likely) when I listened to this again (which is also likely). But as of now, I think this album -- which has a tropical beach sounding instrumental -- sounds too happy. It's not bad of course, just not Black. Sabbath yes, but not Black. I still liked it despite the boring soft breaks. It's Sabbath after all.

Do not judge a book - or an album - by its cover. Of course this is still true when taken literally. But still, covers gives the consumer - especially the ones who haven't heard of it before - and idea of what's to expect. Let's have a real life example: Say a guy discovered a music album, it's cover a blonde woman smiling with her eyes closed. Above it, in a solid font read "OTIS BLUE/OTIS REDDING SINGS SOUL". Otis? What an odd name. The guy thought as he began listening to the album. A raspy, energetic, and most notably, male, voice erupted as soon as he pressed play. The man was shocked. Is Otis a woman who sounds like a man? Of course not. Otis Redding is a dude, and the guy who is listening is bamboozled. And who is that woman on the cover? As far as he know, it was a freaking stock photo. And the music of "OTIS BLUE/OTIS REDDING SINGS SOUL"? It's pretty decent. It's mostly generic soul or R&B. Half of the album is a bunch of covers of some rock and blues songs.

For every piece of art - whether it is a music album, a book, a movie, etc. - there is at least one person who never gets it. It doesn't matter how the consumers and the critics love it, there is always some people who just hated it. In this case, the influential "The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan", one of those people is me. Yeah, I know, it's BOB DYLAN. The harmonica driven folk guy who sang the original "All Along the Watchtower" (loved that version - it's the only Dylan song that I knew then), how could someone hate him? I'm surprised by how I hated it myself. It's boring, it's tedious. Yeah, the lyrics might be the meat of this album, but that alone won't make me listen to this. I get his voice and the harmonica interludes, after all that's why I liked the watchtower song. But most of the time, it felt like he was someone screaming random sentences over a guitar track. I kind of liked some of the songs though. The love songs are listenable, at least. And the opening, "Blowin' in the Wind" is popular for a reason. The rest? Naaah. I don't get the hype about those so-called "protest songs." But to be fair, people would probably welcome some soothing music during such terrifying historical event.

vespertine \ˈve-spər-ˌtīn\ adj. 1: of, relating to, or occurring in the evening 2: active, flowering, or flourishing in the evening noun 1: a dull album that sounds like trip-hop but much lighter. Characterized by an enchanting whispery voice, music box tinkles, and some household sounds. Typically with a great first half and a boring second half. verb 1: when some Icelandic woman tried, typically through music, to stimulate being cozy at home but instead ended up stimulating a fever dream where one is in an alien house in the middle of woods where they are indeed cozy but very bored

Two years. Several musicians from different countries. One hundred plus tracks. It seems that these are recipes for a wider and more diverse (and possibly more exhausting) version of "The White Album", but fortunately, Brian Eno did it pretty well and only ten tracks made it. This album is quite a ride. At the beginning, I thought it sounded colorful (I'm thinking about the spooky black and white album cover) and fun, like being in a carnival. But like a bland cotton candy, it sounds generic and forgettable, no matter how colorful. But as I said, it's a ride. After a while, things get more serious - less colorful, but in a good way. The ambient-ish tracks are great, it's like riding from the noisy circus to a pleasant, quiet park. Still, while it's a ride, it's pretty rough one. The rock-ish tracks and the ambient-ish tracks didn't go really well, but I guess that's the "before" and "after" science that he was talking about. So does he tell us that the world is a circus - even happy - before science? It's tempting to dive into it. But I don't think it matters. The only sure thing is that this album is an interesting, rough ride between circus-y rock and heavenly ambience.

Drunk. How does it feel to be drunk? Is it being dazed, feeling lightheaded and fuzzy? Then after it, you don't remember anything at all? Well, there's an album that portrays it well. It has weird synth and falsetto sounds that made elevator music sound like "Bohemian Rhapsody", and zero remarkable and memorable things. It was almost an hour long - pretty lengthy - but I didn't recall listening to anything at all. But at least the album did two things to me: (1) It definitely told me how being DRUNK probably felt like and (2) it changed my entire definition of what "boring" is.

There was a guru who calls himself Dr. John, because he has a so-called "spiritual kinship" with a spiritual healer named Dr. John Montaine. That's probably where he got his treasured amulet that he call a "gris gris". Something about New Orleans voodoo. The mysterious man offered some stories about some native communities in New Orleans. Curious, I sat and chewed the stories. I'm not sure and I don't remember if we used some psychedelics, but we probably did. It IS psychedelic. But those nighttime stories - the trippiest ones - bore me. I prefer the festive daytime rituals. I love the vivid and lively imagery of it, especially the stories and songs for Mama Roux - the queen of little red, white, and blue, and Jump Sturdy - who come out of the swamps like a lazy fool. I felt like I was in that little community, happily chanting with them. It felt like a non-horror version of "Midsommar", it's trippy, exotic, and tribal. I'll definitely come back to his stories, but if I do, I'll probably skip the slow, lengthy trippy ones.

Punk is dead. And John Lyndon wanted to resurrect it as a slightly different entity: post-punk. And surprise! It still sucks. The opener, "Theme" is awesome though, despite it's length. Carrying the I-hate-society-slash-myself theme from punk, it has a deep, dark metal sound. The closer "Fodderstomf" has a interesting sound, but 1 minute of whining mouse vocals is enough. the rest is still punkish, or should I say, pukish.

Is the way he improvised his music given the difficulties and the circumstances impressive? Yes. Are the melodies interesting for someone who doesn't know a single thing about jazz or music theory (like me)? At some moments, yes. A good background music for doing some tasks for school or work? If you don't mind the moaning sounds, yes. So does that mean that I enjoyed this piano fiddling that stretches for more than an hour? No.

There is another challenger for the battle against the mediocrity of '80s synthpop. Equipped with elements from jazz and soul, as well as a pretty good vocalist, Simply Red made a pretty nice effort in it in their debut, "Picture Book". But unfortunately, they lost the battle. The generic sound of the '80s synthpop didn't engulfed them, but it knocked them to the ground. "Come to My Aid" is such an early triumph. The banger sounds generic, but they used the sound well and produced such an electrifying synth pop song. After it comes a live (?) jazz infused song. While the instrumentals here are great, the overall sounds are unremarkable and even boring. It's not really downhill from here. Some songs, especially the slower ones, are pretty good. But it's all dull and boring. Not exactly generic, but still terrible. Not a really bad album though. An easy listen, at least for the first time.

From Nirvana to The White Stripes, I can hear a lot of alternative rock acts germinating in this album. "Surfer Rosa" is one of the first alternative rock album, surfing from 1988, yet it sounds as fresh as freshly catched fish. Is the reason punk fans enjoy punk is the fun feeling of the raw, edgy, chaotic, and loud sound of it? Perhaps, and that's why I enjoyed this album a lot. It's gritty, yet fun. Some tracks still sound like forgettable loud garage rock snippets, but a lot of it are one of the best punk songs I have ever heard to date. "Bone Machine", "Gigantic", "River Euphrates", and "Where is My Mind" are notable examples. This album is just a bit above thirty minutes long, but I felt like I listened to an hour worth of the so-called "art punk." Perhaps because it's such a unique sounding album, perhaps because most of the latter half is pretty dull.

Synth pop was probably dying at this point. This album, "Behaviour", released a year before Nirvana stormed the scene, sounds like a final groove, a last dance. The overall atmosphere seems melancholic and vulnerable. I guess switching to analog synths contributed to it. I don't mind the British accent, but the vocals are irritating most of the time. It doesn't go well with the synth tunes. It's not really bad, but it surely didn't age well. While the synth lines and the melodies are catchy sometimes, the songs just pass by without leaving anything remarkable. This is far from a must listen.

Another punk going alternative rock album. The bridge between the two genres viewed at another angle. And while Pixies introduced some new elements in "Surfer Rosa", The Replacements made a "more sincere" work in their pretty decent coming-of-age album, "Let It Be" four years earlier. Most of the tracks are still as messy and as edgy as most punk songs that I know. And I unsurprisingly didn't enjoy most of them. The theme ranges from childishly fun (songs about somebody's tonsils or boners, for example) to mature and serious (a non-binary love story, for instance). And the signature punk energy weaves all of those tracks, creating such a solid statement, despite it's messy sounds. Not something that I would listen to again, but definitely a fun ride.

Okay, so I'll describe the most recent narrative that I discovered from LET'S GET EDGY CINEMA. It's about a mad scientist. An up-to-date theme, right? And he's a doctor. A gynecologist and a surgeon specifically. He specifies in intestine surgery, rectal rebuilding, relocated saliva glands, chimpanzee acne, and moose bumps. But that's not all. He's an extraterrestrial from Jupiter. And a time traveller as well. His phone number is 1-800-PP-51-DOODOO. And and he is also horny and homicidal. And at the top of that, he is named after a freaking polygon. At first, I thought that this is a pretentious narrative trying hard to be "scientific" or whatever. Throwing slick bass and technical words here and there. But it's (probably) not. I think it's a parody, a circle jerk for... medical or science fiction stuff? Awesome synth-y and scratchy sound effects. Love the horror-ish vibes. The lyrics seems comical most of the time, but the delivery is sometimes repetitive and weak. With a length of more than an hour, this little science fiction horror thing gets weary and boring after a while, whether it is a genuine attempt to make a horror sci fi narrative or a self parody doctor story.

The history of my knowledge and impression about country music can be expressed in two parts: Before discovering Neil Young's "Harvest", and after discovering Neil Young's "Harvest". And guess which one has a better impression (clue: it was during the time when I know some awesome harmonica driven country rock/folk music by a surprisingly great singer).

"Catch a Fire", which actually means burn in hell. in terms of sound, it's pretty solid. Chill and slick despite the political themes of most songs. I think, however, that the sound is better and more sincere when the theme is simply about love. Reggae. Is this just creating tunes over that signature beat? I don't know. But I didn't liked it overall. Too repetitive or same-y. If this is considered as the best reggae album of all time, then I'm pretty sure this genre isn't for me.

How many possible co-writing duos can the "Worst Band in the World" have: There are four of them so... 4C2 = 4!/(2!*(4-2)!) = 4!/(2!*2!) = (4*3)/2 = 6 Six pairings of Stewart, Gouldman, Godley, Creme. In just a bit more than thirty minutes, these guys went wild with the sounds of pop/rock during that time. All of the six pairings produced at least one song (Creme and Godley seem to like each other a lot, though). And with such sparse and hit-and-miss process, it's unsurprisingly a messy album. And is "Sheet Music" a shit music? Well, yes. But I think that's part of the show. Take note that they admitted being the worst band in the world. This wildly adventurous album might seem like a mediocre album trying very hard to make something unique, or to change the course of pop and rock during that time. But for me, it's just an aimless and fun fiddling with the sound. It's fragile, it's inconsistent, and it's pretty weird, and I like it. It gives one the light and carefree vibes with its stellar and playful sounds despite singing about topics like time bombs in airplanes.

One day, a fish (or some old man who accidentally swallowed a fish bone, I don't know which) learned how to sing and make some music. So, he grabbed some guitar and harmonica, gathered a bunch of other musicians and decided to record an album. All I can say about the result is, he did a pretty decent human music. But the critter needs a lot of improvement. I love the "One World" title though, it's like we and those fishes live in one world or something, right? Probably not. I mean, I don't get the sound of it. It sounds include tropical restaurant background music, default ringtone of cellphones, and some pretty decent bossa nova stuff. But perhaps more important than the sounds is the vocals. Yes, singing in the air is difficult for a fish, but it should be improved further. There are lots of great singers (yes, even outside of death metal and black metal) who have raspy vocals. A little bit of vocalization and now he's good. Overall, boooring. It kind of reminds me of Pink Floyd's "Meddle", another ocean-vibe rock album that was released six years before this one. It's a masterpiece of course, I mean there were whales lmao. But at least this album, unlike "Meddle", was so experimental it invented trip hop, among other genres. A nice achievement for a fish, isn't it?

Just got a perfect album this Christmas Eve. While it isn't solidly great, its warm, slick, and minimalist approach in rock is just perfect for such a cold, grandiose day. I want to liken this album to a fireplace. It sparked in the first track, "Down to the Waterline". A pretty decent opening. But the fire was still not warm enough to do anything besides emitting a low glow. Between the opening and "Sultans of Swing" aka "The epic acoustic guitar solo song" -- the greatest extent of the fire, no doubt, the fire was like that. Bland. Trying hard to make something out of the folk and country fiddling in their pub-rock sound. But after the explosive spark of "Sultan's of Swing", the fire was up. The following tracks were warm and slick. But while "In the Gallery", "Wild West End", and "Lions" are great tracks, none surpassed the epic single. Overall, pretty dull, but a delicious Christmas treat nonetheless.

THINGS MASSIVE ATTACK'S "BLUE LINES" ACHIEVED: • Making such a solid blend of hip hop, soul, reggae, and electronic music (I love how these elements mix well and get baked into one delicious bread). • Making the first "trip-hop" album, probably igniting the trend for the mentioned small genre (it's amusing how it went from this to something like "Roads" and "Teardrop"). • Making an album that is interestingly both chill and upbeat. • Showing how can terrible vocals and terrible raps be saved with great production. • Making one of the worst and the most low effort album covers.

Living in the "eastern" half of the world, I received "A Christmas Gift for You" a day late. But I don't mind. After all, I live in a country where Christmas starts long before the winds get colder and ends several days after the New Year fireworks lighted up the sky. Also, I don't have time to listen to it on Christmas Day anyway. All I can say is, it's a decent gift that has everything one could expect from a set of Christmas songs. The notable things in this album is that it's so '60s. The sound of '60s pop songs rule this album. That, and Phil Spector's so-called "Wall of Sound" approach is well-compiled in this album. And perhaps that's the reason why this is included in the list. Overall, pretty good. Out of the four gifts, my favorite is Darlene Love and her powerful voice -- just look at her in the cover, at the top, waving her name like a banner. Not listening to it again next year though, nor blast it on speakers. I mean, Mariah Carey is overplayed as hell, but I liked the more recent versions of some classic Christmas tunes more than the outdated '60s pop version of them. Thinking about it, Christmas song is probably a great lens to look at the evolution of pop sounds throughout the years.

Q: This is "Modern Sounds in Country and Western Music" by "the Genius" Ray Charles. Bringing in not only the typical rhythm and blues, jazz, and soul elements of the time's pop sounds, it also integrated country music and big band music as well. It created an irresistible set of love songs that captured the hearts of people regardless of race. Released in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement, this album once again showed that music unites! So, would you like to listen to forty minutes worth of generic (but not bad) '60s love songs? A: I won't mind I guess. I grew up listening to these kinds of songs in the radio every Sunday anyway.

PEARL A beautiful, precious, little gem from the sea (where Janis Joplin - oh! such a powerful voice! - rests now). I don't even know who Janis Joplin is, but this posthumous album blew my mind. Just a standard soul album, but with a great band and a passionate voice. The Full Tilt Boogie Band's performance slaps. Setting aside the haunting context of "Buried Alive in the Blues" (what an ironic title), the band's bluesy beats here are irresistibly moving, not undermining the energy of the rest of the album. Her voice is of course, incredible. This album is a great showcase of her voice's vigor (perhaps not, but the empty space in "Buried Alive in the Blues" might give us an idea of what more she could possibly achieve). It's a lasting final statement. It's possibly one of the best soul albums of all time. It's a pearl.

When thinking about my appetite for music without lyrics, a few contradictions appear. I'm not someone who focuses on the lyrics, if it sounds good, then I'd listen to it. Lyrics is just a bonus, or a part of the context for me. Good lyrics with terrible sound... I might just read poems instead. But music without lyrics seems... incomplete sometimes. It's seems difficult for songs -- if they ARE called "songs" -- like these to be a solid whole experience. But I do listen to songs without lyrics, or even without context. Pink Floyd's epic 20+ minute "Atom Heart Mother" comes to mind. The track is as nonsense as the title, yet I like it. But I'm still struggling to justify why, for example, I like classical music of Chopin or Beethoven but dislike something like jazz. What makes a wordless track listenable, at least for me? "Let's Get Killed" is an hour of electronica fiddling with an aim to create movie soundtracks, and I enjoyed it. I was moved by the beats and the instrumental fiddlings in this album. But why? My hypothesis is that some wordless tracks, like the ones in this album, takes me into an adventure. It makes me conjure images of scenes or emotions. The way a violin passionately rejoices, or the beats weave a sense of conflict. Whatever the reason. I like this album. Though I might only come back to it if I want a good background music. But still, it's energetic and quite fun for a background music (ignoring the conversation snippets, of course).

Cool, another hour of mostly instrumental album, but this time it's literally a movie soundtrack. I'm not familiar with the movie, "Shaft" (1971). Apparently a "blaxpoitation" film, which means that it's like poverty porn but instead of slum inhabitants, it is focused on urban African-American people. But I won't judge the movie since I haven't seen it. Nor will I judge this album as a soundtrack. After all, this project involves listening to albums, not watching some movies. This album is... great. I liked it. Perhaps because it's admittedly better than "Let's Get Killed" that I listened to yesterday. I love the chill and soulful vibes of the tracks, and I can see why it was such a successful hit. I think I'm loving soul. This one is a so-called "progressive soul". Probably, this genre is culturally tied to African-American music. Think about the kind of movie that it is based on. And if it does, then this album is definitely a culturally significant work of art.

It's 2020. Quarantine started. Almost everyone locked themselves at home, away from the terrible mess of the outside world. It was a weird time. Stretching for months and months. A lot learned to plant, to cook, and other stuffs that are popular in the DIY world. This event accelerated a trend. No, I'm not talking about TikTok, I'm talking about people's inclination towards sentimental, minimalist stuff. Plants. "AESTHETIC" designs. Crafts. Journals. And of course, lo-fi and indie music. My teenage sister would blast moody acoustic songs, thanks to this trend. These songs are oftentimes mediocre and frankly, boring. But I do enjoy some of them, but only if they are close to rock. Biases, I know. And this album, "Tigermilk" by Belle and Sebastian, is a perfect soft quarantine-vibed indie rock. I'm not a fan of this kind of music, but this is actually well done. I love the oftentimes lo-fi instrumentals. The vocals are pretty mediocre, but I think it's appropriate. Overall, a nice indie album. I just wish I discovered it during quarantine, maybe I'll enjoy it more. I wonder if my younger sister would enjoy this piece from 1996. Maybe she would, despite it's age and the fact that TikTok probably (fortunately) haven't touched it yet.

Another "penultimate" album from a female singer? Well, I guess I knew what's to expect despite that suspicious genre name of "vocal jazz". Aaaaaand it sucks, even for a '50s pop-jazz album. Her voice is like a whistling drone, it's somewhere between irritating and boring. Yeah, this is her "penultimate" album and it's her voice's last performance after years of alcohol and drugs. But... does it matter? I doubt if this is included in the list as a do-not-do-drugs-or-you'll-sound-like-a-chicken-trying-to-sing-like-a-songbird campaign or something. I also doubt if this is included for us to experience and appreciate Billie Holiday's voice. It's far from her best performance, I think. The orchestra is also mediocre. But I guess it captures the '50s sound well. Overall, I'd rather listen to three hours of Ella Fitzgerald (or even Billie Holiday herself before her voice succumbed) instead of forty minutes of this. At least Ella's voice is at full power and passion when I listened to her in the ridiculously long "The Gershwin Songbook". What I'm trying to say is that I don't really hate the orchestra pop songs released when my grandparents are in elementary or high school. As long as I feel the smooth flow and the gentle yet powerful voices of the era, I'm in.

"Songs of Leonard Cohen", guess whose debut album is this. A clue: he was actually a published poet and novelist. So, while his album titles are too generic for a poet (his second album, which I already heard, was titled "Songs from a Room"), his songwriting is unsurprisingly awesome. Folk, acoustic mellow albums are never my thing, even after listening to this undeniably fine record. It came two years before the personally boring "Songs from a Room", but I enjoyed this one more. Perhaps because it's more raw and sparse sounding than "Songs from a Room". I like the guitars and I felt the emotions in his voice most of the time. It has decent love songs, but still too mellow for my taste. The less "acoustic"/stripped-down tracks such as "So Long, Marianne" are personal highlights. Overall, just another acoustic moody album. Not my vibe, even during a chill, rainy day. Decent, but not for me.

A guy invited you to his place. Apparently, he wanted to show something, something "special," something that he wanted to show everyone. That guy is not the most decent guy that you know. You recall the incident that he made during a gathering. He interrupted a congratulatory celebration for a girl, shouting that another girl is "the best". That incident either kindled or intensified the fiery feud between him and that particular girl. He stayed in another place most of the time after the incident, working on something. Now he's done, and he'll show the product to people. All of your thoughts were dissolved - at least temporarily - the second you entered his home. At first you can't make out a single thing, because at every corner and at every edge there is FLASH. It was a set of colossal artworks that apparently expressed his thoughts and feelings. Everywhere you look, there is something to be astonished to. Your eyes can barely have a break. After a while, you get exhausted of it. The flashes are mostly gone, but the remaining ones are still incredibly jaw dropping. Now, you began to chew the dense and complex artwork. While he DID worked hard for that something, it won't be there if not for the help of a lot of people -- most of which have BIG names. What is this? You think. Why does he want to show this excessive and self indulgent display? It's admittedly impressive, even jaw-dropping. The way the art was made, or PRODUCED, was awesome. But you couldn't help but be torn between judging the art and the artist. Of course one can judge the art without while not taking note of the artist, but this art seems to scream the artist's name in every corner. The almost immature and egoistic way the message or the thoughts were presented isn't very easy to ignore. But perhaps that's what it's all about: presenting one's ego, topped with enough bling-blings to obscure it's stench. Isn't that what hip-hop, or even art in general, is all about? Perhaps it's too naïve to say that. Fortunately, you didn't know a lot about that guy. and maybe even if you did, you'll still at least enjoy this giant one-inch-thick-icing-coated cake of an effort.

I visualize this journey as a day at the beach, or maybe at the woody mountains (the original title of this album was "Landlocked" but they resurrected the discarded track from 1966, "Surf's Up", and made it a decent closing track for the album). In the early morning, the cool and welcoming vibes was captured by "Don't Go Near the Water". I love the casual and slightly trippy energy of it. The rest of the morning, the first half of the album, is pretty bland. Just a bunch of forgettable Beatles-esque tracks. At noon, a riot erupted. "Student Demonstration Time" is a bit of a rocker with a dark theme. But even that is forgettable and not that great. The fun began when the sun sets. The beautiful sound of "Feel Flows" painted the crimson-going-indigo colors of such calm time of the day. The ocean went from blue to black. And the winds became more solid and cool. It's nighttime, and while everyone is beginning to sleep, the nature is just waking up. I love this "nighttime" part, the second-half of the album. It's trippy and oftentimes emotional. The sound conjures images of walking alone in the beach at night. Almost haunting, but cool and relaxing. It's like being spiritually close to nature. It was night. And nature was wide awake. . . . And the lyrics? Perhaps extending the metaphor and narrating this as the reason for spending a day at some beach? To ponder about some social issues, especially environmental ones. Perhaps their true motive is just to re-ignite the band's public image, and that might be the reason it felt messy. But the few stellar tracks are worth experiencing. I might not come back to experience the whole album, but I would listen to those tracks again. Perhaps at a vacation in the woods. Man, this album made me want to experience and smell those woods and leaves and soil again.

What I just heard is probably one of the best summarization of the '90s alternative rock tsunami. Unfortunately, that's what "Definitely Maybe" seemed to only do, it just summarized rock sounds of its time. They did it well though, but focusing on the sound for almost an hour? It gets tiresome after a while. I only knew Oasis as the "Wonderwall" boys. It was narrated that their name was used to be "Rain", after the Beatles song released almost three decades earlier. Apparently, Oasis based their sound on the mentioned track. But while one can hear The Beatles's "Rain" in it, the sound of "Definitely Maybe" is heavily grunge-like. The grunge and alt-rock songs of '90s and even the '00s can be heard in these rock songs driven by the deliciously hazy guitars. It's so '90s rock. Unfortunately, this makes the album generic. But it's still fun nonetheless. At least in small doses. It's interesting how it went from this to "Wonderwall". Even the chill closing track is different from it. Perhaps they're still finding their sound here.

"Holy shit! He's alive! He just opened his eyes. I did it! I DID IT! Dr. Frank would be proud!" "rgggh..." "And here goes his first words!" "rghhhh... Fuck you!" "Perfect!" *** "You are Slim Shady, my alter-ego. You are made of every angry experiences and thoughts that I have ever had. Your job is to tell the world all about you. About what makes you, and maybe even about who made you. You are already gifted with literary skills, and all the words that I memorized from the dictionary, so you can work now." *** "Find him!" "Really? But he is white!" "I don't give a fuck if he is purple, if he can kick it, I'm working with him" "Okay, okay..." "..." "I heard that he's one of your big fans, Dr. Andre!" "Hmmm mm? I think I'll love giving those verses some life!" *** "What the hell are you listening to this time, son? Another edgy rap isn't it?" "It's just some new hip-hop guy, mom" "Just some new hip-hop guy, eh? But he does sound different, let me hear... hmmm... Jesus Christ what the FUCK are you listening to young man? You... ... ... *** "Hahaha rap god fast" *** "Was all of these... me, daddy?" "Yeah, this little girl in the picture is you. And that little voice in the special song was also you. We all made it when you were a baby" "But... was it about... killing and disposing... mom?" "Errrr... not exactly. These things shouldn't be taken literally you know?" "Geez..." "..." "So... what was all of this... thing all about?" *grabs a cigarette* *** "Hahaha rap god dude during the '90s... wait WHAT THE HELL?" "hehe beats good"

Somewhere in the early 2010's, a "facts" page in Facebook once boasted: Japanese scientists have created an MRI machine that can record your dreams and reconstruct them for you to watch while you're awake. And that made me think: considering the illogical and very, very weird stuffs that we see, do, and experience in our sleep-worlds, what could we watch if such MRI machine exists. And more importantly, how will we REACT? But apart from images, our brains actually created SOUNDS too. And of course, the sounds isn't any less weird. A lot of people are probably aware of those non-existent symphonies and synths and voices screaming random words like opera singers. I experience such music when I am about to sleep or about to wake up. And thinking about the fact that my skills in music stuff is zero, I guess that EVERYONE'S brain creates unique music too. My point is, what if instead of recording what we see in our dreams, we record what we HEAR in our dreams? What would we hear? Well, in 2009, some people who call themselves "Dirty Projectors" made a pretty convincing impression of those weird dream-music. They called this album "Bitte Orca". Please killer whale. And hearing those while awake? Weird. Weird. And weird. And perhaps I would have the same reaction if I saw my dreams in that MRI machine. I would see all the eccentric adventures and the illogical stuffs in it. I would find it weird. And this is how I describe "Bitte Orca". Surreal lyrics, unpredictable sounds, and tense yet fun overall atmosphere. It's dream music (no, not the Minecraft YouTuber). It reminds me why I love dreaming. It is where we temporarily throw logic and rules aside, and just have fun and face the chaos and surprises of human imagination.

A debut album of a band that is founded by a literal teenager, it is not surprise that "The Modern Lovers" is one of those "proto-punk" albums. But is this really a landmark in proto-punk? Let alone in the influences in punk itself? I can definitely hear punk being conceived along the angsty lyrics and sounds, but it sounds more like a '60s rock inspired fiddling than a genre conceiving album. In terms of sound, it's pretty chill but boring sometimes. It was narrated that the band had a conflict about the direction of their sound; towards more mellow stuff or keeping and improving the aggressive sound? I would love it if they went with the former, but unfortunately, punk clearly went with the latter.

Woaahhh! These guys created one of the best punk songs I have ever heard just by having a live performance in the recording studio. Amazing. The ugly vocals and the messy guitars are used well, creating an energy that is like, you know, being in a FUN HOUSE. But it isn't punk... yet. Of course, this flavor of rock can be much more harsher. But I think this is the just the perfect harshness. Filthy, but not annoying.

You know, Cowboy Elvis, I actually enjoyed our trip in the Western Country. I love the vivid stories and the delicious cowboy rock flavor of it from the '50s. I guess I enjoyed this little album as a whole. Most dads and grandpas today would love this set of '50s pop-rock tunes. Simple and even generic, just like "the good old days". It has a generic overall sound. It gets boring after a while, not so different from the old cowboy movies the local movie channel sometimes shows. But it's the vivid stories that bring this album to life. Much like the stories our grandparents tell us, there's fun in experiencing the adventures that they went through during those days.

Folk country with a bit of psychedelic stuffs. Where did this album took me? Along the generic landscapes of the countryside of America? With Fields so green one can smell it? With a forest that is thick enough to cool the place but not thick enough to conjure funny images at night? Wooden house with beer barrels? I could go on, but this whole thing feels like coloring a greyscale photo. The place where this album took me felt colorless, and it only gains those greens and browns when I let my imagination paint the scene. Perhaps I'm too colorblind as of now to see the "American Beauty". I'm not sure if this is a good representation of Americana music, and I don't even know why is this so popular both among the critics and the listeners. I'm definitely colorblind at these stuffs.

With such a loud and passionate sound, it is no surprise than "Ten" is considered such a groundbreaker that triggered the tsunami of alternative rock in the '90s. With casual yet headbanging sound, as well as dark subject matters, I think any young rock fan from any decade would enjoy this. I enjoyed it, but something just don't hit it. I enjoyed the loud instrumental outbursts, the solos, the solid yet raspy voice. But somehow, I felt disconnected with the songs. I don't know, but I might describe it as the lack of "approach" that the songs do to listeners. I get the sound, loud and passionate as it is, but why do I always get zoned out and ultimately get bored after enough repetitions of the same sentence? It felt like a performance from a distance, impressive, but not actually played for me. Or perhaps it's because it's too loud? Maybe. The energy seems over the place sometimes. And the more "mellow" tracks are personally better. "Black", "Jeremy", and "Alive" are personal highlights. But I also enjoyed "Once" and "Even Flow". Still, a great must-listen album. Maybe a couple of re-listens will do for me to enjoy this one.

Why "New Gold Dream (81/82/83/84)"? And why the crucifix with a sacred heart? Are Simple Minds really simple? Well, upon listening to it, one would infer that yes, it's definitely simple. Just a generic '80s synthpop that didn't age well. "Someone Somewhere (in Summertime)" is a nice mellow pop track. But the rest is just a bunch of boring pop songs. The synth riffs are interesting sometimes, but the songs themselves are not that great. In the end, "New Gold Dream (81/82/83/84)" just aged together with the other synthpop albums during that time. And no matter how interesting its name is, its sound is still indistinguishable from its peers.

"Pacific Ocean Blue". A tropical title that is not that unusual for a Beach Boy. But of course, he'll deliver music here that is different from the famous band's music. And the result is just a bunch of forgettable rock and ballads. It's such a boring album. Dennis Wilson himself panned this album for "having no substance". And... it DOES have substance -- a product of his personal stuggles for the past seven years -- but it still sucks. The more I listen to moody rock music, the more I learn how I hate it. This album is clearly not for me, and I'm not sure if it should be on this list. "Dreamer" is such a slick banger, though. I wish there was more of the track's tropical energy throughout the album.

I remember enjoying Elvis Presley's songs during my explore-music-through-youtube phase. I liked almost every song from his compilation album, "Elv1s: 30 #1 Hits". My general thought about his music as a whole is that the songs usually lie somewhere between ballad and rock-'n'-roll. The closer it is to ballad, the better. I know he's the King of Rock-'n'-roll, but his voice sounds like a wood being sawed when he's singing rock songs. Sorry. When I received his self-titled debut, I expected to hear at least one of the tracks from "Elv1s: 30 #1 Hits", perhaps at least "Heartbreak Hotel", one of my favorite Elvis songs. But there is none, because to quote Wikipedia: "In the 1950s, general practice dictated tracks having greater commercial potential to be released as singles, with tracks of lesser appeal placed on albums." And that's probably why this album is such a letdown personally. It felt dull, especially when compared to his other songs. And weirdly, I enjoyed the rockabilly songs more than the ballad ones. Not even the fan beloved "Blue Moon" impressed me. But perhaps it's because the songs here have the minimal production that is observed in "Heartbreak Hotel". But I guess this album is still important for bringing rock-'n'-roll into the mainstream. He covered those rock-'n'-roll songs from people of color so kids who listen to it don't have to lie to their parents that they're listening to a white singer. Perhaps he's definitely the King of Rock-'n'-roll for bringing the genre into the forefront of the music scene. Whether these covers are great is probably a matter of debate. I'm particularly familiar with Little Richard's bluesy banger, "Tutti Frutti". And Presley's cover of it is surprisingly dull, lacking the energy of the original. Overall, influential but not that great.

Days since I heard music that is so fun and full of life: 0

A cup of kickass riffs. 500 grams of irresistible grooves. 10 slices of hooks that are either terrible or doesn't age well. A can of dull, whiny vocals. And finally, a desired amount of layers of deliciously interesting production instrumentals. Mix everything careful until it's thick enough for future molds to sneak in. And behold! A typical new-wave album! An odd yet perfectly sane mixture of delicious and repulsive.

This album: *gets released* Critics: In this album, Oasis departed from the alt-rock sound of "Definitely Maybe" and made songs that are more melancholic and ballad-ish. It's not as good and original as "Definitely Maybe", it sounds generic, but it's an okay album. This album: *gets commercially successful* Critics: WOAHHH THIS IS A GIGANTIC ALBUM THAT MADE OASIS SUCH A WORDLWIDE ACT! BEST BRITISH ALBUM BEST '90S ALBUM BEST ALT-ROCK ALBUM BEST BRITPOP ALBUM BEST ALBUM OF ALL TIME! A MUST-LISTEN BEFORE YOU DIE!!!

Well, of course, mixing reggae with other genres is already popular at more than forty years ago. I don't know about other countries (but I remember Magic's reggae fusion banger in 2014, "Rude"), but reggae plus x music is still a fairly big thing today here in my country especially among young people. Unsurprisingly, reggae hip-hop is the most popular. Those songs are pretty decent, but the older local reggae folk songs (yes, folk, my least favorite genre) are my favorites. And this? This... sucks. Why would they combine the feel-good energy of reggae and the angsty power of punk? This album is such a mess. Which is a shame as I'm interested in the riffs and beats of some of the songs. Is this what ska is all about? I'm not sure. But it makes sense, I guess. Punk is a big genre during the '70s, so it's no surprise this album got so popular, especially among the British youth.

I don't want to focus too much on the fact that this is another attempt by a bunch of white people to do blues music, but as I listen on this seemingly soulless version of blues (a quality that I also observed in Elvis Presley's self-titled cover album), I think I might want to change my mind. But ultimately, I just listened to it. It still has the immediate catchy-ness of blues songs. It's an ok album overall, not that offensive. I guess Eric Clapton's guitar works had a huge impact in this album as a whole. I enjoyed his riffs and solos. I guess I know now why he is one of those big names when it comes to guitarists. Again, an ok album. Not coming back to it, but maybe I'll give myself a spin of the first two tracks (my personal highlights) sometimes. Both "All Your Love" and "Hideaway" are covers though, but Clapton's guitar works here are awesome.

Bruce Springsteen. The steorotypical American rockstar. I haven't heard of his music before, partly because yes I'm living under a rock, but mostly because I wasn't "Born in the USA". "Born in the USA", apparently his masterpiece, is a perfect introduction to this kind of music. It hit all of my expectations with such music. But what surprised me is how well it delivered those generic rock sounds. Also, the Pearl Jam-ish energy of it made me think for a moment that it's released in the '90s, but as I listened closer, I heard the synths and other pop elements present in the '80s. Does that mean that this album is ahead of it's time? Perhaps. But whatever, kudos for not letting the music be engulfed by those '80s synthpop sounds. And kudos for using such an uplifting and melancholic flavor of rock despite the criticizing nature of the lyrics. I'm not surprised that many misinterpreted the title track as a totally patriotic song.

R&B was such a big genre in the 2000's with acts such as Ne-Yo, Chris Brown, Rihanna, Usher, and of course Destiny's Child dominating the music scene. But as the 2010's began, EDM stormed the scene and swayed some R&B artists away. But of course, a genre doesn't just die, it evolves no matter the circumstances. And sure enough, a different form of R&B emerged. Because aside from EDM, another separate element is currently storming the scene: minimalism. These are just my observations though, and it's certainly evident in the 2016 R&B album, "A Seat at the Table" by Solange, the younger sister of pop star and former member of Destiny's Child Beyoncé. Just like most R&B songs, it tackles themes such as anger, injustice, violence, alcoholism, etc. but it sounds chill, too chill even. Like... sitting at a seat on the table. Perhaps that is what this is all about: "let's sit at a table together and talk about some issues" instead of "I'M GONNA SCREAM ALL OF THE INJUSTICES AT THE TOP OF MY LUNGS BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHOSE VOICES ARE SUBDUED!". Also notable is its minimalist yet slick and passionate sound. Solange's voice is so beautiful and the production and instrumentals are all fascinating. These elements saved the album from being an elevator music-like mess like Thundercat's "Drunk". But still, it's hard to stay engaged with such music. I find the latter half boring, but perhaps because I've been sitting on that seat at the table for too long at that point. But at least, it ENGAGED me. And it impressed me as well.

What best represents this highly fascinating, sometimes enjoyable yet rarely catchy sound of this unconventional species of art-rock? A couple of boobies, of course.

Hey, what are you listening to? Feminist punk, I guess. Whoa? How does that sound? Uhm... punk.

A country concept album about an outlaw who murdered his wife and her lover. Nice. I am not a big fan of minimal instrumentals and stripped down productions. But this isn't bad. The sound is perfect for the sentimental nature of the album. And I love the instrumentals and the vocals, as well as the way they are so balanced. Definitely coming back to this. Maybe I'll like it even more.

Not long after listening to Solange's R&B album "A Seat at the Table", I got her older sister's self-titled album. It's tempting to compare the two, one minimalist fused R&B and the other electronica fused R&B. But nobody wants to be compared to their sibling, so I guess won't. Beyoncé's surprise album is a surprise indeed. Mostly because this isn't what I personally expect from someone who gave us "Single Ladies", "Halo", and "Listen", among others. This is a so-called "alternative R&B" album. The sounds and the productions are so jaw dropping-ly gorgeous. It perfectly captured the personal, the sexual, and the feminist aspects of this album. I love how the electronic and synth elements are utilized. However, the album seems to have an unconventional structure. It's not bad, but because of this, there are minimal hooks in this album. After a while, it losses its steam, and it becomes somewhat monotonous. Still, it was a hella good listen. I'll definitely come back to this, perhaps I'll even watch the visual part of the album to maximize the experience.

Definitely a hot and buttered. A deliciously funky psychedelic soul. Issac Hayes, the one who made the famous "Shaft" soundtrack. But this is something else. It's much better than the mentioned album. I love the long and smooth instrumentals. The length and the psychedelic nature of this album feels a bit too much however. But who wouldn't love a big steamy buttery treat like this for breakfast?

Just remove the experimental rock-ish side 1 and this album could be one of the of the most decent and slick new-wave EP's of the '80s.

There are albums that are personally catchy yet shallow. There are albums that are profound but personally boring. There are albums that are both meaningful and groovy. And of course, there are albums that just don't care about concrete meanings or hooks but will give you an out-of-body experience to the fifth dimension of the universe, or something like that. ...guess which one is my fave.

Was pleasantly surprised. I don't know Simon and Garfunkel, and I'm not a big fan of folk and singer/songwriter, but this is the best folk album that I have ever heard so far. I love the reggae, rock, and other elements blended with folk in this album. I like his voice, and that's probably one of Simon and Garfunkel's defining assets. I also enjoyed the guitars and the other instrumentals. I'm now excited to hear a Simon and Garfunkel album. I'm pretty sure that I'll enjoy it. I wonder how different the duo's sound were, and how much did Simon explore. Anyway, I just learned today that I can actually enjoy a freaking folk album. That's one of the beauties of this project.

"Darkness on the Edge of Town" brought to you by '70s Springsteen. Country-ish hard rock springkled with flashy riffs and sax solos. And what's the difference between '70s Springsteen and '80s Springsteen? Or in particular this album and "Born in the USA"? I don't know, tbh. The sounds are pretty similar. Yet for some reason, I enjoyed "Born in the USA" more. Of course it's too early to judge Springsteen's music as a whole. But I think his music is the best in small doses. I received his USA album not so long ago, and that's probably why i find this album a bit tiresome.

I don't really get The Doors. The slow and thick psychedelic sounds don't impress me a lot. But I knew and liked some of their bluesy hits - most notably "People are Strange" and one of the singles from this album, "Love Her Madly." This album is described as the band's "most blusey," so I think it'll be good. Aaaand... it's not that bad. It has two distinguishable sides, the LA Woman side and the Riders on the Storm side. The LA Woman side is bluesy. I like the first three tracks. And the last track, the title track, is pretty okay but the lengthy build-up bored me. The Riders on the Storm side is pretty interesting. It's a much trippier than the previous half. And while it has the slick psychedelic sound that I disliked, its interesting at some parts. The iconic closer is chill and trippy, and I guess that's why a lot of people love the band. But personally, it's pretty boring. Overall, pretty good and interesting. Btw, was that really Jim Morrison? His voice here is much rougher than I remember.

It's been a while since I had fun with a television. And it's been a while since I heard a great guitar driven rock, let alone a good punk album. A pleasant surprise.

NOSTALGIA Inspired by their upbringing in a suburb of Houston, Texas. Nostalgia. Did it worked on me? Yes, because I also have my own experiences of living in a suburban area. Some elements of '80s synthpop and '90s alt-rock all mixed with the notably soft and indie rock sound. Nostalgia. I think this IS what nostalgia sounds like. Bittersweet, but it's just a sugar coating that covers the fact that it was just a mundane experience in a freaking suburb. This album nailed that character of nostalgia. It's boring, but the sounds and the instrumental build-ups create this sweet nostalgia flavor. Album cover of a generic photo of a suburban scene. Edited so it looks like faded and unreal, yet familiar at the same time. Nostalgia. Perfect album cover, it tells us that nostalgia lies. And perhaps that's why it sounds and feels so sweet. Overall, it's basically a nostalgia album. It worked on me most of the time, because again, I have my own suburban experiences. But I think other people who never lived in a suburban area, or even anyone who observed the sound closely, will see this album's sound naked: a boring indie rock sound.

Slick and R&B-ish productions, highly masculine rap delivery, chorus composed of a single phrase followed by a hook, over an hour long... This is the most stereotypically '90s rap album that I have heard so far. Not that surprising, considering the fact that 2pac is one of the most popular figures of the genre. And it's not that bad either, just predictable and loooong. The theme of this album is apparently 2pac's reflection on his bad experiences, which is better than the usual look-I-am-rich-I-am-misogynist theme of gangsta rap. Overall, not bad, just forgettable.

A '60s pop album with orchestra instrumentals and classic soul-ish vocals. Definitely dusty. But not without pleasant surprises. I enjoyed this thirty minute jam, despite the 60 year old dusts. While it isn't the finest wine around, it still aged like one.

Fetch the Bolt Cutters. Apparently, it refers to freeing oneself from oppression. And I think that it's also a statement for us listeners to try something that us outside our comfy zones. And that's how an industrial rock percussion driven pop album is made... just a couple of years ago. Tbh, however, it's not something that I would listen to casually. It's an experimental album, and it's the best experimental album that I have ever heard so far. I love how it is lo-fi (a so-called "bedroom pop" which basically means that it's recorded inside their home) yet it sounds sophisticated. It's chaotic, it's cathartic, and as the hype-induced critics put it: it's human. Overall, it's enjoyable. Love the chaotic mess of angst, humor, and heartbreak. Perhaps I'll enjoy it a lot if I were a teenager. Is it wrong if I assumed that this album, like any pop album, is made for teenagers? Perhaps.

Weird. Messy. And most importantly, mind-blowing. These experiences are why I signed up for this project. This is a unique, unusual, and beautiful discovery for me. It's not easy to describe its sound, but I think the cover art tells a lot about it. Two seemingly hipster men on a beach, which is painted in a vibrant scheme of blue and purple. That perfectly sums up the album. It's hipster-ish, as some less enthusiastic people put it, yet it's oddly moving. It was like walking along a surreal beach built by those synth (?) riffs. It was like musical psychedelic trip, with a nice uplifting build-up. What happened to this type of music when artists like LANY and The Chainsmokers brought it to the mainstream in early 2010's? Whatever, I'm still glad that I discovered this gem. It might not be one of the best pop albums of the recent times, but it sure is the most mood elevating album that I have ever heard so far.

This is a lyrics-focused album. The beats and the samples are minimal, making the listeners focus on the lyrics, on what the album is narrating. Which is apparently his life in the rough areas of New York City. I love everything about this, the sampling, the vulnerable and not the usual machismo-driven lyrics, and the overall solid length of 30+ minutes. Definitely a classic.

Somewhere between the mountainous figures that are grunge, punk, and electronica, a delicate subgenre lies: shoegaze. And what exactly is it, gazing at a shoe until you hallucinate? Something like that. Do valleys have summits? It's weird to call "Nowhere" the summit of this curious valley, but it is. Wooshy guitars, dreamy vocals, trance-y drums... it's a perfect background music, but it can be more than that. This album is the best representation of the genre. A ride across nowhere, but a ride nonetheless. PS. Just listen to the original first 8 tracks. The bonus tracks dragged the album A LOT, and those tracks are the reasons why I disliked this album at the first listen.

Brazil the "tropical paradise", revolutionized by the "tropicália" movement. Combining the traditional and the popular, as well as the foreign and the local, the mentioned movement changed the culture and even the politics of Brazil. One person deserves respect for igniting such movement: Caetano Veloso. Did his self-titled album captured at least the beginning of this movement? Perhaps. But I don't get it. Chill vibes, psychedelic bossa nova, decent voice... it didn't clicked with me. Maybe a couple of lessons in Portuguese and Brazilian history might help. Still, I appreciate it. I didn't enjoy it, but I respect it

Napoleon Dynamite, isn't it? Nope, it's just Elvis No. 2, and just like Elvis No. 1, he apparently makes bland, uninspired albums (despite the fact that he is playing at a freaking stage volume inside a room big enough for an orchestra). But this one specifically does have a few hits, most notably "I Want You". Thank god Elvis No. 2 lives during the times where great singles are also included in albums, unlike Elvis No. 1. Oh! And the two Elvises have a pretty different, albeit generic, sound. This one is pretty grunge-like. I wonder if his voice is great in ballads. Like Elvis No. 1, his voice is annoying when he's singing rock.

The background music of the old mobile game "Smash Hit", where you destroy triangle shaped crystals with metal balls. That bland music that is played in a seminar venue when the seminar has not yet started. A background music for exhibition arts, or a smartphone screensaver. You know, the type of show that only consists of lines and shapes. Elevator music but for airports. This is apparently ambient techno. IDM (EDM but with I for "intelligent", perhaps because it makes you feel smarter, or whatever. Fun Fact: Aphex Twin himself hates that term). It's a decent background music when working or doing homeworks. That's what this 70 minute whopper is. An interesting background music. Nothing more, nothing less.

Get the generic '90s gangsta rap. Then replace the background sounds with jazz and soul. Tell them (ANGRILY!) that you will ROCK them. Add a punk interlude. And let it build-up. In the middle, bangers and nice instrumentals will spawn. "Thought @ Work", "The Seed (2.0)", "Break You Off", and the ridiculously long "Water". At this point, you just ROCKED them. Nice. After it, you can go back to the generic gangsta rap with soul background. But this time sprinkle some more soul on top. Congrats. You just created 70 minutes worth of a so-called"progressive rap" album.

I took a deep breath and I can smell the earthly scent of this beautiful continent. Afrobeat is a nice upbeat genre that conjures images of festivals. This album nailed that festive energy. Most of the songs are a bit overlong and I'm not a big fan of those vocals. But still, I enjoyed the overall vibes of this one. Definitely deserves spot in that thousand and one sized list.

A weird and boring electronica fiddling with interesting synth riffs, a decent opening, and a kickass title track.

A double album that is described as "experimental", Rolling Stone Magazine compared it to the Beatles's "White Album". Not only that, this album is very messy, mostly due to the band's own internal conflicts. The result? A long, boring double album that is definitely not Rumours 2. Congrats Buckingham, you did it. Among the sparse mess of this overall unimpressive album, I find Stevie Nicks's songs great. Kudos for carrying this 70 minute whopper of an album, Nicks. Love your voice.

Alternative dance in 2007? Well that idea conjures a series of nostalgic scenes. We all know that there's a dance electronic band that ruled the 2000's. That's right, I'm talking about The Black Eyed Peas. Wait, what? LCD Soundsystem? Who are they? Oh, The White Stripes trying to make electronic music? That's interesting. So... people used to DANCE to this? Lmao. I think they could make a kickass punk album, but of course, it was already 2007 and they had to touch at least one music trend at the time such as EDM. They did it horribly, btw, or maybe I'm just biased against the personally boring EDM music.

While the return of RHCP's impressive guitarist definitely influenced their turning point album, "Californication", I think the irresistible groove and kicks of it should be credited more on the amazing and now one of my favorite bass player, Flea. And of course, I am expecting the single that boasts that infamous video game themed music video. It's as good as I remember (although "Otherside" is personally better). Aside from being a nice title track, the song "Californication" is also the last great song in the entire album. I could consider the closer "Road Trippin'" decent, but anything between it and the title track is personally monotonous and uninteresting. That is disappointing because as I listen to the first five tracks, I thought that I'll have another five star album. Still, I love the unique funky flavor of it. I get the hype around these guys. But if I would listen to it again, I would stop right after the title track.

One of the many punk albums that has interesting riffs and a highly monotonous and ugly sound. Of course, that's the point of punk ,or post-punk, or whatever subgenre of punk /post-punk is this. Thats closing track though.

Peak 2020, I guess? Not necessarily for everyone, but for black Americans. So, how did SAULT delivered the rage, the pride, the sorrow, the frustration, and the joy of the black experience in the USA? Particularly in 2020, when the infamous murder of George Floyd sparked protests and even riots across the globe? Boring, monotonous electronica beats, of course! Sprinkle in some little speeches that sounds like ads for a beauty soap bar to reinforce the message. I mean, I respect it. It has great beats, and a (hopefully) genuine cause. But it gets boring very quickly. It felt bland and emotionless, but I guess it's minimal emotions mirror the experience of many common black people in the USA. It's decent, genre bending too I guess, bit it's not as revolutionary as for example, Kendrick's "To Pimp a Butterfly", released four years before this, and maybe Beyonce's self-titled too, released even earlier. In 2020? Imo, it can be overshadowed by Run the Jewel's surprise album, "RTJ4". Still, I enjoyed listening to this, but it made me want to revisit the intoxicating frustrated energy of the mentioned albums - which are about the American black experience too.

The solid force of metal. The raw energy of punk. The fiery vigor of hard rock. And the angsty fuel of hip-hop. All combined in one punch.

Did I, a non-music major who knows zero things about music theory and jazz, let alone the difference between Latin jazz, African jazz, and American jazz, appreciate Machito's landmark album that brought Latin jazz into the mainstream? Yes, I guess. And did I, a man who claims that he listens and enjoys "every genre" and is currently participating in the fun journey that is listening 1000+ albums to discover more new music, enjoyed this? I'm gonna be honest: no.

Reminds me of those times when we used to play the FM radio with a keypad phone every night before sleeping. It usually requires a headset jack to function as an antenna, but that particular phone has a built-in antenna. We would play the radio every night, because not aside from a built-in antenna, that phone also has a beast of a speaker. Our favorite radio channel mostly plays '80s songs, some of them are familiar, some are not. That's what this album feels like. An '80s radio channel. Overall, it has a great sound. But just like any double album that tries to explore as much sound as possible, this album is only enjoyable if one is in a mood for a musical adventure, or an occasionally familiar background music.

I never thought that Björk was actually a member of a band, let alone a post-punk band! Ans she's on fire here, carrying an incredible vocal energy while staying in the post-punk territory. The instrumentals, while generic at some places, are great too. Love the drum beats on some tracks. Overall, with such volcanic vocals and cool instrumentals, this slightly exotic album is equivalent to a little walk in one of my favorite countries.

Shoegaze-ic Oasis. Love the psychedelic bits in some otherwise generic tracks, and I also enjoyed the surprisingly moving "History".

The "Birth of Cool". It's cool jazz, which is still jazz, the only music genre with double 'z', because it can make you go zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Apparently, there are so much contributors in this album that David Crosby forgot his own name (what a terrible album name, even for a '70s album). So he looked up in the sky as the sunset paints it red, and at last... he now has a perfect album cover for his new album! (also a terrible album cover, it's hilariously corny). But despite the bad album name and cover (and also the personally bad vocals), it's actually a decent album that many elements (most of which are psychedelic licks) that tries to distance the sound from the stereotypical country music sounds. I enjoyed the psychedelic efforts in the first half, most notably the eight minute "Cowboy Movie". The second half is mostly chill and moody, a series of efforts that became boring from "Song with No Words" onwards. Overall, it's an easy listen. It has a few surprises (though I think it might be due to me underestimating it based on its name and cover).

I find the '80s synthpop sounds boring, I also find slow pop-jazz boring, But the struggle between the two in "Songs from a Big Chair"? Surprisingly enjoyable. PS. "Everybody Wants to Rule the World" sounds familiar. It's popular, but it's not that great. PPS. Slow pop-jazz won. Hence the boring latter half. Not that it'll be better if the synthpop elements engulfed it anyway.

If "September" make one dance in September, then this album makes one dance in the other 11 months. While I'm curious, I don't really care now why there is no "Water" in their name. It doesn't change the fact that these guys craft some of the most irresistible grooves, especially in this classic feel-good energy infused funk-soul album.

Just a beautiful, calm acapella. I've got nothing more to say besides that, tbh. I wish I know the best mood listen to this again, perhaps a nice vacation morning or something.

So, he "changed his name to Elvis after Elvis Presley and adjusted his image to match the then-rising punk rock movement." This Wikipedia sentence tells pretty much everything about this album. So he IS Elvis no. 2, and his debut album is much better than the mess made as Napoleon Dynamite. Like Elvis no. 1, it's consistently dull yet for some reason irresistibly catchy. It's like a cheap candy. Enjoyable, but not remarkable or anything. I could say that if his "aim" is to make a punk version of Elvis Presley, then he hit it. His aim was definitely true, whatever that means.

A probable link between '90s grunge and '80s new wave. Apart from the sweet guitar riffs and some decent alt-rockish hooks (which are only in the first half, btw), this album is neither interesting nor enjoyable as a whole.

This is French singer Héloïse Letissier, with a stage name of... Christine and the Queens? At first I thought it was a band, but it isn't, Christine and the Queens is a single person. Weird. So in her second album, Héloïse Letissier aka Christine and the Queens reportedly cut her hair, stood up, you know like a typical woman-gone-badass movie trope, and said "just call me Chris". Aaaand... I don't think synthpop is the best medium to deliver some messages in 2018. It sounds like somewhere between '80s synthpop and the minimalist R&B of the '10s. It has some great moments, but overall, it's pretty boring and monotonous. I guess the music scene in France is a bit different, of course it's different. Still, it's a pretty nice and accessible effort by her to spread awareness and share her journey as an LGBTQ+ member.

A product of Fleetwood Mac's internal turmoils, "Rumours" is hailed as one of the greatest albums of all time. It's in the top 3 of this generator's global stats, and it apparently contains some of the radio staples in the Western world. This is my second time listening to this. My first time was a long time ago, I remember enjoying the trip as a whole, especially "Dreams", which is perhaps the greatest pop-rock song that I have ever heard. None of these are an overplayed radio track in my country, where every radio station is obsessed with '80s ballads. So listening to it now, it's fairly fresh to my ears. It's not as mind-blowing as some put it, at least for me. It's just an incredibly easy listen, one that would make your feet tap and head bob along the melodies. And it has some interesting instrumental outbursts too, the buildup in "Chain" being a notable example. It's pretty cool how this band, having two couples, were able to translate their conflicts into great music, let alone a pop classic. Truly a masterpiece, not something that I would adore, but it's something that I definitely respect.

Another proof that a little bit of melody can turn the angsty punk into an alt-rock beast. Released a week after Cobain's death and carrying a considerable amount of suicide references, I'm not surprised that this album created a buzz during that time. But whatever happened between Love and Cobain, these few things are clear: Courtney Love is a kickass singer, and this album can definitely compete in her husband's musical field. One of the best punk albums I have ever heard. "Feminist" punk that actually works.

Finally! Some Beatles! It was of course a fun listen. And... er... rating it is pretty tricky. The thing is, "A Hard Day's Night" was one of my least favorite albums by the band. Yes, least favorite. And yes, "was". Although "And I Love Her" is the very first Beatles song that I love, as well as the reason why teenager me dived deeper into their discography despite the geo-blocks on YouTube during those times. Listening to it again, it's much better than I remember. Considering the fresh sounding tracks with infectious melodies and simple structure, it's not hard to see why these boys set the music scene on fire during their time. "A Hard Day's Night", their first all-original album, written while constantly touring and making non-music projects, is probably the epitome of their early works, their early musical force at full power. Their early works are pretty tricky to rate. But regardless of how I approach this, it doesn't change the fact that early Beatles albums have this kind of raw, infectious energy that I love. Those albums, including this one, have a few minutes of fillers and are not as mind-blowing as their later works, but I will keep on coming back to them to just sit back and enjoy some music. And because of that, I guess this album deserves a five star. Two classics and two five stars in three days, what a nice week!

A vocalist whose main objective is to destroy his throat. A drummer who probably wished he has four arms. And of course, everyone is very angry about everything. This album is basically one satan reference away from being the most stereotypically metal metal album. But it does rock. Those speedy drum fills, heavy riffs, and mad vocals hype me up. It's so energizing. I don't hate the world, but I gotta admit that this is a perfect work-out album. Another heavy metal album that I actually enjoy.

Wow, this is next level electronic music! I enjoyed every second of it, despite the ridiculous loudness (loudness war?) of it. I love the beats and the hooks (is that "Tomorrow Never Knows"? they even nailed the guitar wails in it) and how the album as a whole doesn't sound like a mobile game that involves polygons. I never knew electronica could be this good. What an experience. Another highlight in this 1000+ day project.

TIL folk albums are (personally) more enjoyable as background music. I enjoyed this 52 minute set of moody songs. I guess it's so calming after listening to heavy metal and rave music in the past two days. I love the great voice, and the generic piano thingy. Another entry in the short (2 entries long, to be exact) list of folk (?) albums that I actually enjoyed.

A profile picture of a man smoking, in a dark monochrome. A caption that goes like "whatever people say I am, that's what I'm not". Yep. This is definitely a Facebook profile of a millennial trying to be "edgy". And weirdly, this association sums up the album.

"Mediocre beats will work if they're loud enough." -the golden rule of gangsta rap, probably

Mouth-wateringly interesting multi-layered productions with R&B vocals. Not that enjoyable as a whole, it sounds messy, formless, and repetitive. It made me want to listen again to Taylor Swift's "reputation", not because it's a good album, but because it's one of the albums in this domain that I actually enjoyed once, ahhh good ol' 2010's. Overall, it basically sounds like a hifi version of vaporware.

Fresh. Futuristic. Aware. These guys crafted such a timeless rap classic as the new millenium arrived. In terms of tracks, the funkier/softer ones are among the best rap songs I have ever heard. Those beats are on a different level. The skits and the rock-ish tracks are skippable, imo. However, the album as a whole is a pretty solid 70+ minute epic. Apparently, the duo tried to be more melodic, explored new musical influences, and worked with new producers to capture the colors of their times. Geez, the 2000's feels like a mirage now. Overall, while it's not something that I would listen from start to finish, it's definitely a solid modern classic.

Swamp rock, isn't it? It's fun as a listen, it's full of jams and grooves. I can see why many love this band. It explores blues, rock, and country. And the bluesy tracks are the best imo.

Okay I get it. You put your ears in a blender and you power it with angst and rage for around twenty minutes. I get it. But that doesn't mean that I enjoy it. Still, it's remarkably better than the Circle Jerks album that I got a while ago. And that closing track is a beast!

Annoying voice. Repetitive melodies. And generic instrumentals (not without some interesting bits, however). It has everything I hate about punk.

I never took Madonna's music seriously. And after listening to this album... I still don't take her music seriously.

Not a big fan of cars, but I guess that shiny red eliminator is pretty fascinating. That's how I felt throughout the entire album. It's an interesting and fun take on blues rock in the '80s domain. The singles are great, but it has a considerable amount of fillers. Synthesizers and drum machines are so good at turning music into noise that the entire second half became boring. Still a fun album, but perhaps just outdated.

Holy cow, this is TOO GOOD for a synthpop album! What a fun gem!

How to Make a Dozen Songs Using the Same Three Tunes. by the great powerhouse of a rock-'n'-roll singer, Little Richard. (Includes "Tutti Frutti"!)

Why would I give this a 5? Modern pop music sucks, right? Taylor Swift sucks too, right? So what if those modern-twisted '80s inspired hooks are catchy? Most of the tracks so overplayed listening to it again hurts right? And the moving atmospheric tracks such as "Out of the Woods" and "Wildest Dreams"? Erm... Not that good right? I mean Taylor is probably not the first one who did that. Oh, and the second half are pretty boring already, huh? So what if those soft tracks are so goood? It ultimately drags the album... I'm only rating this album a very little bit too high because nostalgia. Yes. Those nights with my kid siblings. Watching MTV. The smell of fried potatoes. The way pasta compliments the taste of softdrinks. Father going home from work. It's only nostalgia right? This album is overrated, so I would not give this a 5.

WAAAAHAHAHGHHDHHDGGGHGH They all screamed. They danced like worms sprinkled with salt. They made a big mess in the massive mansion. But Dracula didn't scream. He just sat there, unmoved, bored as hell. Should I go out at the next sunrise and end this misery? He thought. He looked back at those men. Still hammering the floor to the same tune. It was disappointing really, they were impressive at the beginning. I miss terrorizing humans, he thought. But I must do what is best... And at that night, Dracula migrated to Hotel Transylvania.

Mermaid Avenue is apparently a road that connects the traditional folk rock sound and the contemporary colors of sounds brought by Bragg. The first half of it is fun. It shows how this avenue is full of colors. It's lively, yet it has a fair share of gloom. But Mermaid Avenue is just like any other avenue. Mostly uninteresting. But I guess seeing the way those traditional and contemporary sounds travel along the road is enough reason for some to include this in their must-visit-before-I-die list.

I always knew that the day will come. Out of 1000+ albums, why wouldn't I encounter at least 1 folk album that I'll genuinely enjoy? This album, with its jazz infused upbeat folk, by a nice voice and a good set of accompaniments, is one of the first folk albums that I actually enjoy. Kudos! Unfortunately, most of the songs felt overlong. Because of that, it has some boring moments. And apparently, those are enough to make me hold back those sweet fives. Anyway, I look forward for more of Nick Drake. Him and S&G are some folk artists that I enjoyed discovering.

As the outstanding "Buffalo Stance" plays, I was impressed. I was like, woahh no wonder rap replaced '80s pop! - hiphop goes well with synthy drums! And next tracks kept the flame, they're enjoyable too, albeit not as good as the opener. This album is basically a better version of Madonna. Definitely '80s, but tolerable. Then we got to "The Next Generation". I mean yeah, next generation, the future of the nation. It's a genuine message, but the way it was delivered sounded like it's a parody rap. Personally, not something one would take seriously. Then it's alllll downhill from there.

Synth drums: check R&B elements: check Multilayered productions: check Sexually explicit lyrics: check Big names as guests: check A TikTok single: check A stereotypical "modern music" album. But whether or not you agree that "modern music bad", this particular work is surprisingly well done.

The first two songs are perhaps the most enjoyable jazz that I have ever heard. The rest are instrumental fiddling that I wouldn't even want to play as background music. In other words, if "JA" represents the moments where I enjoyed it and "ZZ" represents the moments where... not so much, this album is: JAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Very woooooshy. Tracks "Queer" and "Only Happy When It Rains" are pretty nice, but even those are soft hits. Not so long later, I will remember 0 things about this album, or maybe just one: the name.

Early '90s rock is such an interesting mess. The entire thing felt like a hit and miss. This album's opener, "Turnover", and closer, "Shut the Door" are absolute hits. The rest are pretty okay, I guess. The album as a whole has the rage and grittiness of punk, but it is damped by the wooshy noise of noise rock. That's post-hardcore I guess. Fascinating stuff.

This entire thing sounds like a fever dream, in a bad way. Still, the brilliance of "Hanging Out & Hung Up on the Line", "Safesurfer", and "If You Loved Me at All" saved this 70 minute whopper from a 1 star.

In the alternate universe where I actually like punk, I probably gave this a 5. The gritty attitude, the dirty riffs, the vocals, and the overall sound of this one are peak punk. Not to mention those delicious bass lines. I can definitely see why this is considered a masterpiece in the genre. Unfortunately, I'm not a big fan of punk. I felt that most songs are same-y. Still, this album slaps.

The music: 🪨🦴🐵 The atmosphere: ☠🌑🗻 The lyrics: ⭐🌟✨ The album as a whole: 😲😴😴😴😴😴😴😴😐😲😴😲😴😲😴😴 What a ride.

🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜🟧🟧🟧🟧

I have a hypothesis as of now: Every band that releases "hardcore" or "heavy" songs will always eventually release "softer" and more melodic songs. Either it will work or not. In Hole's case, they did a pretty decent job in fully embracing the alt-rock sound in their final 90's album, "Celebrity Skin". I can hear the female led alt-rock bands in the 2000's in this album. It's okay, but not as good as their punk-ish "Live Through This".

Tom Waits? Aren't you the same guy who made the oonga boonga music in "Bone Machine"? Wow. While he vividly simulates 10000 B.C. or whatever in "Bone Machine", he also succeed in doing the same with pubs and jazz clubs in this album. It's tempting to say "Hey! Why don't you just make real music? Look at your voice in the chorus of 'Better Off Without a Wife', it's pretty good." But I guess it will be a generic and an equally boring effort. Both "Bone Machine" and "Nighthawks at the Diner" are interesting yet boring. Not to mention looooooooong. But I enjoyed "Bone Machine" more, mainly because it has fun singles, while "Nighthawks" is basically 70 minutes of spoken poetry/story over a jazz track.

Once upon a time, a man used a drum machine for his soul album and pretty much everyone was hyped about it

Love me some nightcore rap

Sentimental yet down to earth. The most easy-listen type of country music. Pretty chill.

I enjoyed the first half a lot. Folksy tunes with some upbeat elements (which are apparently shanty elements). The second half is the usual slow folk that is so boring I decided to just give this a 3 instead of a 4. Still, it's another one of the few folk albums that I actually enjoy.

It's like a stock photo. I might agree that it's well-done, great even. But I'll forget about it after an hour.

Like "Bone Machine", but better. My third Tom Waits album in a span of like two weeks? An interesting guy. This is his best that I've heard so far, and I think a little more exploration in his discography (particularly the '80s part) might get me into his sound. Apparently, this is the second part of a trilogy. But as of now, I have to dust off the sands in my ears first.

Post-punk, post-rock, post-hardcore, shoegaze... they might be different, but it feels like they lie next to each other together in one messy spiderweb-y mass. I've never been a fan of these kinds of music, they often feel like something beyond boredom. The void lack of attention so solid it gives me a headache. But this one, this one blew my mind. With just six songs and a runtime of barely 40 minutes (in contrast to the 70 minute epic, "Peggy Suicide" for example), it managed to create a sensation of being trapped in a gigantic cave. It has the woosh and the otherworldly licks that seems to stretch through time, but without sounding like a tv static. I also love how they used dynamics (loud/soft parts) to paint their greyscale sound. In short, it's not boring, it's awesome. Perhaps I liked it because it's more basic than it's peers, but nonetheless, it's a rare gem of post-something music.

With an album cover like that, I expected it to be a grandiose or at least an adventurous folk album. But it's not. It's a sparsely produced folk album with only a guitar and (great) vocals that runs for less than 30 minutes. And while I wasn't really drawn that much with this minimalist approach (the fact that I'm not a fan of folk compounded this), I can definitely say that it has depth. It's dark, melancholic, and just sad especially when you know the background. I don't mind revisiting this one, but as of now, it's safe to say that I find the experience a decent one.

"We've got the jazz. We've got the jazz. We've got the jazz..." They proudly chanted this in the intro of "Jazz (We've Got)", one of the album's highlights and a personal favorite. And they didn't yelled it like an extroverted MC in a night club, like most rappers do, but they almost whispered it. That's what this album is. With such a laidback sound and a minimal/more subtle use of vulgar words/topics, this is a easy listen. Very easy for a hiphop album. They used the jazz elements professionally, creating a light and easy atmosphere. The rapping is fine, and the lyrics admired for it's "social awareness", whatever that means. It is no surprise that this is one of the most respected albums in hiphop. It can draw anyone, whether they like jazz or rap or something not as harsh as gangsta rap. A classic. . . . So why does it sound monotonous at some point? Well, perhaps because it appears that the tracks are centered around a variation of a single drum machine beat.

If '60s rock is a class then this album is that one kid who nobody remembers after graduation. PS. Is it just me or are '60s singers a bit too fond on calling women "little girls"? I guess it's another '60s feature that got mixed in this generic album.

Never knew that the sound of '80s rock could be turned into a progrock journey. Rush particularly did this well in their famous "Tom Sawyer". The idea of using synths to amplify a spacey atmosphere is not that new (probably, this was 1981 after all), but I never heard anyone did it as well as Rush. "YYZ" is also a notable mention. This instrumental track reminds the listeners that they're still a progrock band, with top-tier instrumental prowess. It's rhythm is apparently inspired by the morse code of "YYZ". dah-dit-dah-dah dah-dit-dah-dah dah-dah-dit-dit. Can you hear it? The rest of the album is okay. It got some occasional WOW moments. But overall, the album sounds like a complex version of '80s mainstream rock. It's just okay. I dunno, maybe it's Lee's voice.

Wow. This is some Pet-Sounds-Sgt.-Pepper level psych rock! I can hear a lot of influences here from their peers. It's very '60s, might even be the most definitive '60s psychedelic rock album. I mean, just look at that cover

Both discs start put strong. With bangers after bangers. Yet it losses steam after a while. In the latter half, it's pretty boring already. So, what happens when two of these get stacked in one H U G E album? It's quite an adventure, ngl. But maybe if they stripped down this 134 minute whopper of a double album, it would've been a solid 5/5 album. Still, it's a great album. I'll come back to most of its songs. But not on the whole album. Sorry Run the Jewels, but I think I have a new favorite hiphop duo now.

post-punk... WITH COLOURS!!!

The slick noise of postpunk. The wooshy riffs of grunge. And the irresistible grooves of alt-rock as a whole. It has everything that I love about '90s rock. Whether it's a wild experimental rock album or an early catalyst in the '90s alt-rock tsunami (released a year before Nirvana's "Nevermind"!), this album is an adventure from start to finish.

The Beach Boys are truly a different beast to The Beatles, and what a beast they are. Still, it's pretty tempting to refer to this album as their "Revolver" and the unfortunately removed "Good Vibrations" as their "Tomorrow Never Knows", both in terms of greatness and music style changes. Overall, "Pet Sounds" made me go "wow!", but not "WOW!!!" as most people claimed they did. Most of it are two minute pop songs with great instrumentals and incredible productions. It's great, albeit generic at some places. I enjoyed it, though not as much as I enjoyed "Surf's Up".

Amazing vocals with no whiny or pompous quality of a glam rock star. Instrumentals breaks that does not intimidate but falls down like a snowflake on a quiet night. Short lyrics that is deep but not deep enough to be ironically self-indulgent. Here is a non-Floyd progrock album that legitimately blew my mind.

Another proof that complexity and flawlessness doesn't guarantee an enjoyable listen. I mean, it's great; jazz rock fusion, incredible production, nice instrumentals... it's an easy listen. But I don't think I will come back to it. I can see why it's considered awesome, but ultimately, it felt bland as a listen.

At first, folk and punk seems like genres lying on two opposite extremes of music. So what should we expect in "folk punk"? Well, folk and punk still have something in common: politically charged tracks. And Billy Bragg pushed the poetic storytelling of folk and the energetic angst of punk to create this album. The title itself summarizes this attempt. It's a genuine attempt, I guess, but it's a weak one. The tracks felt flat and shallow. Also, I don't think weaving those political proses with such an annoying voice is a good idea. DEFINITELY a difficult album.

Six minutes of the same beat looping doesn't seem so long if you're on the dance floor. Because as some poets or whatever said, time slows down when one is dancing. But what about when someone is listening to it while crunching numbers in his laptop? Well, it made me realize how long 3 minutes can be. Time is such a thick dimension. Still, the beats are nice. No wonder it set the country on fire.

Mom can we listen to The Beatles? We have The Beatles at home. The Beatles at home:

David Bowie's exploration of the soul genre is a pretty fun journey. It has the glam, but not mainly because of the production and Bowie's charisma, but because of the soul and R&B elements, happily driving the beats and melodies. Unfortunately, it felt dry and overproduced at some point. I guess Bowie himself wouldn't have called it "plastic soul" for no reason. In particular, the last acts of the tracks often felt monotonous, Bowie is usually repeating the same phrase here, while the background is repeating the same grooves. Again, it's a pretty fun journey. But not something worth revisiting tbh. PS. Perhaps the reason he got away with that terrible "Across the Universe" cover is because he was a friend of John Lennon during those times. The former Beatle even helped him make the album's most popular track, "Fame". Still, it's pretty amusing, how Bowie uses Beatles influences. Take note for example the "A Day in the Life" lyric sample bit in the title track.

Latin music is really something else. It's that kind of art that never fails to paint a smile on my face and give a mood-elevating energy to my soul. I don't dance especially with those nonsense electronic beat loops, but with this music? Hell, let's murder that dancefloor now! What a fun listen.

Punk but the guitar gets a considerable exposure to spotlight. And I guess that's how grunge is born. Those "grungy" tracks are the best in the album, "Generation Genocide", "Thorns", and "Broken Hands". The rest are, to be honest, just mediocre punk.

Wikipedia described this as "post-punk revival", but it sounds more like dream pop or noise music. Hell, I even think shoegaze is a more appropriate genre for this. But while it doesn't really matter, I think it reiterates my observation that post-punk, shoegaze, or noise pop are lying in the same dank territory of music. But perhaps the reason it's so wooooooshy is the weird obsession of modern indie rock bands to replicate the sound of TV static. It's... ok. Most of the time it felt like it's about to achieve something, something that will at least poke my bored ass, but it never reached anything worth listening. The whole project sounds... weak. It felt like a timid little noise pop wannabee that tries and fails to make great sounds. The wooshy attempts are interesting sometimes, enjoyable even. But this isn't the harsh and otherworldly dreamy music that they strive to be. It has a lot of potential, but it has a weak sound, and it is therefore boring.

Now this IS what good music is. Takes you somewhere else. I wasn't even ready to cream my pants when those incredibly high funk energy swayed me across astronomical distances. Solid 10/10.

The beats and the hooks are nice. But they cranked the volume up to 11, then whooshed it out with the classic indie rock TV static noise, at the top of that, there's these fever dream-sy vocals that only amplifies the monotonicity and messiness of the overall sound. These guys know how to make great sounds, but they probably got carried away while producing.

This album was lying underground for more than two decades. Unearthed. Then released. This intimidating wine blew my head into pieces then threw it in a hazy hyperspace. What a freaking punch. Shoegaze is something else.

Straightforward stoner rock, done in late '90s. Not too outdated eh? Guitars are interesting and the overall atmosphere is heavy. But I don't think slithery spacey guitar solos are new during those years. Overall, it's surprisingly unremarkable. I expected more than just rough riffs and spacey solos with weak vocals.

In the cover, Elvis 2.0 is wearing a formal attire, gesturing with a camera in front of him, staring at his subject: us. It was a clean shot, like a stock photo. Without context, I don't think anyone would assume that it contains punk. And it's not the punk that I know, the classic young rebels chair-breaking messy punk. No. It is a "punk" where men in formal suits occasionally slapping the table (not too hardly because the champagne glass on it might spill). Perhaps that's what they call "new wave". What happened between "My Aim is True" and "This Year's Model"? The former is a great album, but this sounds bland. I don't think it's the introduction of The Attractions. Their instrumentals are actually good here. Perhaps it's overproduced, which is weird considering critics described the production as "stripped off". Whatever is this, it sucks. Not that I'm a big fan of angsty punk, but I just hate whatever type of over-sanitized music this is more.

It's like every existing genre in the '90s got together and threw a party. This mess has no business being this good! PS. The deluxe version's cover seems more fitting for this album.

It's like fake grass. SILVER fake grass, just like the grass in planet K-69420. It feels artificial. But it's undeniably fun to play on once in a while.

** furiously watches "Shrek 2" **

Latin music really turns the elevator-ish jazz into an explosive monster. I felt every note in this album. The struggles and build-up of the drums, the wailing of the violins, the Tom and Jerry-ish flow of the wind instruments... All of these sound so chaotic and human. And because of that, every second of this is such an adventure. That's the epitome of a musical experience. This is probably how jazz sounds to jazz fans. Not a boring, lengthy musical fiddling but an experience beyond words. I'm not a big fan of jazz, but I freaking love this bad boy.

Okay, if I'm not mistaken, this album introduced folk rock to the mainstream, steering away from the loud guitar driven blues rock of the decade. In 1969, bands like Led Zeppelin was storming the scene by pushing the loud blues rock aesthetic into its limits. While these guys formed a supergroup to chill around, look back to their folksy roots, and release this. Okay, I might get a lot of things wrong there, but I'm pretty sure that it's a compelling alternative. As a hard rock fan myself, I find the softer ballads, most notably, "Helplessly Hoping", enjoyable. The psychedelic rock and country sprinkled bits are generally a careful hit-and-miss. It's still very '60s sounding, even to the point that it sounded generic. Overall, it was an easy listen. Nice guitars, nice harmonies. But it's pretty unremarkable as a whole.

Noise rock is a tough sound. It's loud, it's heavy, it's wooshy. It's easy to get bored or annoyed by it. But when used right, it can evoke powerful emotions and create a mind-blowing journey. Sonic Youth nailed it here, in "Daydream Nation". Their brand of indie rock driven by grotesquely distorted guitars and heavy noises, it's quite a ride. It might be very loud, confusing, and wooshy. It's also interesting, fun, and uplifting. For me, this mess is what good music is. Takes you somewhere you've never been before.

Is the second half really boring or is it just the effect of post-nut clarity that I got in the first half? Freaking Latin music.

Take the blandest thing about most popular '70s bands, like Pink Floyd, Steely Dan, Rush, 10cc, Eagles, and Led Zeppelin. Mix it all together and now you have a hit-and-miss album, most of which are misses.

Released in 1995, "Different Class" is the best and most fun rendition of '80s synthpop I have ever heard.

This cheap cake filled with repetitive lyrics and terrible puns is surprisingly enjoyable. It's fun, the beats and the hooks are nice, and it's very '90s.

I've always wondered how did punk evolved into post-punk. Now, I know. This 2000's garage rock bit topped with layers of noise seems to answer my questions. It's harsh and angsty, like punk, and wooshy, like post-punk. Too much noise and too loud, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

Never knew funk could be so dark. Truly a beautiful genre.

With a name like Rod Stewart, a raspy voice, and a rowdy personality, Rod Stewart is very rock-'n'-roll. I discovered him as a soft-rock figure, however. Kinda like Barry Manilow and Elton John. I discovered his popular live videos in Youtube such as his versions of "I Don't Wanna Talk About It" and "Sailing". This album is his second. Early Rod Stewart. Bland and generic Rod Stewart. To be fair, I didn't really expect anything surprising when I saw that cover. I expected it to be boring, and it is. Country-folk covers of "rock-'n'-roll" (according to critics) tracks. A few interesting instrumental feats here and there. Rod's raspy voice. I didn't find it captivating at all. It's dull, it's uninteresting, and I could die without listening to this album.

As a country album, it's an equivalent of a white bread. And... I liked it. Being a perfectionist, Williams reportedly released this album six yees after her previous one. While conflicts does contribute to this delay, I can still observe the sanitized feel of the album. I love her voice. It's soothing and when used well, it carries emotion like it's a wave. But even that is generic. Not even the admittedly nice interaction with the male backing vocals made it a unique voice. The instrumentals are pretty good. Everything is in the right place, but ultimately, it becomes a bit predictable, and therefore uninteresting. The production is neat, but again, generic. The critics were praising her songwriting skills. Judging by the tracks' titles, it might be interesting but I don't want to explore it further. Again, this is like white bread. That mass produced, generic commodity that one can find in the local store. Her perfectionism might have made her album overtidy and uninteresting, but I've got to admit that she still did a great job crafting its overall sound. I unashamedly enjoyed this white bread, and I don't mind consuming it again... after a while.

Golden Age of Hiphop? More like Golden Age of Sampling. That was my first impression about this album. It's not bad. And I know that sampling is one of the foundations of most great hiphop sounds. The opener is a beautiful sound collage of samples. I heard some familiar tunes and some soundbites. This is basically the entire album. Samples. In the so-called Golden Age of Hiphop, they can sample as much music and soundbites as they want without getting sued. Public Enemy did a great job using these samples to create a rich sound. They aren't like other rappers/producers who stack up layers of samples and beats like it's lasagna, but they painted every note with a piece of sound to push the overall atmosphere. It's one hour of dense beats, deep lyrics, and complex commentaries. That being said, it's dense. It's a pretty demanding listen. I didn't enjoy most of it, especially the second half, where it became monotonous. But I respect it. I like the popular singles, and how the samples are used. Apparently, they used jazz, soul, and R&B - elitist music - without leaving their humble roots. I know Public Enemy transformed rap from a fad to something revolutionary. Something that even requires social consciousness. This album really proved it for me. A classic from the Golden Age of Hiphop.

Swamp rock? This sounds too clean for a "swamp" rock. I'm surprised at how boring this albums turned out to be. It sounds like they're trying hard to steer away from their blues/country roots or influences but at the same time they stick to the same formula. Ultimately, it felt uninspired and uninteresting.

Cool! Now let's see what's the hype is all about... Update: Basically glam rock but the musicians are actually very talented. But this particular album is pretty playful. They don't take themselves too seriously. It's kinda fun, carefree even. An opener that seems to trash on someone? A song about a loving cars? Together with monster hits like "Bohemian Rhapsody" and "Love of My Life"? Clearly, this isn't an ordinary night at the opera. As of now, it's a 4. Maybe I'll appreciate it more if I come back to it.

It feels like their sound is tied up in a chair and forced to perform at gunpoint. I don't know what's missing in their sound. I like the guitar and production bits in some places, but overall the atmosphere tries hard and fails to connect. They're apparently trying to portray nostalgia or something, yet it comes out as emotionless. I think they should be a bit more carefree and maybe leave behind their past. I enjoyed their hard rocking "Elevation" for example. I love how they used their signature echoey sound in the electric guitar driven chorus. Some mellow tracks are pretty good too, but again, they didn't connect with me. Overall, whatever is that thing that they can't leave behind. They should probably leave.

Elevator music with great drums.

A folk rock album that is well produced without compromising the natural folksy quality of the genre thanks to Cat Stevens's skill as a storyteller. His character here reminds me of a grandfather who gives stories and advices to his grandchildren. In general, he's a man getting old amidst a rapidly changing society. I love how he portrayed it without sounding like a typical technophobic person. It's sentimental, it's delicate, and it's sincere. Great folk.

The muscular riffs and angsty vocals saved this goth rock album from being a cheesy fad that's only listenable during Halloween. It's compelling and the fun never wears off as one goes deeper into the gothic mansion. Perhaps one of the best things that came out of post-punk, as well as the best ones that came out of the '80s music scene.

I love the synths melting and enveloping into the rock sound like a butter on a toasted bread. It's so delicious and mood uplifting, like a good breakfast on a peaceful morning. Those kinds of morning where one tries to think about their life decisions with a hint of nostalgia. It's another oddly sad yet happy indie rock from the 2000's. I dunno what exactly drives them. Hope? Nostalgia? I dunno, but I love it. It's one of my favorite parts of the '00s music scene. Karen O has such a sweet voice. And I love how she drives the energy of the synths and the emotion of the album's tracks. Overall, it's an indie perfection. Inconsistent, but that only made it better. It felt like the musical version of "finding yourself". It's so soothing and mood uplifting. Yes, the BLITZ! title with an egg being... squeezed in the cover seems misleading in terms of sound, but it nailed my reaction to the album. It's freaking BLITZ!

NEU! For those who don't know, it's the German word for "NEW!". Imagine walking along a record store and seeing a black album with the word "NEW!" proudly sprawled across it. It's a bit of a clever name, I guess. Aaaand... it's probably new back in '75. An album with ambient in the first half and protopunk on the second one? That's pretty new. At its best, however, it's just interesting. The exploration in protopunk and the ambient bits are both nice and chill. But they are only fine together if one sees this as an exploration of sound. Otherwise, it would be an inconsistent, boring trip. It's very unlikely for me to come back to it. There's Kraftwerk and Brian Eno if I want some ambient music, and there's The Stooges if I want some good protopunk.

Not as sexy as they claimed it is. That voice alone can kill any sane guy's sex drive. The faster first tracks are actually a nice jam, but the latter, slower ones are pretty bland and boring. Overall, it's mostly soulless computerized soul. Not recommended for sexy sessions. Enjoy the vibe of the first half and stop as soon as it gets too slow.

It's fun and mood elevating. Great folk, as I expected from Paul Simon. Yeah, I'm aware of that it's basically an appropriation of African music (done in Apartheid era South Africa!). I can definitely hear it in the tracks. They sound like pop-infused, at some point even country-ish. Furthermore, I don't understand the hype about "You can Call Me Al", this '80s pop infused African fiesta thingy annoys the hell out of me. What's funny about this experience is that I don't actually enjoy African music. I mean, yeah I respect it, but after a couple of world music rolls in this generator, I figured that I'll have a hard time trying to get into music like that. However, I liked the less pop-ish tracks in the album, most notably the acapella "Homeless". In conclusion, "Graceland" is basically African music for the mainstream. Another Elvis Presley-ish appropriation. This issue isn't unimportant of course, but if one sets it aside for a while, they can see that it's definitely an impressive feat.

It wasn't long since I heard "Fear of a Black Planet". The mentioned album is driven by a rich multilayered array of samples. Released right after that, "Apocalypse 91" creates an immediate impression that Public Enemy used much less sampling here. It wasn't intentional probably, because they apparently lost a bunch of tapes that they've been working on for years. The stripped-down sound reveals Public Enemy in it's purer, angrier form. They still delivered complex and timeless political commentaries, most of the time looking inwards into the violence and other problems in America's black community. As a listen, it's not as exhausting as their previous, but personally, it's less enjoyable. Very '90s gangsta rap despite the social consciousness not usually incorporated in the subgenre. But again, it's Public Enemy and they put political awareness in the usual gangsta rap fad of their time.

I only knew Muddy Waters as the guy who brought us "You Need Love", the blues song that became a foundation for Led Zeppelin's "Whole Lotta Love". And boy how ignorant I was in Muddy Waters's impact in the world of blues. Not a big fan of live albums, but I think this one captured the energy of blues and Waters's irresistible grooves and charisma. A gem in the top of the godfather of all modern music.

Great voice. But country folk.

Roots reggae. Reggae as a socio-political movement. Reggae made by an actual Jamaican. It's actually nice and chill. Reggae at their purest possible way without losing commercial potential. I love the vocal sounds and the instruments. But in it's thirty minute journey, it tends to get monotonous. The beats are similar and the formula of the tracks are the same. Still, an interesting reggae album. Perhaps among the few reggae ones that I listened to, this is my favourite.

That's what I like about indie rock. It's so adventurous and pure. Fuzzy Logic in particular sounds like a pastiche sometimes. I caught stuff from '70s rock to the britpop sounds of the '90s. But it didn't come out as unoriginal nor uninteresting. In fact, it's the most adventurous and fun indie rock album that I heard for a while. It can be messy and all over the place, but it's great rock nonetheless.

Now this is interesting, a bad indie rock album. Or maybe it's just me. Apparently their third best, after the debut and "The Suburbs". I already heard the latter and I thought it was decent, just a bit colorless. I described it as a plain rock album dressed up with nostalgic sounds. It's pretty neat. I also learned that Arcade Fire is a pretty popular band. I agree that this album is worse than "The Suburbs", but I don't think it's that great. It doesn't have the melancholic atmosphere of "The Suburbs". So the sound is there, in its pure, plain form. But not without special toppings though. This time, they put so much synth it turned into an '80s pop album. Not my vibe, I'm afraid.

The opener is such a slick banger. A nice intersection between disco and punk. After that track, however, he slowly descended into Elvis Costello lite. The riffs and the overall atmosphere might be interesting, but it's pretty bland especially when compared to the opener. Near the end, he made a turn and became full pledged punk. Compare the explosive noise of the genre to the chill vibes of the opener. This album is quite a rollercoaster ride.

The Beatles. Nearly a decade of great songs. One of my favorite bands ever. Yet sometimes, some questions linger in my mind as I revisit their music. Have they ever made a bad song? What about a bad album? Why does a song like "Little Child" exist, in a discography of a band like The Beatles? What's is about "With the Beatles" that it felt bland at some point? Why "With the Beatles" and not the arguably better "Please Please Me"? But whatever the answer to these questions are, it's always easy to get lost along their music. And even in their early works, there's several gems to enjoy, despite their cheapness. Overall, this album is like a bubblegum. Sweet, but gets bland pretty quickly.

You know it's another Beatles riff off when it's a '60s boy band with a misspelled animal name as a band name.

Love the instruments. But not a big fan of the vocals, for some reason. Not a big fan of the repetitive formula, either. Imagine the "Free Bird" solo but the first couple of riffs are looped over and over again. It felt like that. Almost epic at first, then it quickly became annoying. I can see why it's a must listen. But I won't pretend that I enjoyed it. It's folk rock after all.

It's 80 minutes long, but it wasn't an exhausting listen. Of course, that's because I listened to it in two sittings, one per disc. It's pretty dumb, but I figured it's easier that way. However, it only felt appropriate not because it's a double album, but because the two discs have a clear distinction to each other. "Abattoir Blues" is quite enjoyable. I loge the gothic undertones and the Tom Wait-sy energy. It sometimes gives me a Celtic folk rock vibe. While "The Lyre of Orpheus" is as poetic as its title. It also has the Tom Wait-sy vibes, in fact, it's stronger here. The sound is stripped down and most of the punch comes from the lyrics and the way it is delivered. Overall, fascinating at its best. It can be boring, but it's not annoying.

Mediocre '90s hiphop R&B.

My first encounter with this band was "A Northern Soul". I described that album as "shoegaze-ic Oasis". I didn't think that they're an Oasis riff off. But after hearing this, I changed my mind. But that doesn't mean that it's worse than "A Northern Soul". In fact, this is more enjoyable, despite the cheap britpop vibe of it. It's much more popular. But in terms of sound, it's more basic and therefore less interesting. I really can't decide which of the two albums are better. But between Oasis and The Verve, it's clear which.

What a trippy and slick electronica. It's too interesting to be compared to an elevator music. It's quite fun and great in some places. A hit and miss. But that's the point of experimental rock right? I knew it's the "sibling" of their beloved album, "Kid A", but personally, it doesn't have the "outtakes" vibe. It's an album on its own, and a slightly boring one.

The cover. The name. The music. Everything about this is generic.

Fiona Apple's debut. It's quite far from her 2020 hit, "Fetch the Bolt Cutters". It's not as chaotic and unique. "Tidal" is mostly piano based ballad. Perhaps the great thing about this is how her voice is presented at full force here. I haven't appreciated it much in "Fetch the Bolt Cutters", but here it's evident that she has a nice voice. As a whole however, it's a hit-and-miss. At its best, it's a fascinating look at early Fiona Apple.

Instantly recognized the purple cover of Kate Bush lying down with a couple of dogs. It's the one with "Running Up That Hill". It's currently a hot track because it appeared in the Netflix series, "Stranger Things". My sisters loved the show. Apparently, it was set in the '80s. "Stranger Things" also featured other '80s artists including The Clash and of course Metallica. But Kate Bush's popular single is the most Tiktok friendly. So unsurprisingly, it took storm in the internet. Personally however, I didn't really care about it. Once when my sisters and I were hanging out, we tried listening to the whole song. Halfway through, one of my sisters said it was longer than she thought. I agree, it's quite long. Only it isn't. It's 5 minutes long. And even after listening to it again now, I still don't care about it. Sure, it has a decent sound, but it's still a mildly annoying '80s synthpop song. And that's the album as a whole, boring '80s pop. This album is decent. It's well-produced and it has some great sounds. I don't really see anything interesting about Kate Bush as a singer. Her voice is shaky (idk if it's distorted or it's just her or both) and a bit generic. As a whole, it's quite boring.

Out of all the '70s rock parodies that I've listened to, this one (or at least the first half of it) is my favourite. It sounds like David Bowie but crazier. It's a shame the second half is a soul-infused mess. I don't think the entire second disc is even necessary. With chaotic outburst-y sounds like this, it's safer when it's short. Like a joke, it gets worse over time.

While that name conjures an image of a pizza movie night for me, I know he's great considering how he made a Spotify playlist for himself in the '50s. Not to mention that the half-hour jam is composed of songs with freaking "la la" and "oh oh oh ooh" as choruses. Pure bluesy good vibe energy here. I loved it.

Clean punk that is surprisingly ahead of its time.

Cold and dark. It sounds like Tom Waits but without the rough, reptilian energy. This one is smooth yet thick, like blood. It's a bit boring in some places, but overall, it's quite a ride.

Interesting at its best

Today's a cool morning filled with a heavy rain. The weather's heavy, you might say. And while I don't think a jazz fusion album suits such a day, this one didn't ruin the mood. I love the stormy energy of the instruments and the smooth flow of it all. Some tracks are quite boring, but as a whole, this album is a decent listen. Another great jazz.

My heart sank when I learned that today's listen is another '80s pop. Another synth infused, generic, disco-pop, I thought. But it surprised me, at the beginning at least. Cyndi Lauper has an energy and personality like I've never heard before. Those carefully produced synths, that clean voice, the overall let's-drop-everything-for-a-while-and-just-dance atmosphere are all the things that I'm looking for an '80s pop song. Don't get me wrong, it's still as terrible and outdated as its peers. Generic synth-infused '80s pop. Not to mention how those explorations in the rock territory fell flat. But it's still pretty decent, especially the first half. Of course that might be because I have low expectations. Still, I'm confident that between Madonna, Kate Bush, and Cyndi Lauper, only Lauper is likely to grow on me. She's definitely unusual to some degree, I guess.

When I first encountered the name "Kilimanjaro" (it is the tallest mountain in Africa for those who don't know), I thought it was a kickass name. One of the names that I would consider when I form a band or something. It's a shame that the name is given to a terrible trumpet-infused '80s psych-rock parody.

As an inhabitant of the underworld, I can confirm that we always listen to techno beats that could've been decent if they aren't overlong and unnecessarily repetitive. As for the "Second Toughest in the Infants". It's not really as brutal as it sounds. It's just something about a kid's experience in a nursery school in the UK. Of course, a good bunch of us know what kind of underworld nursery schools are.

"Rock 'N Soul" is exactly what it sounds. A rock-'n'-roll soul album. For some reason, the tracks are shuffled in Spotify. I don't know why, and I haven't realized it when I listened. But began with the amazing "Cry to Me". I love the bluesy energy with the smoothness of soul in Burke's personality, especially in this track. Unfortunately, the rest of the album lacks the pure rock-'n'-soul energy of that track. A few tracks are pretty fine, but overall, it felt like generic '60s pop riff offs. I guess it's a must listen since it's the bridge between soul and rock-'n'-roll. But much of the vibes here can easily be blown away by its peers.

Yes, I definitely find this ecstatic. I'm someone who... enjoys instrumental fiddling. Unfortunately, the ecstasy fades away after a while. And I'm pretty it's not the post nut clarity. Not "countdown to ecstasy" but "countdown to the end of ecstasy".

Carefully calculated and thoroughly sanitized rock. A set of radio fillers with decent riffs and annoying vocals. Generic hard rock for malls.

It's fascinating how "O.G. Original Gangster" is described as the pioneer of gangsta rap. It's as if Ice-T described himself as the "original gangsta" before gansta rap or gangsta aesthetic in general blew up. Or maybe the culture is already on fire in 1991. Still, I can definitely see how raw and sincere it is. It really felt like the beginning of something, a new genre. It has the vibes and energy of Public Enemy. And of course, this isn't as revolutionary as the mentioned group. But I still get it. Apparently, Ice-T realized that writing "party-rap" like everybody else is worthless, so he started writing about the realities in his rough life in Los Angeles (?). But perhaps the only thing that truly interested me here is how he used rock/hardcore music. And he was true about rock (or rock-'n'-roll as they refer to it) originally coming from black people. I guess that little rap vs rock thing has a race dimension. Although I wouldn't say that the rock elements are very great, they're still fascinating as a listen. In "Body Count", he introduced his band of the same name. The metal-ish track caught me off guard. It might be out of place but it broke the monotony of the album. The band will eventually release the controversial "Cop Killer", which would inspire N.W.A.'s "Fuck tha Police". Also, RATM would release their debut in the same year. Influential, I guess. Although Bestie Boys did a hard rocking rap rock album half a decade ago. Btw, "When the Levee Breaks" is better with "Sweet Leaf" than it is with "Black Sabbath". Still, "Midnights" is also a fascinating, monotony-breaking, rap rock track. Overall, quite decent. Just too long and too monotonous. But that's just gangsta rap, of course.

Ahh yes, dream pop that actually sounds like a dream. Still not sure if it will grow on me, but I can definitely tell that the next listens will never be the same as the first time.

Unique name. Some unique elements in the sound. Same casual atmosphere. Definitely the same vibe at The Beatles. But definitely not a riff-off. Far from that, it's a different beast on its own. A not-so-common gem of '60s rock.

Amazing guitar-driven storm that ravaged the music scene in the 1970 and haunted it ever since. I know a lot of heavy blues and dark sounding rock that came before this, but after listening to this, I decided that yes. "Black Sabbath" is definitely the evil growl that triggered the avalanche of heavy metal in the music scene. The first thing that I heard are thunderclaps and rain, then the iconic tritone riff. I love the doomsy vibes of it, but my favorites are the wilder ones. Those riff-driven hard rocking tales really turned this album from slacky blues to a total dark storm. I love it as a whole. However, I have mixed feelings some parts of it. Ozzy's vocals is a big debate among the listeners. I was never a fan of that one, although I agree that it has a personality that fits the theme. I don't think it will be the same with different vocals. Another is the instrumentals, especially the last ten-minute track. I know it is driven by riffs from Iommi, whose damaged fingers gave way to their signature sound. But it mostly sounds like a demo. Of course, an album created out of a single twelve hour session could sound like that. But I don't think it means that the album needs a 10-minute demo session of random riffs. It has some good parts though, and maybe if those riffs were developed into a couple of songs, it would've been better.

If Muddy Waters's Newport album taught me anything, it is that blues - especially live performed blues - requires personality. Muddy waters have this charisma that instantly connects with audience as he sing. And if Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains the Same live show taught me anything, it is that live performances that are driven by loud and hard-rocking instrumentals and goes at as long as twenty minutes requires much more than generic blues fiddling. Nahhh, I lied. I realized these when I listened to this album. I learned it in the same way a bad book teaches a lot of stuffs that are useful for authors.

I'm a huge fan of minding your own business. So I don't really meddle in my neighbors' personal lives, nor do I take interest in celebrities' shenanigans, nor take pleasure in afternoon TV shows involving real life love affairs or late night TV shows involving fictional love affairs. So, the vouyeristic nature of Gaye's "Here My Dear" didn't hit me. In other words, I don't care about his divorce. I guess I appreciate the fragility and the sincerity of it. But that doesn't mean that I enjoyed thus one hour messy soul jams. There's a reason why it was panned when it's released, and it's simply because it sucks.

No, Mr. Orwell, there were no telescreens, thoughcrimes, and Big Brothers. Not yet. It will be long before that. As of now, we got glam metal! Intense guitar-driven synth rock. Isn't that great? Oh, yes it will NOT age well, but we got Van Halen and their guitar. It will keep it alive and relevant like a cheap preservative.

Pure, raw, angsty teenage energy right here.

Ahh yes, Public Enemy's first masterpiece. Hip-hop's blueprint ever since its release. Not as dizzyingly full of samples like "Fear of a Black Planet" and not as slick as "Apocalypse 91... thr Enemy Strikes Back". This is raw, chaotic, and just monotonous. I mean, I get that the main appeal of this is the lyrics and that the samples are intentionally used to make the tracks more messy. It probably represents the present state of black Americans in their country. That being said, everybody knows how revolutionary is this. Socially conscious rap album that launched hip-hop into the ears of the public and the critics. But listening to it is a bit exhausting. It's not as enjoyable as the next two albums, which of course are just albums built upon this gem. Hell, almost every hip-hop album after this is built upon it.

See that picture of Rody singing with a vintage something as background? That's right, that bathroom corner colored photo. Like any pictures, it tells a story. A story about the most generic album of 1971.

You deserve every diss that you've got, Kanye lite.

I love that voice. But this particular type of pure folk has something in it that turns every intimate story into an annoying drone.

Not that awesome nor terrible. Overall, it's decent. Typical '80s synthy pop. Each track has some interesting bits. And some beats are even catchy. Rest is pretty generic. Still, it might grow on me.

"Too Rye Ay" is among the worst album name that I have ever encountered. Some people speculate that it came from an Irish lullaby with a nonsense part that goes "too ra loo ra loo ra". If that's the case, why didn't they just used it? This unnecessary additional element made it more annoying, in the exact way those trumpets turned this new wave album into a terrible mess.

They sound like a bunch of monkeys trying to create music, both in a good way and a bad way. It's a mess that is while inventive, mostly annoying to listen to. I didn't freak out throughout the hour long journey, but return of the Son of Monster Magnet? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

No, there had never been an Archduke Metallica. It was Franz Ferdinand and apparently his name "sounds good" so that particular band adopted the name. Lame choice, not gonna lie. But boy how their punk-fuelled indie rock hit hard like a thick history book.

There's another green world. The world of snake guitars, desert guitars, choppy organs, spasmodic percussions, uncertain piano, and of course unnatural sounds. Observe those critters in the strange world. Sombre reptiles, little fishes, spirits drifting... trying to create something. A formless, directionless sound. But I'm telling you, everytime the sound gets full and complete, it's sublime. It's otherworldly, you might say.

When I saw the cover and heard the vocals, I grunted and thought of how unsexy this is. But then I heard the instruments. j i z z z

Far from the minimalism of the incredible "Royals", the only Lorde song that I know, but the elegance is still there. I love the production and the feels -- young person energy -- but it's ultimately generic as far as these "sad girl" pop songs go. And I say this as someone who is currently obsessed with such songs lately.

Straightforward, down to earth, and fragile. Literally B.I.G. in every sense of the word. This IS gansta rap.

It is a common belief that most artists go through two major stages: copying-what-everybody-else-does stage, and coming-up-with-something-original-or-groundbreaking stage. Of course, not every artist went to the second stage. That being said, it is clear that while Bee Gees did reach the second stage, "Odessa" showcases them at the first stage. Good name, promising opener, but ultimately a pompous '60s rock pastiche. Hardly a surprise. After all, they're disco stars, not concept album weavers.

Finally! What goes after all these "to be continued" memes are revealed! And it's basically what happens when an acoustic guitar tries to do something prog. Ambitious yes. Complex and nice musicianship yes. But enjoyable? Naaaah.

It's too tempting to call this "generic", but this album has a knack at hitting the right tickle-spots. Making the familiar '70s country rock sound not an annoying but a cozy one. And they didn't stop there, there are also parts where the guitar-driven epicness caught me off guard. Perhaps that's the one that separates them from their peers.

This is so sly in many levels. Usually, deciding to "go pop" is a recipe for disaster, but Steely Dan managed to make such catchy tunes without sacrificing musical complexity. Too bad their perfectionism sucked all the energy of it, but I can definitely say that it still has the colors.

Basic hiphop beats on a basic soul track. That's exactly what you would hear in a typical jeepney with music here in the Philippines. That's what this album basically is, a groovy background music. Tip for future listeners: once you hear a male vocal, SKIP THAT TRACK.

Exotic, weird, and confusing. In short, it's psychedelic. But it isn't the sophisticated trippiness of the likes of The Beatles and Beach Boys, nor is it the solemn and dark compositions of the likes of The Doors, despite the slight similarity of the sound. It's the wild and feral psychedelia of Syd Barrett-era Pink Floyd and Dr. John. It's like getting lost in the middle of an unfamiliar jungle, with all those unfamiliar creatures and tribes around. Of course, this type of psychedelic rock isn't necessarily better than the respected classics of the genre, nor is it worse. In fact, it's a completely different domain. Apples and oranges. I agree that this is the most difficult to get into, but I can't deny that this is the psychedelia in its purest form. It's messy, chaotic, and exotic. I mean, what could be purer a psychedelic track than a song performed when they were so high it goes on for 17 minutes?

Definitely not a Beatles riff-off, of course they aren't, their name isn't a misspelled animal name. But are they enjoyable? Personally, not really. Actually, they sound more like The Kinks. And while it is a skeptical take on the "hippie" movement of their time, I didn't really caught the dark undertone in their sound. It's in the lyrics. But still, the meat of this album is more on the sound. Great strings, great bass, great beat. But sadly, it didn't really captivate me. Perhaps the sound came out more of an uninterested than a skeptical view of all those colorful movements. It sounds colorful and bright, but the colors are a bit bland.

One of the many things I discovered in this journey is how much I actually love female driven punk. I mean, as a former enjoyer of Avril Lavigne's emo pop-punk, I should've seen that coming. This album carries the female punk energy that I love. But it's sound is quite sonic and atmospheric despite the chaos. It's more post-punk than punk. Still, it has just the right level of grittiness and filthiness from punk. It hit all the right spots in me.

I don't think there's anything special about this. Even the country twang added no spice in this carefully produced standard pop album. Except, of course, her voice. And somehow, it's enough.

I like The Kinks. They have a unique flavor in their '60s rock sound. This is the third and probably the last Kinks album that I will hear in this generator, and my overall impression with these guys is yes they're not a Beatles riff-off, but much of their songs are hit-and-miss. "Something Else" is really something else. It's not as cohesive as "Face to Face" and "Arthur". It's all over the place and a lot of people LOVE albums that are all over the place. Unfortunately, I don't. But "Something Else" still has the charm and string driven ear candies. And I guess that's enough for a great Kinks album. Not as good as its amazing predecessor, "Face to Face", but still decent.

In the '90s, electronica was trying hard to sound like hip-hop. It made many new subgenres. And of course, not all of them worked.

I was never a fan of the song "Imagine". I discovered it when I was in high school. During that time, I made slogans and reaction papers and essays about all those things about the environment, the society... you get the picture. That being said, I'm basically sick and tired of all these MAKE PEACE and SAVE THE EARTH and all those BLAH BLAH BLAH as if people would listen to fifteen year olds. Not that I don't care, it's just annoying. I feel like a clown writing all those slogans not because I genuinely care but because it's a school requirement. Everything feels synthetic when the school forces you to do it. So when I discovered "Imagine", it just passed as another MAKE PEACE blah blah blah. And listening to it now, it still is. The lyrics are frankly shallow and even naïve, and while the minimalist piano sound is a nice touch, it's not really a captivating tune. But that's the main appeal of this album. The simplicity and the straightforwardness of it. Personally, there's nothing really special about it overall, except perhaps that it's made by a former member of a popular rock band. The ballads have a pretty nice sound, they have better instrumentals then "Imagine". "Jealous Guy" might take a couple of relistens and a dozen articles about him apparently beating his wives for me to appreciate it though. I enjoyed the Beatles remants in the rock tracks. The bluesy "Crippled Inside" and the slightly psychedelic "I Don't Wanna Be a Soldier" are nice surprises, although they're still pretty weak. Overall, this album is decent, albeit cheap. It only suffers from the fact that it's overhyped AF and that it's rooted in John Lennon's personal musings, and John Lennon and his personal musings are too easy to hate.

2000's music has an odd tendency to sound like nostalgia. Maybe it's the new century, a transition that baffled even computers during that time. But I felt that this IS what nostalgia actually sounds like. Snippets of familiar sounds that creates comfort despite the chaotic flow of the music as a whole. This really created a new perspective on sampling, leading to a number small movements later in the century. I can hear them here, the lo-fi hiphop, the EDM, even the nightcore. The cover art, which is apparently from a painting by Fred Dana Marsh called "Sinking of USS President Lincoln, 31st May 1918", was also "sampled" and turned into a dreamy painting showing two boats across a big wave. It really defined the album as a whole, sampling and reinterpreting many music and movie snippets to create such an emotional wave. It's been long since an album blew my mind. A new favorite right here.

1. Make a riff 2. Add lyrics 3. Give it a guitar solo 4. Repeat this 9 more times *also for some reason end the album not with an epic guitar solo but with an annoying repetitive chanting instead.

This is actually quite good, as far as these "hardcore punk" albums go. I like the riffs and the angsty energy delivered in the vocals. But there is a reason their peers didn't go beyond 16 minutes, with individual tracks seldom reaching 3 minutes. Hardcore punk songs are basically straightforward bursts of energy. make it a little too long and it turns into noise. PS. That's a pretty odd cover. I though it was an ambient-electronica album at first. I like it, it's not corny or pretentious like other punk album covers.

I'm excited to finally hear this popular cartoon band, and I'm not disappointed. It's fresh and unique, an elegant mix of hip-hop and rock. It's not hip-hop and rock in the same way as the exploding nu metal scene of their time with bands like Linkin Park, and definitely not the earlier hard rocking sound of RATM. Unlike those, Gorillaz are chill and carefree, without much angst. And of course it doesn't end there, they also explored more territories such as electronic and punk. As a whole, it's a compelling album with many surprises, albeit inconsistent. On my way to listen to "Demon Days".

☑ Terrible coverㅤ ㅤㅤㅤ ☑ Terrible voiceㅤㅤ ㅤㅤ ☑ Terrible instrumentals Kudos for the worst reggae/reggae+ album that I have ever heard.

I, too, wanna be a water if I can. Because water 𝑑𝑜𝑒𝑠𝑛'𝑡 𝑔𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑎 𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑛.

No. This is no Sgt. Pepper, this is no Mozart, and this is not the best of the decade. Not a huge fan of Michael Jackson but everyone would agree that he can easily blow this away. This is generic '80s pop. With zero special things in it. Hardly a must listen. Also, why didn't he just name it "The Hardline"? Isn't the unnecessary length of this album the reason he thinks it's in the level of "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band"? But don't get me wrong, it's decent, and it's getting a bonus star for that.

Nice keyboard and guitar bits, "Firth of Fifth" has such a compelling buildup that only progrockers can pull out. I would've love it as a whole, too bad I'm never a fan of all these glam rock-ish sound driven by such a charismatic voice.

Wait, so does this album imply that overproduced punk = glam rock? No wonder both genres can be annoying.

3 (that rubbery guitar) + 3 (the rest of the band)

As pure and loud as punk can get.

Experimental folk, aka interesting instrumental noodling that is constantly eclipsed by some annoying vocals.

Chaos and angst without emotions are just noise. Also, wtf is that cover art?

This is so lo-fi it's reeking of dust and musky dead wood smell. I love it. The quality of the guitars, the drums, and the vocals gave it a sincerity and vulnerability that I've always admired with folk. Too bad it's too easy to make this sound boring. It has incredible highlights, but the listening experience as a whole was quite a daze. Perhaps I need a couple of relistens.

Stellar post-punkish build-ups. Generic electronic fiddlings. 2000's indie rock at its funkiest.

Music for distilled water enjoyers.

With a striking 3-color aura and a ravaging blues-punk elephant of an album, The White Stripes is one of the most prominent acts of the 2000's.

John Barleycorn is the personification of barley, according to Scottish and English folklore. The events leading to his death are incorporated with the production of beer or whiskey. So that's why poor Johnny "must" die, for us to have booze. It's already evident in the title how much does this album cultivates from folk. It was a captivating work of folk-jazz, but it eventually succumbed into a generic '70s synthrock in the second half. Something died with John Barleycorn halfway through. Still, I understand that a fully instrumental album filled with all those jazz-folk jams would've be exhausting. Like John Barleycorn's journey, it has to go to the next stage. Ultimately, the booze hits pretty quickly, but dies down as quick as it hits.

A few days after the 9/11 attacks, a stranger in a car reportedly told him: "We need you now." I guess that stranger was right. At times like that, America needs their charismatic rock star who made the anthemic "Born in the USA". Yes, the mentioned track was misinterpreted as patriotic, and yes it was released in the '80s. But I can still see why some American folks would love this kind of music during those times. Today, however, this album, and Bruce Springsteen in general I think, sounds like Christian rock sans Jesus. Some tracks might uplift one, but the 70 minute track is overall a generic mess. Corporate feel-good energy. We don't need it as much as we did in 2001, and we definitely don't need to hear it before we die.

Unfortunately, no matter how much human flesh is stuffed in the cover art, the music stays as robotic as it is.

So warm, cozy, and soulful. Like a glass of wine in the solitary comfort of one's home. In short, it's Winehouse.

Had to double-check to confirm that yes, they're the ones who brought the '80s ballad "Hard to Say I'm Sorry". The radio staple is far from the jazzy rock sound of their debut album. And it's surprisingly decent, considering I'm not a big fan of jazz. The tracks are overlong, however. A daring move for a debut album, tbh. Strip it down a bit and it'll be a nice eclectic jazz-rock album.

You don't sound like a bird, you sound like a frigging kettle.

Sir, this is a Café Bleu. I mean seriously, wth are you doing?

Unfortunately, they're right, A-ha is a one-hit wonder. Fortunately, that MTV staple will always have a special place in me.

I actually liked the electric jug. My main issue with this is the fuzziness of the mixing. I mean it's very fuzzy I had to check if my headphones are broken. Setting it aside, I almost believed that the electric jug stuff is the only notable thing that this album did. But alas, it apparently invented psychedelic rock itself. So, kudos for that I guess.

Quite generic. But hey, it's indie rock. And it's not as synth-infected as other '80s albums. So plus points for that.

Somewhere between the colorful '90s britpop and the grey, melancholic '00s indie rock, this album lies with its epic pitch black indie rock goodness. But I don't know if it's the relatively outdated sound, or the whiny vocals, or simply the self-indulgence of it that turned me off towards the end. A more developed and concise version of this would've been a 5. Still, a pleasant surprise.

Somewhere between "Child Abuse" and "Corporate Record Company Bullshit Wank", "1977" brings a punk-pop sound that is so strikingly '90s that listening to it felt a bit nostalgic. Judging by their opener, "Lose Control", they could've made a good punk album.

Far from the generic nostalgia sound of "The Suburbs" and the synth infused "Neon Bible", "Funeral" is a masterpiece. Unlike its successors, this album achieved the genuine emotion-driven epicness, and perhaps that's what they've been trying to do again since. Never been a fan of Arcade Fire but this album is so beautiful.

One day in 1970, Marvin Gaye was like: "SEGGS!" Then, everybody turned to look at him.

Michael's little sister basically portrayed the world in the '80s, particularly the crimes, wars, drugs, poverty, and the weird pop obsession to synthetic drums. Only the last one is portrayed well.

I've never thought I needed a freaking conga driven Cuban rumba for my morning but here we are.

Not a big fan of reggae but this is definitely among the best one that I heard from the genre. I love the revolutionary lyrics (although I'm not a fan of that ignore-problems-and-just-dance philosophy), and the flow here is great and not monotonous. Bob Marley is such a gem of the genre.

I'm a sucker for Latin music. I'm a sucker for psychedelic rock too. I'm also a sucker for weird experimental stuffs I haven't heard before. This is literally a treat.

I get that they're trying to show that a bunch of hippie rockers like them can make a country music. They definitely can, but that doesn't mean that their generic and character-less set of country covers are enjoyable.

"Shake your money maker" is a pretty weird slang phrase. Of course I'm saying this as someone who doesn't live in a culture that uses such phrase. Still, I was a bit surprised at how generic it was. It's a pretty decent blues-rock album, but I'll probably remember 0 of those riffs. Maybe this shake your money maker thing is not as weird as I think it is. Is this what they call "dad-rock"? Christian rock sans Jesus? Maybe. Kudos from being a non-boring, energetic dad-rock of an album though.

It's an interesting mess of 3 genres, which are of course, not mutually exclusive. I like the Brian Eno-ish ambient bits, probably because I'm enjoying the recently discovered Brian Eno himself. I won't actually mind if they go full Brian Eno lite. The disco grooves and the synths gives it a unique character. Then we have those small rock or punk stuffs. It's actually lots of fun, punk with electronic-dance grooves. Quite an experience. Lastly, we have electronic dance. Not a big fan of this one, I'm afraid. It's ironic considering this is the one that gives colours to the other two in this album. Overall, a nice adventure. My kind of mess.

This album, with the plainest name and plainest covert art, is packed with interesting sounds and grooves. It's been a while since I head their debut, "Dummy". While the elegance of that is still evident here, the soulful samples and the chill, seductive atmosphere are stripped down. Making this a dark and anxious album. The messiness and the overly loud drums made it more ominous and uncomfortable. And I freaking love it. For me, the antidote for the robotic genre of electronica is to make it portray the mess of human emotions, dark or otherwise. Portishead's music is such a wildly adventurous one.

Another attempt to sing like a bird that ended up sounding like a kettle. Apart from the nice buildup in "Little Bird" and the folksy summer sound of "Clowns" (what the heck are those vocals though?), this album is a bunch of terribly sung folk tunes over forgettable electronica beats. So, yeah, the mentioned 2 tracks basically saved this from a 1 star rating.

Less concise than "One World" but less boring too. The opener is such a beautiful jazz-folk track. And how it instantly degraded into boring folk-blues or whatever that was is annoying. These mediocre albums with great openers are the worst, it makes me feel bamboozled. Have you ever watched a TV show with a nice pilot episode but turned out to be terrible? It was like that. Still, it's not offensively boring. I agree that "One World" might be better, but at least this album doesn't sound like a long boring trip across the ocean.

As cliché as it sounds, everything he touches turn to gold. The charismatic and glamorous personality is more evident here than on "Young Americans". Whether it's good old rock, or Brian Eno's ambience and slick electronica, or even that weird oriental rock tune, it's packed with such tight stellar-ness that I enjoyed a lot. Quite ahead of its time for a 1977 album.

At this point, grunge seems to be a U-turn from punk in a sense that they are bringing back the thick riffs and guitar noodling from rock that they despised and avoided. For starters, proto-grunge album "Superfuzz Bigmuff" is barely 23 minutes long, but with tracks being as long as 5 and a half minutes (Why can't you just show the original, non-deluxe album, Spotify?). But if one thinks about it, it might just be a perfectly logical evolution of punk. As some pointed out, they derived the muscular sound from metal, particularly Sabbath metal. Noting that metal and punk are born out of the rejection of the bright and noodly psych rock, it's logical that they may be mixed and work together. As an album, "Superfuzz Bigmuff" did show the formation of the Seattle sound from punk. I like the energy and the guitar sounds. Hints of Nirvana-ish sounds are already present. Overall, it's decent. But perhaps it's only an enjoyable listen if one is interested with its background and influence. We already have Nirvana ffs. But of course, while Nirvana raised grunge, bands like Mudhoney conceived it.

The Wall. The most popular album by my favorite band Pink Floyd, which is funny because this is basically a Roger Waters solo album in disguise, with Gilmour and producer Ezrin helping, and the rest of the band contributing a little more than nothing. The first thing that one will notice with this album is it's immensity. To begin with, it's a 26-track, 80-minute long double album. It has a lot of styles ranging from acoustic jams to disco-ish tunes. It covers a lot of emotions and atmosphere, after all, it encompasses the character Pink's entire life. Above all this is the denseness of its message. It's pretty deep and bursting with meanings. Dante's "Divine Comedy" comes to mind. Of course, "The Wall" is far from the epic poem. But I've only experienced the dizzying yet stimulating nature of "Divine Comedy" with "The Wall". In short, "The Wall" is not comparable to "Divine Comedy" but it blew my mind in the same way that "Divine Comedy" did. In fact, this album is my big turning point. It's my introduction to Pink Floyd, now my favorite band, and it's also the one that made me see what music can be in a whole new level. Of course, I can definitely see why some might not enjoy this dense story driven album. And I also agree that this is self-indulgent to some degree. As mentioned, it's a Waters solo album. And given the enormity and personal nature of this album, it seems that Waters wanted so bad to be taken seriously. This is evident on how he experienced the tours that they made. He was often irritated at their noisy fans, so much that he once spat on a bunch of them. Fortunately, his collective efforts with his bandmates and producers produced something that is worth taking seriously. "The Wall" has a knack at making the listeners experience the story and the journey of Pink. A demanding listen, but a worthwhile one. PS. > "Another Brick on the Wall Pt. 2" is far from Pink Floyd's best and is one of the most overrated rock songs of all time. The lyrics are shallow, the beats are cheap, and not even Gilmour's solo can save it. > "Comfortably Numb" will never fail to give me goosebumps. > One can ignore Waters's political views. But that doesn't change the fact that there are anti-semitic views fictionally expressed here, and that one of the songs has the old British equivalent of the n-word in it. > Definitely overhyped and even a bit overrated. Not among the band's Top 5 best album. Still, it's a 4.5.

This album is so much fun from start to finish, albeit in a dumb way. Here is a '60s band who don't take themselves too seriously. Of course, that leads to lots of potential problems. In this case, we got mediocre covers and way too much "WAAAAHH!". Either the mixing, the recording, or both are freaking bad. Though I like it, it gives the album a raw, no-bullshit atmosphere. Despite all these, it's one dirty and fun rock album. I enjoyed the experience.

"White Ladder" eh? What kind of album name is that? The album cover did not help. It's among the worst one that I have ever seen so far. Here we have a mundane scene of behind some sort of iron fence. In front there's a black square with a glowing diagonal line in it. What the heck is that? It tells a lot about the music itself. Mundane and annoyingly generic. My heart sank when I learned that I'm listening to another "folktronica" album. After that Goldfrapp album, I knew mixing folk and electronica is a bad idea. I enjoyed it a bit more though. I like the electronic tunes in some places, particularly in the moments where emotions can be felt. However, that does not necessarily mean that it's better than Goldfrapp's "Seventh Tree". The mentioned album is more inventive and less generic than this. This is some well-produced folk pop for malls, and it's evident with that voice. In conclusion, David Gray's album is, well, gray. I can accept the first track, but as a whole, it's another proof that the robotic electronica and the emotional, human folk is at least very difficult to marry.

[Wesley's Theory] The album opens up with some reggae-soul sample that goes "Every n**** is a star..." then suddenly hits with some beautifully complex array of beats. I get that a lot of people will be dazzled by such display of complexity, and maybe even the rampant use of the n-word. But this is a nice introduction to the album, a complex, dark, and exhausting album. I already heard this album a lot of times, and this is my introduction to Kendrick. Yet even now, it's still among my favorite songs of his. Far from the chill vibes of the rest of his discography, but still mind upliftingly good. [For Free?] This interlude is not something that I would casually listen too, but still, it's very fascinating. Here, we got a string of obscenities and profanities over a jazz track. Setting aside the humorous element of such contrast, there's a number of possible interpretation for this. But I'll focus on how Kenrick, the so-called "savior of hiphop", is pushing the genre to its limits. "For Free?" is far from the average hiphop track, song or interlude. It's some fascinating effort to explore, not to represent the genre. [King Kunta] A lot of first-time listeners, including me before in fact, unsurprisingly cites this as their favorite track off the album. It's no surprise, "King Kunta" is akin to MBDTF's "Power" and DAMN's "HUMBLE". It's popular, not necessarily because it's better than the rest, but because it's less demanding of a listen. Being less complex, it's easy to get tired of this song after a few listen. Personally, it may just be a demand for the album to take seriously, both in terms of buying it obviously, and in terms of listening to the rest of it's dense 80 minute runtime. [Institutionalized - Complexion] A huge chunk of the middle of the album. This is the meat, where most of the message comes from. Unfortunately, this is the section that I find hard to get into. While some songs stand out, it feels like every song is just the same Kendrick-rapping-with-a-weird-voice-over-the-same-soul-track thingy. Not a big fan of Kendrick's peculiar vocal style either. "Loving you is complicateHHHE!" is personally among the worst verses he ever did. The hooks are not that great either. I remember the thing about shit not changing "until you get up and wash your ass" and the stuff where Kendrick is babbling "BOOBOO!", in a bad way. "Alright" is a unique song in this period, although I'm not a fan of that repetitive rock-ish tune. I can see why it became an anthem for the BLM movement though. [The Blacker the Berry] Damn, this track is so good. I wonder if my relistens would include the whole album if it wasn't for this highlight. Basically, this is the album at its most emotional, the climax. A mind blowing masterpiece of his. [You Ain't Gonna Lie - i] The cool down after "The Blacker the Berry" is somewhat the same vibes as the aforementioned middle of the album. For some reason though, I liked these tracks. Perhaps it's the more positive nature of these tracks. [Mortal Man] Finally, the album ends with this complex 10-minute closer. Here, he finally finished the thematic poem that was being recited throughout the album, after that, he had a fictional chitchat with TuPac, effectively explaining the whole idea of the album. The conclusion, one might say. Whew! Pardon for such lengthy review, I decided that writing my mixed feelings about this complex masterpiece is easier done track-by-track-ish. As one can see, it's an exhausting, complex, demanding album. But it's art, enjoyable for me or not. A modern classic. Still, I will rate it based on how I enjoy it. After all, I'm here to listen albums, not to be a critic wanabee. Will it eventually be a 5? Perhaps, but as you can see, even now I'm still intimidated by this mammoth.

No, employing more production elements does not mean that it's "edgier". I don't really see it as a mover outward from the phenomenal "Thriller". Apart, of course, from the fact that it sounds like the filler tracks of "Thriller" being stretched into an album. As trite as it sounds, it's indeed bad. Basically the groovy "Smooth Criminal" and the rest is filler.

K

For the last time, overproducing an album does not make it sound "futuristic". Or maybe it does if one's perception of the future is where everything is robotic, colorless, and smells like bleach.

TIL just because it's called "college rock" doesn't mean it's suitable to listen to while doing lab exercises.

Surprisingly good. I have a weak spot for all these 50's-60's generic pop blues sound and Elvis managed to hit it in here, despite the usual lack of singles.

Punk rock opera. It's such an interesting phrase, and one that fits Green Day's massive album, "American Idiot". Apparently, more than just signing with a major label and being one of the biggest "pop-punk" act of the early 2000's, they made a CONCEPT ALBUM. With tracks as long as 9 minutes, complex structure, and big guitar and production tricks. Perhaps the only common thing between Green Day's sound and punk's general sound it the political and teenage angst dimension of it. That being said, it's a more demanding listen than I expected. Some tunes and lyrics are fire, but some are too messy to follow. I might listen to it again with more focus, but as of now, I'm not in a mood for some overblown punk rock.

Popular music owes a lot to disco, especially this album. So I guess it deserves the respect that it gets now. As a listen though, it's quite overlong and repetitive. Of course that's understandable if my guess that the practice of making lengthier pop songs began here. The story goes that disco DJ's find it hard to quickly switch discs since songs usually ends after 2-3 minutes. They need more time to find the next songs' discs. So the songs need to be longer. And how can a 3 minute song transform into a still danceable 6 minute whopper? By repeating the hook over and over again of course. It's hard to think that such a generic disco album is so revolutionary, but it is. Packed with irresistible grooves and carefree atmosphere, it's still an enjoyable listen and a quintessential disco album.

The thing is, almost nothing about its sound is new to me. I already heard all of these blues, ballad, and rock-n-roll tunes. And I don't really mind, as I'm a sucker for pop songs of this age. The problem is, "Chirping Crickets" is a big hit-and-miss. I see the appeal: those guitars made me feel sunny no matter how rainy it is today, and that voice has that urgency that I always like with blues and rock-n-roll. But some of the songs unintendedly border into being a parody or a cheap copy of other tunes. And even if these tunes came after this album, it doesn't change the fact that they are at least more preferable to listen to. So kudos for the influence I guess, but I'll only come back for a handful of tracks.

Folk rock: like rock, but boring.

It's tempting to refer to this as the sibling of "Ride the Lightning", better sibling even. Not really because it sounds like Lightning 2 but because it sounds like Lightning version 2. Lightning but more complex, more polished, and more epic. But that may only be because of Metallica's conservatism, making the albums follow the same pattern of tracks. Not to mention the overlapping themes. On top of that, the tricks and thrill of Lightning and Puppets are almost the same. Nice headbanging riffs, aggressive vocals, melodic section that catches one off guard, power ballads that ravages like avalanche, epic instrumental track, etc. So which one is better? The epic Lightning in bright blue? Or the wild Puppets in fiery red? I think it doesn't matter, because both equally blew my mind.

The first folk album that blew my mind. I know that folk artists are basically poets, but here Bob Dylan is on another level. I love the images and narratives that he conjure with the lyrics, and I regretted not focusing on them much. Maybe next time when I am not too busy. As for the sound, we got some delicious harmonica fiddling. Some tracks are bluesy and some have rock elements. I enjoyed it a lot and I know that this is something special. So while it tend to be boring sometimes, I think it will grow on me after a few re-listens.

Surprisingly good and inventive for a synth-pop album. The synths, and the songs in general actually, are a bunch of hit-and-miss. When they did hit though, it's very nice and groovy, they have the haunting synth sounds that I love about '80s pop. It's definitely a daring, albeit monotonous, synth-pop album. The popular tracks hit it, and they hit it well.

Sci-fi and futuristic themes in cute colors such as pink. I don't know what kind of aesthetic is this but I think I love it now.

Rating of each track (based on personal enjoyment of course): 01: 1 02: 1 03: 1 04: 1 05: 1 06: 1 07: 5 08: 1 09: 1 10: 1 11: 1 12: 1 13: 1 14: 1 15: 1 mean = 1.27 median = 1 mode = 1 standard deviation = 0.998 FINAL SCORE: 1

Without the sax, "Careless Whisper" boy is no different from other '80s pop-soul acts. Generic, pompous, and ironically not as sexy as they think it is.

Live albums suck, why do they even exist? I may like it if it appears to expand the tracks and give the audience/listeners a new experience with it, but they did not. These tracks are just the louder version of their studio counterparts, and apparently, critics liked it because their "energy" is apparent here. In other words, their studio songs probably suck. Also, while it has some decent, headbanging moments, the sound as a whole is still that annoying, generic, glam rock nonsense. Can't believe it's preserved at the Library of Congress. Some say that they pioneered hard rock and maybe power pop. Which is wrong, Led Zeppelin introduced hard rock to the world around a decade ago, power pop is associated with '60s acts such as The Who, while glam rock is seen as a fruit of some early '70s art rock acts such as David Bowie. Apparently, what they did pioneer are live albums, and like I said, live albums suck.