Before I even spin the first tune, I'll say this is a band I consciously avoided. Not sure why. Let's see if I denied myself something fabulous. Oh right... now I remember. Fred Durst may be the biggest little bitch in music. Jesus, he's insufferable. Did you know he doesn't give a fuck? I just Googled "how many times does limp bizkit say fuck on chocolate starfish," and apparently, the title track is noted as having the word "fuck" 48 times. So multiplied by 15, that's 720. So, I still listened to the album (how some of these songs have over 200 million spins on Spotify is confounding). "My Way" has something that resembles a hook, "The One" is actually not offensive or juvenile, and the blend of electronic and metal has promise, but the message in the music is so self-focused and inane, and it's so flat and uninspired, it's hard to endure. I guess some folks feel differently. Great. Makes me wish I rated When Teardrops Explode as a 2 because this sets the bar for a one-star rating. Next?

Damn, what a voice. And k.d. lang knows how to use it to beautiful effect. She's got an impressive range, but doesn't spend any unnecessary time finding reasons to impress with vocal acrobatics. She hits notes with authority, with a shimmer of grief even, when it's the right emotional pitch for the moment, and she sings sweetly and quietly when it's right. She sticks to her sweet spot most of the time, and there's a lot of it. She's a singular singing talent, to be sure. The production is just as spot-on as her performances. Great harmonies, expert instrumentation — not a sour note on the entire album. The only reason this isn't an easy 5-star is that the songs do blend together. There's not much of a change of gear from start to end. That's intentional, certainly, but that's the one key that holds me back from a "perfect" score. It's an 8.5-9 on a 10-point scale in my book. One weird point, how did "Constant Craving" get chosen to close the album? Seems like it should have been placed way earlier in the mix. Easy to say after the fact, but it's so clearly the most accessible track on the record.

Full disclosure, this is my favorite Joni Mitchell album. Haven't listened to it in a while, and never noticed the penis on the album cover before. Learning something new all the time. "Coyote" is such a great opening track. Lyrically, it is just fantastic storytelling, the bass tone and playing set the expectations for the musicality of this ensemble. I love it. "Amelia" has such a sense of longing. Mitchell has a gift for putting pain to melody. And on this album, it's the perfect lyrical blend — high-minded poetic construction that tells rich, beautiful stories. Whether Mitchell set out to create a concept album, I don't know, but there's something so cohesive about these songs, like we're spending a week on the road with her and the band. Quiet moments crossing the middle of the country. This album just transports me. I can listen to Jaco play like this all day. He's a master on the bass. And then comes "Black Crow," which is a clinic on how to be the coolest motherfucker on an instrument possible. Seriously. I get that this may not be her most accessible album, but it's brilliant. Road dick!

Modern listening experience on this one. Started with an MP3 at my computer (through external speakers), continued listening to a CD in my bedroom, finished the album streaming Spotify in my car. Without question, it sounded best on the CD, but that patented mid-range buzzsaw guitar came through in every medium. Found I enjoyed the album more than I expected I would. While I own this on CD, I always preferred Mellon Collie back in the day, so now I'm going to go back and listen to that front to back to compare. Nice blend of dynamics on this, though mostly defined by the angst-fueled signature wail of Billy Corgan — vocally and musically. I appreciated Jimmy Chamberlin's drums more than ever on this listen. At the end of the day, I find myself losing the thread of the song with The Smashing Pumpkins — it's more of a vibe than a collection of songs to me on this album. I remember moments, and a couple of standout tunes, but ultimately, three stars because I don't expect to keep going back to listen to the album. Sidenote: I once stood next to Billy Corgan at a concert in NYC, Ric Ocasik's solo band — dude is tall!

This is one of those albums that I probably have never listened to front to back before, but I knew every single track. Always appreciate hearing tracks in the context of an album, and this is an impressive collection of songs and performances. I know Stewart has made some choices in his mid and later career that undermine his standing as a pillar of pop/rock/folk history, but this album is evidence of his talent as a singer, writer, and arranger. As iconic a vocalist as he is, surprisingly, Stewart is not the best at harmonizing with himself — he sounds more powerful/musical when paired with another vocalist, and the women performing on this album bring it, big time. Last thing thing, for the hundreds of times I've probably heard "Maggie May," I somehow missed the amazing bassline in the tune until this listen.

I appreciate the band and what they're doing more than I enjoy the music — certainly over the course of a full album. I would dig these guys in a live setting and the arrangements are impressive, especially coming from a listener with a decidedly non-traditional-Irish musical background. But I was tired of the album before it ended, and while I think it merits more than two stars, I'll let Marianne's higher rating pull mine up to 2.5 or more. Glad I listened, I wouldn't have picked this out of the list on my own.

While this may come as a surprise, I'm not a huge metal fan. I sure do like my heavy rock in general, but I had this album on cassette back in the mid-'80s and didn't bother getting it on CD when I was building my collection, so that says something. But damn, you have to love the scope of these tunes. Everything is majestic, tight, and while the songs wind and stray, this band is fine-tuning the art of bringing it back to repeated and recognizable themes on this album and there is a musicality and songcraft that sets them apart from their peers. And Lars on drums is pretty darned good, in addition to all the other noise this band makes. This was the album that started Metallica's acceptance into the mainstream, which, unbelievably, did not alienate the band's ultra-dedicated fans. They found a way to maintain the metal majesty and attitude and just kept sweeping more people into the fold by writing songs that resonate and brandishing an attitude that straddles the best of metal and "popular" music. Even the cliché lyrics — sanitarium! — ring as honest, and I've grown to appreciate the dry drum sounds and how every instrument sounds isolated from the others. It's a lot to take in as a whole, but this landmark album holds up, in my estimation. Master! Master!

This was good music to work to, but does that make it a great, must listen-to-before-you-die, record? I'll admit, I don't know what sets a noteworthy trance/ambient-pop album apart from schlock, but I sometimes felt like this record was scratched. I'd be waiting for a song to progress to the next part and it felt like it just stayed in place. It might be the best album ever for its genre, but that's lost on me.

While I love some '80s English synth-laden pop (Duran Duran, Psychedelic Furs, A Flock Of Seagulls), there's a flavor of this genre that does not connect at all. This falls into that latter category, along with groups like Roxy Music, Depeche Mode, and a host of other bands that I sidestepped in my most active era of musical discovery. I had never heard of this band — the name alone would have made me avoid them back in the day — but I went into this hoping to love the album. Alas, not so much. "Second Hand" had a promising bassline, and there were plenty of musical moments that I was enjoying, as immersed in an early-'80s production sound and writing aesthetic as they were. Ultimately, it's the vocalist that made this a one-star rating for me. I was going to give it two, but I was repeatedly turned off by the lyrics, melodies, and choices, and then when "Use Me" came on, that sealed this as a one-star listen for me. Another album I'm glad I listened to, but not one I particularly enjoyed.

This is a difficult one for me to rate. I really do like the band, and maybe even more than that, I appreciate how innovative and groundbreaking they are. But, I don't know what any of these songs are about. I enjoy this album, more than the two preceding it, but OK Computer stands as the high water mark for me with this band. There is almost something deliberately obtuse about some of this music, which I also appreciate. I'm vacillating between a 3 and 4 on this (it's a 3.5 damnit), but saving a 4 for the Radiohead albums I'm more likely to better understand. So many great moments on this though — I love how Yorke uses his voice as another instrument in the arrangements.

Before I even spin the first tune, I'll say this is a band I consciously avoided. Not sure why. Let's see if I denied myself something fabulous. Oh right... now I remember. Fred Durst may be the biggest little bitch in music. Jesus, he's insufferable. Did you know he doesn't give a fuck? I just Googled "how many times does limp bizkit say fuck on chocolate starfish," and apparently, the title track is noted as having the word "fuck" 48 times. So multiplied by 15, that's 720. So, I still listened to the album (how some of these songs have over 200 million spins on Spotify is confounding). "My Way" has something that resembles a hook, "The One" is actually not offensive or juvenile, and the blend of electronic and metal has promise, but the message in the music is so self-focused and inane, and it's so flat and uninspired, it's hard to endure. I guess some folks feel differently. Great. Makes me wish I rated When Teardrops Explode as a 2 because this sets the bar for a one-star rating. Next?

Another album — another band! — I've never even heard of. Definitely a cool feature of this adventure. Punk was never a genre I particularly connected with, Siouxsie and the Banchees and a couple of others were exceptions, and for a minute, I heard a similarity with Siouxsie and Wire. That didn't exactly last, and I won't consider this a band I've fallen in love with, but they were cool and did this right — short songs, no bullshit, bing, bang boom. I did recognize "Strange," though it took a quick Internet search to realize that's because R.E.M. covered the tune on Document. Funny how those lyrics triggered that "I know this from somewhere" switch in my brain. And what the fuck did we do before the Internet? I was there, but what did we do? Just go crazy trying to remember things we couldn't look up in 12 seconds? I would not have put the R.E.M. connection together. So... a 2? A 3? I don't see me going back to this album or this band a whole lot, but maybe. I'm going with a 3. Right down the middle.

Piper Down is covering "Paradise By The Dashboard Lights," and I still have this album on vinyl (I think, gonna have to check). But when was the last time I listened to this front to back? Today, apparently. Let's go! OK, so I was planning to save 5-star ratings for "flawless" albums, and while I think "Heaven Can Wait" could have sealed it had it been a little less melodramatic, that's clearly the driving aesthetic sensibility of this album and damned if they don't pull it off. I'll admit, I thought Jim Steinman produced it, but this is a Todd Rundgren production and it's a real feat. The trio (Rundgren, Steinman, and Meat Loaf), along with some quality musicians, pull off a minor miracle in producing an album that's kitchy, over the top, and delivered with dramatic sincerity, while being clever, adolescent, and self-aware all at the same time. The album totally holds up, and stands alone in genre and classification. From the somber ridiculousness of "Two Out Of Three Ain't Bad" to the mini-opera that is "Paradise By The Dashboard Light," this album had big aspirations and managed to get it right over and over again.

k.d. lang is one of those artists I've always thought had something special going on but I never dug into her catalog apart from knowing some of the big hits (and she and Tony Bennett were the choice for Marianne and my wedding song). So this entry makes me want to go and buy the book this whole endeavor is based on. Why this album? I don't know much about her catalog, but I know this is not her best album. It's fine, it's like a glimpse into what she'd later blossom into as an artist, but this is pretty raw, not terribly well produced, and sounds more akin to a well-crafted demo than a shining example of an artist at her creative apex. So why this album? It's a 3 in my book, and just barely.

Well, I've been wrong about The Clash for a long time. I never understood why people consider them "the most important band" ever, and still don't get that, but I always thought they were just another punk-adjacent band who scored a few hits and were blown way out of proportion. I was expecting to not enjoy this listen very much. Turns out, this is one of those rare instances where the hit songs are my least favorite on the album (not entirely, but there's a lot more here than the hits). I was really struck by the quality of the songcraft, which was a major surprise, and also by how tight this band is. I wrote them off as being average players at best, and they decidedly are not (the drummer is really good). It's funny, the image this band fostered and the mythos surrounding them dissuaded me from checking them out, and I had a mis-perception of who they are. All that said, this is not entirely in my wheelhouse, but this is a 4-star album, and I have a new take on this band.

I really know nothing about jazz. I know I like it live more than on record, and while I own some notable jazz CDs, it's all about catching some killer riffs and solos here and there as opposed to studying the compositions and having any real understanding of the history or the significance of anything I'm listening to. So with Miles Davis, I know he's a pioneer, legend, visionary, difficult personality, brilliant player, but that's not because I listen to a lot of his music or know anything about how he changed the form over the course of his storied career. I appreciated the short compositions on this album, it made it easy to stay with a tune through it's duration, and I was struck by how every player seemed to be as accomplished as the next — no one instrument stood out as the focus or the virtuoso among the ensemble. I later read that these sessions were actually recorded in 1949-50, though not released until 1957, and are credited with ushering in a new style of jazz, called cool jazz. That all makes sense having listened to the album, and I guess I'm a fan of cool jazz. A three? Four? I'm going with a four-star as I can see me teeing this album up again and getting more familiar with it.

Wow. Talk about catharsis. I was not particularly digging the first half of this two-album set. Marvin Gaye is unquestionably in a special, elite league as a vocalist. I marvel at how effortless his delivery is — though he also went for some moments of vocal strain in places on this album. But the opening five tracks were like him singing his sad diary in real time with a divorce (I later read a little about the album and that's pretty much what we're hearing). So, from an artistic, "I'm leaving everything out here on the field" perspective, this is pretty bold and probably groundbreaking when released. But I didn't find it made for a great listen, and I was thinking, "this is the kind of material you might regret having released five years after the fact." Things shifted after that with "Everybody Needs Love" and "Time To Get It Together," and I started feeling differently about the album. Still, it's a little hit and miss, "Sparrow" was a low point, but as the second half of the album wasn't so literally glued to his day-to-day airing of grievances, I thought the material was stronger. It's an uneven record, in my estimation, and the hyper-focus on his personal upheaval at the expense of songwriting on half the material makes this a three in my book.

Oh no. Alright, let's see if I have a new take on this cat. Going into it, my bias is strong. I always found Morrissey impossibly whiny, verbose, and just plain unlikeable. Not the guy I'd like to get stuck talking to at a party. And god damn... another revelation. This album is pretty damned good. Morrissey is nowhere near the insufferable git I remember from The Smiths. I'm hearing a quirky crooner with a bit of an attitude and a penchant for the creepy, which I have to admire. The songs are fairly straightforward on the surface, which is just fine, as it lays the foundation for some cool textures and arrangements that are well done and interesting. And Morrissey uses his voice to great effect, with his melodies sometimes going in odd but familiar directions and his lyrics painted just outside the lines of what most any other writer might arrive at. I'm teetering on a 4, but thinking it's a 3.5. The fact that I'm considering a 4-star review for a Morrissey album is the most surprising thing about this endeavor to date. Couple that with McCormick going low on Marvin Gaye and Marianne buying Limp Bizkit merch and we're about to open a portal to the Upside Down. It's freakin' apocalyptical.

The sounds on this album are really pretty amazing. The breadth and depth of the synths, the vocal tones, even the synthetic drums, it's well produced for sure. I was never taken by the band's material, and on this album, while I found myself enjoying the ride more than I thought I might, I do not connect with the songs or the emotional pitch of Depeche Mode, which is why I've never really paid them much attention. Glad I listened, I appreciate the craft, but not an album or a band I'll dig deeper into.

It's difficult rating an album when you don't understand a single word of the lyric. I enjoy hearing this type of music. The interplay of the percussion is infectious, I can't resist moving to the rhythm. I was struck by the muted tones of the horns. No sharp edges at all, the horns were always a mellow, round sound. I also really like the dynamic between the lead and backing vocalists — the call and response was a feature I enjoyed and it didn't wear out its welcome. But all that said, I'm not sure how to rate this. I enjoyed it, but it's like an island in my musical experience, I have little else to compare it to. I'm going with a 3, partly because if I heard a track from this album again in any other context I don't know that I'd recognize it from any other song in the genre.

Another difficult album to rate, and not because I don't like it. I think these guys are brilliant, and this and "Speakerboxxx/The Love Below" are two OutKast albums I own on CD, but man, this is a lot to take in in one sitting. The songs are so dense, I need an hour or so to digest what I've heard after three or four tracks and then come back for more. It's hard to believe this album is 20 years old — I'm not a student of the genre (whatever genre that is... you try to classify them) — as this album would be pretty groundbreaking if it were released today. [Side note, this and Speakerboxxx/Love below won Grammies for "Best Rap Album," so that's how the "industry" defines them.] The effortless (and adventurous) mix of styles, the guitar solo and entirety of "B.O.B." is a great example, is a feature of OutKast that drew me in from the start: the band just doesn't sound or act like any other in the rap/hip hop space. Andre 3000 and Big Boi are like Prince's younger brothers, artists who won't let convention or precedent determine how to create music, and while I don't relate to every moment on the album, it is all really good. It's a long album, with a running time of 73 minutes (taking the CD medium to its limit), but there's nothing to remove to make it leaner, even the interstitial interludes work to give the album cohesion and flow. I guess that settles it, this is a 4, closing in on 5 territory. Glad I had the weekend to explore it.

Always cool to listen to music outside of my wheelhouse, and this fits that. I was focused on the bass and thinking how I'd tire of playing the identical riff over and over and over and over in this band, and that didn't aid in my enjoying the music. It also speaks to why this is not music I am drawn to. It's impressive, the band is really good, but the redundancy of the material wears on me. It's not my bag, baby.

I can't quite put my finger on what it is about this band I don't enjoy. I appreciate their honesty, but something leaves me flat with this band. As in the case of "Otherside" — I was thinking, "hey, this is a really nice tune," but before the song was over, I was less smitten. Kind of emblematic of how I feel about the RHCP. There are plenty of great moments, and while Anthony Kiedis is a singular presence as a vocalist (and Flea as a bassist), I prefer him when he goes with a "less is more" approach, and that's not usually his style. I also wasn't knocked out by the guitar work. I guess this is just not a band I love. I've had bandmates (bassists, specifically) who love this band, and they've been on my radar from early on (1985's Freaky Styley), but I've never been drawn in. I like them on a song-by-song basis, but not enough to go all in.

Going in totally blind on this one... "Your lunacy fits nicely with my own." That's a funny lyric. And that's a seriously strange outro (Sea Song). "Hey Robert, we're not going to be able to afford a trumpet player for 'A Last Straw.'" "No problem. I'll just sing the part. 'wah wah wah wah wah.' How was that?" "Fuckin' NAILED it!" "We're going to need a guitar solo." "No problem. Just record me tuning up." "Fuckin' BRILLIANT!" "I just binged 'Tomorrow Never Knows.' Hit record and let's play this song backwards." There is something strangely compelling about this. Can't exactly say I enjoyed it, it sounded like it were being composed as it was being recorded, but it seems like a peek into the very cluttered mind of a mad genius. This dude must be a trip to converse with. "Mr. Wyatt. Are you off your meds?" "I'm fighting for the crumbs from the little brown loaf. I want it. I want it. I want it. I want it." "So that's a 'yes'..." This is the first artist from this venture for whom I immediately listened to another album just to hear what the hell else this guy recorded. Pretty much a continuation of this album. I feel a little bad now knowing his story about the accident and his loss of the use of his legs just before recording this, but it seems to me that this artist would have recorded a similarly bizarre album regardless. I give it a tuna fish sandwich. A star rating just doesn't apply.

I bought this album when it came out, and it was on steady rotation for a while. Now — as I was then, I'm impressed with the songs, performances, vibe, and the sparse but adept production. The experience held up on this listen, the first in many years. This is just a plain solid album, and that's without delving into the fact that Kravitz apparently did most of it himself. I was never again enthralled by anything Kravitz released, he seemed much more focused on being a rock star that a music artist, and I felt the next bunch of releases were devoid of the things that made this album so great (good songs and honest performances). I've pretty much not listened to anything since 1998's "5," which disappointed me (I did buy the CD, though I no longer have it). But that's a tangent, this album is really good. 'Nuff said.

It's kinda crazy to admit, but I've never listened to an album by The Roots. I do know a little bit about them, and the blend of musical elements — from the live players to the hip hop and R&B flavor and a general disinclination to stick to any one approach — did not disappoint. I listened to the album twice, once with more focus and later as background music as we worked on the kitchen (currently being renovated, I can literally hear the nail guns and saws as I write this). Maybe I'm a prude, because I found that the predilection for sexual references got stale and that ultimately prevented me from loving the album. I enjoyed the less focused spin more. Musically, everything was really inspired and enjoyable, and this would otherwise be a 4+ star review, but lyrically I was less enchanted, which brings this somewhere between a 3-4. I'm going with a 3. Maybe there's another Roots album I'll love more. I'm going to give them a listen and find out.

With so many classic artists and releases, I realize that I'm missing the context of the work in terms of its impact and contribution to its moment in time. What sounds cliché now was novel at one point — things I take for granted in songwriting and production were at one point unheard of. I don't know if any of that applies to this album, per se, but I did find the production and ideas on this album a bit clichéd, certainly taken as a whole. Ultimately, while I'll assert (again) how much I admire Marvin Gaye as a vocalist, this album seemed to skid along the same vibe and subject matter — I didn't feel like the album took me anywhere. "Let's Get It On" is not a subtle reference, and it's used three times (including the album title) and then we have "You Sure Love To Ball," and it's pretty clear what Marvin had on his mind. I imagine this must have been pretty racy at the time of its release, for a number of reasons, but strip that away and I found this to be one long sexy track. Nice, but not an album's worth of interest for me.

Another one I'm going into with a pretty extreme negative bias. I actively dislike "Wonderwall," so I'm girding myself for this album. Immediate thoughts — musically this has energy. But I can't help feeling this is a band that's just trying too hard all the time. Maybe that's mostly true of Liam Gallagher. I had to skip through the end of Wonderwall because of his incessant wankering. How did that become the biggest song on this album? It's the weakest of the first three. 1.5 BILLION spins on Spotify. Confounding. By track #5, I've hit my wonderwall with this sound. I Wanda, if someone did an analysis, does Liam Gallagher hit and hold the same note in every song, because that's what it sounds like to me. The band seems to be running out of ideas... #6... fastest selling album in UK history? The same populace that brought us Brexit. Had to skip past it midway. #7... Oooh, lousy arrangement to add to the cacophony. Not able to save the unimaginative vocal melody. Skip midway. #9... pretty good, I made it about 80% through. #10. Paused. Breathing. Searching for videos of people running fingernails on chalkboards to cleanse my palate. This one has 1.2 million views, so not in the same league as Wonderwall, but respectable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13d5d6LVEpU "Champagne Supernova" is probably the song I liked most — disliked least? — despite the trite lyrics. Gallagher isn't as abrasive on that one. So yeah, didn't like it. Is it a one or a two? Gonna sleep on it.

As a serious David Bowie fan, it pains me to go with a 3 on this album, but there it is. There's a lot I like about this record. I love that Bowie is a pop music artist but there's not a song under four-minutes long on this album. There's also something so strange to this production, and I mean that in a positive way. For all the emotive singing, wailing sax, and perfunctory soul-laden background singing, Bowie sets an eerie, detached vibe to the entire album that's just so unique to him. The problem is, the material isn't awesome. "Fame" is one of my favorite songs in Bowie's repertoire, and "Young Americans" is just a great tune (what it's about, I couldn't tell you), but the rest of the material sounds like Bowie feeling his way through the Ziggy-to-Thin White Duke transition, trying to find his voice in this new musical experiment. It's part of what made him such an amazing artist — his willingness (compulsion?) to go to entirely new places. This record is just a curious choice for this endeavor, as I think Station To Station (the release that came after this) is just a flat-out better album. I will say, I think Bowie's coif on this album cover may be the look Donald Trump has been chasing after.

Damn, what a voice. And k.d. lang knows how to use it to beautiful effect. She's got an impressive range, but doesn't spend any unnecessary time finding reasons to impress with vocal acrobatics. She hits notes with authority, with a shimmer of grief even, when it's the right emotional pitch for the moment, and she sings sweetly and quietly when it's right. She sticks to her sweet spot most of the time, and there's a lot of it. She's a singular singing talent, to be sure. The production is just as spot-on as her performances. Great harmonies, expert instrumentation — not a sour note on the entire album. The only reason this isn't an easy 5-star is that the songs do blend together. There's not much of a change of gear from start to end. That's intentional, certainly, but that's the one key that holds me back from a "perfect" score. It's an 8.5-9 on a 10-point scale in my book. One weird point, how did "Constant Craving" get chosen to close the album? Seems like it should have been placed way earlier in the mix. Easy to say after the fact, but it's so clearly the most accessible track on the record.

I was nominally familiar with Harry Nilsson going into this — but here's one of those artists of whom I knew more of his material than I realized. In addition to "Coconut" and "Without You" (I'm most familiar with Heart's cover from their "Magazine" album), it's apparent Nilsson's influence is huge. Hard to tell who influenced who in some instances, but from McCartney-styled vocal melodies to Beach Boys harmonies, I also heard some Rundgren in there and imagine Ween listened to Nilsson as well. This is pretty inventive, non-formulaic pop that features as many song drafts as it does full-fledged songs (IMO), but that's all the more reason to admire the final product. This is cool stuff.

I've always admired Costello's craft as a songwriter. His arrangements are often unconventional, his gift for creating vocal and instrumental melodies is exceptional, and he's got an edge to his lyrics that gets your attention, even if I don't always know what he's getting at. I've never listened to this album in its entirety, though I was familiar with a lot of it. I didn't love every song, "Senior Service" as the second track seemed like a misstep after the haunting last minute of "Accidents Will Happen," but this is a really strong album. Despite Costello's range as a vocalist and gift for melody, he does have a vocal tone that tends to wear on me after 30 minutes or so, but that didn't detract from my enjoying this album (more than once) today.

I was surprised to see Fishbone's name among those included on this list. I owned "The Reality of My Surroundings" and "Give A Monkey A Brain And He'll Swear He's The Center Of The Universe" and saw these guys live a couple of times, but that was the extent of my explorations into the band and I don't own either of those CDs anymore. Let's do this. Damn, these guys are woefully underappreciated. This album deserves a 4-star rating based on the bass playing alone. I had to look up John Norwood Fisher's name because I should know it. He's badass. But it's the whole band. The blend of styles, the musicianship — these guys are on fire. It's at least a 3.5, but I think I'm going with a 3 because I like the songs better on "The Reality Of My Surroundings" (I listened to most of that right after this was done). It may be a matter of familiarity, though it's been a long time since listening to that album. These songs were a little more of a springboard for Fishbone's antics, and I definitely enjoyed it. I'll be listening to more from their catalog just to explore some more.

Full disclosure, this is my favorite Joni Mitchell album. Haven't listened to it in a while, and never noticed the penis on the album cover before. Learning something new all the time. "Coyote" is such a great opening track. Lyrically, it is just fantastic storytelling, the bass tone and playing set the expectations for the musicality of this ensemble. I love it. "Amelia" has such a sense of longing. Mitchell has a gift for putting pain to melody. And on this album, it's the perfect lyrical blend — high-minded poetic construction that tells rich, beautiful stories. Whether Mitchell set out to create a concept album, I don't know, but there's something so cohesive about these songs, like we're spending a week on the road with her and the band. Quiet moments crossing the middle of the country. This album just transports me. I can listen to Jaco play like this all day. He's a master on the bass. And then comes "Black Crow," which is a clinic on how to be the coolest motherfucker on an instrument possible. Seriously. I get that this may not be her most accessible album, but it's brilliant. Road dick!

I totally enjoyed this album — need a bit more time to get a firmer handle on it, but this band was like a perfect cocktail of a whole swath of British pop/rock/punk that came before them. It was as if I could hear every influence (well, there's plenty I wouldn't know) but it never felt derivative or phony. Dug the sense of humor, liked the overall attitude. Not necessarily music I'm drawn to — I'm mostly unfamiliar with blur — but something I was happy to get turned onto. 3 seems like a low score, but I'm not at a 4, so that'll have to do.

I didn't hate it. That's progress.

I genuinely try to understand what it is about Bob Dylan that gets everyone so excited. I mean, he's a hero to so many great songwriters over generations. So I went into this thinking, "If there's one tune I know by Dylan, it's 'Like A Rolling Stone,' and it's a great song, so maybe this is the album that's going to turn me around." Alas, I struggled to stay invested in "Like A Rolling Stone." By the time the fourth verse came around and there was no change to the intensity to the vocal and no deviation from the musical structure, I was starting to feel physically uncomfortable. The same thing happened in "Tombstone Blues." I was forcing myself not to fast forward to the next track. Dylan's vocal stylings are definitely part of the issue: I just do not enjoy listening to him sing. In fact, it's a more profound reaction. It agitates me. (There are other vocalists who do the same: Eddie Vedder, Van Morrison, Adele.) I also can't abide his harmonica playing. So let's face it, I'm not a fan. It is a dagger in the heart of my beloved, but we'll just have to live with the reality that Bob Dylan and Madonna will never be my cup of tea. OMG, the harmonica solo between verses 2 & 3 in "From A Buick 6" made my testicles pucker. "Queen Jane" has got one too. The slower tracks ("It Takes A Lot To Laugh, It Takes A Train To Cry" and "Ballad of a Thin Man") were more palatable to me, for what it's worth even though the title of the first contributes to my belief that Dylan has been playing everyone from the start. It takes... what? Honestly, respect for my wife and the songwriters who obviously hear this differently than I is what makes this a 2. I simply don't get it.

While the Foo Fighters, on paper, seem like a band I should be all over, I really don't know the band's music at all. I mean, yeah, I've heard some songs, but I've never explored their music in any depth. This is a solid album. When you take into account that Dave Grohl wrote and recorded the whole thing on his own, it's all the more impressive. But, man it's difficult to do that and come out with a masterpiece. It's been done, and this highlights just how complete a musician and songwriter Grohl is. It also explains why this is the Foo Fighters' album of choice for this project, as I suspect it's not the "best" from the band's catalog. But a "must listen" as an account of who is the foundation of this band makes lots of sense. Props to Dave Grohl, lots of good music on this album, and I'm inclined to start digging into the band. I was wary, considering every time they release something it results in multiple Grammy nominations — that just fills me with apprehension. My favorite work of Grohl's includes Them Crooked Vultures and Queens of the Stone Age, but maybe that's because I don't really know this band. I started listening to Wasting Light after this played out, and that was very promising. Rock on.

I wasn't able to listen to this album in its entirety, just a matter of a busy day, not a statement about the music. It's interesting, listening to older albums and hearing things that sound so cliché — in terms of songwriting and production — while recognizing that this was probably pretty novel at the time of the release. Hard to put myself in that place and hear it as new. That said, I was surprised to recognize at least one song ("Cool Water," from "The Ballad of Buster Scruggs") and found this to be a pleasant listen. Not expecting I'll be pulling this album out to spin just for enjoyment, but who knows? Robbins has a great range and tone as a vocalist, and there's something soothing about this music, even if it is about outlaws and gunslingers and the dusty trail.

From the outset, this struck me as a blend of Flaming Lips and Black Rebel Motorcycle Club and Beck — though I get that this might be the precursor to most of their music — and I'm not sure I like it. There are times when I dig a repetitive riff/melody/groove, as well as simple musical motifs that build and swell, but there's fundamentally something uninspiring to the base melodies on this that make me not want to go on the ride. It could be that this needs more time to percolate, it may require a more focused listen (which it did not get in my case), and it's probably better than a 2-star, but I didn't connect from the start and that's how I'm feeling about it.

Learning new things everyday with this experiment. I had never listened to blur before the 1001 album exploration, and while familiar with Gorillaz (my kids dig 'em), I had zero idea that Albarn was the creative force behind the band. So yeah, I dug this album, though I wasn't really able to home in on the details (we all listened to it in the car on the way to Dayton this weekend). I'm going to investigate the band further for sure, I think the concept of a virtual band itself is such a funky idea, and I liked what I heard, though I did feel like it played on longer than necessary.

Well here's another revelation. I've long been a fan of Pete Townshend, but I've never been a big fan of The Who. Daltrey and Moon — while I recognize and respect their artistry — have never been musical voices I've enjoyed listening to, and so I've never really dug into the band. But here we are, a gem hiding in plain sight. This is a bit trippier than may be my typical album choice, but this highlights so many things about Townshend's writing (in particular) that are inventive and distinctive. These songs are so unlike anyone else's music, there's a fierce assuredness to the whole affair. And a sense of humor, which goes beyond the album title and adverts within. This less bombastic version of The Who is one I enjoy. Moon's drumming is interesting, if not characteristically loose, Entwistle is brilliant but not overbearing, and Daltrey serves the songs, as weird as they are.

First impression... what a crappy album cover. Okay, I can't claim to know the details of Crosby's life at the time of this recording, but if Rumours stands as the high-water mark of cocaine-induced genius, this album appears to exemplify how cocaine can derail genius into rambling nonsense. The songs meander — one after the next — the recorded tones are not great (the solo guitar tone is awful), Crosby doesn't sound so hot. A 1-star rating seems a bit harsh, but I couldn't find anything that salvaged this.

Reggae is a genre of music I typically only enjoy in small doses. I appreciate, as best I can, the larger cultural importance of artists like Bob Marley, but when it comes to the music, I find that the similar tempos, rhythms, and song structures get monotonous after a few tunes. I think three (at least) songs on this album begin with that identical steelpan drum intro that is like the reggae version of the Intel logo — you know what's coming next. So with that caveat/admission aside, this is clearly a brilliant album by an artist in his prime. Lots of enduring classics, a band in great form, and an interesting blend of religious/social themes and personal stories of a man looking for love. I never considered that Prince might be a big reggae fan, but that juxtaposition of spirituality and sexuality struck me as I listened to the album. Whether or not I'm inclined to return to listen to this album in its entirety, I appreciate that it's really damned good.

I like the album cover. Fatalistic vibe, kind of the Bizarro Welcome to Asbury Park. First song starts... OK, it's the '70s I guess, different social clime, but still, pretty sleazy. Next up... maybe this is kind of sexy? But I'm not feeling it. What's up next? Nope. This is like all the stupid impulses of an asshole, serial cheater put to music. He can sing. I mean, maybe if the lyrical content were different. But even the songs started sounding similar. How did this album make this list?

Yeah man, this kills. Jeff Beck is just so damned good — just watch any live video of him playing and enjoy. Rod Stewart does everything he can to hang with the band — and he does a fantastic job — but honestly, he may be the least impressive member of the group. Mickey Waller, who I'll admit I didn't know by name (even though we've listened to him on Every Picture Tells A Story) is killer — there are other drummers credited (including Keith Moon on "Beck's Bolero), but Waller plays drums on the bulk of it, displaying the abandon of Moon and the control of Gene Krupa — or something like that. Just a great combo of chops and and a long leash and the musical intuition to know when to let loose and when to rein things in. Dug in a little after seeing Jimmy Page is credited as the writer of "Beck's Bolero," which on its face seems difficult to understand — whose Bolero is it? But I'm getting into the weeds... Beck is a magician on the guitar, and while blues is not my all-time favorite jam, this is excellent. The rhythm on "Rock My Plimsoul" is evidence of how this band can take a standard form and inject some grooviness that you might not even catch on a casual listen. And this is 1968. Love it.

No shit! I wondered if this would be the album of the day as I was getting dressed this morning. On the short list for my all-time favorite album period. It's not perfect, but it's a five. Twice. When I bought this on vinyl back in 1979, I felt almost a mystical connection to this album. Listening to it now is taking me back. Great headphone listen. At the time of its release (as a 12 year old) I was not thinking about what a wild departure this was from Rumours, the album that preceded it, the biggest-selling record in its day. But in retrospect, that album's success had monumental influence on what Fleetwood Mac would do next. I LOVE that the band, and most specifically Linsdsey Buckingham, went full-on White Album and produced the strangest follow-up possible. Double album, sprawling in scope, sonically a massive departure... it's the album where (IMO) Buckingham found himself as a producer. And to have the exceptional combination of talent to work with gives this album such beautiful depth. All of Christine McVie's songs on this album are fantastic. I love the opener, "Over And Over," and the swell of ghostly harmonies totally lets you know early on that we're not in Rumoursville any more. "Think About Me," "Honey Hi," "Never Forget," and "Brown Eyes" are gems, and even at her sappiest ("Never Make Me Cry") there's an honesty that just works. Buckingham, beyond the freaking magnificent production and arrangements throughout, pens some of the oddest pop songs on this album, and I love them all. "I Know I'm Not Wrong" is just magic, and "Walk A Thin Line" is equally excellent and odd. The fact that "Tusk" is the most enduring song on the album tells you something. Any other pop tunes feature jungle rhythms and a marching band? Not many. "Sara" may be Stevie's finest tune — hard to say, she's got a lot of great tunes — but what a mood she sets (again, Buckingham and the band have lots to do with that). But this is where my "not a perfect album" comment comes in. "Sara" apparently had 14 verses and a running time of 14 minutes when first written. Every one of Stevie's songs on this album tends toward excess in regard to sheer length. Each song on its own is pretty excellent, but an album (or two) full of Stevie in long-form gets a little tired. Still, "Storms" and "Beautiful Child" are both marvelous and sad and are reasons I was among the millions who fell in love with Stevie. Like, seriously. Mick Fleetwood is an underappreciated drummer. He always serves the song, and has an uncanny knack for accenting beats other drummers wouldn't think of. On this album, it sounds like he recorded more tracks in a closet with a snare drum and a turkey leg than behind a full kit. And so be it. That's the aesthetic of this oddball record. And John McVie is another unsung hero — player of myriad memorable bass lines — "Brown Eyes" is a great example of his ability to sneak a sweet bass line into a rhythm track and make a song better. I could go on, but you get it. I bought the 1001 Albums book soon after we began this adventure, and this was the first album I checked in on to see if it was included. So happy it was. I hope you all enjoyed it.

OK, so I didn't have a premonition that this would be the album of the day, but I was JUST thinking about a scene in Fear Of A Black Hat where this group of women, who are in a group called Parsley, Sage, Rosemary and Thyme are dissing Salt 'n Pepa – "they're only two spices... we're four!" So yeah, Nostra Calilhanus strikes again. My guess for today... Peter Gabriel... OK, that aside... 12 songs in 28 minutes. What is this, punk? As familiar as we all are (as humans) with Simon & Garfunkel, it's possible I've never listened to an entire album from the duo. And yes, it's great. Well written, beautifully sung, great arrangements, everything you could ask for. And it's an interesting blend of songs. For whatever reason, I'm trying to talk myself out of awarding my third "5-star" rating in a row, and after the hour-plus effort of Tusk, can a 28-minute album warrant the same? Well, yes, I suppose it can.

Unfortunately, I was not able to give the the listen it deserves — just too many meetings and work yesterday and this morning. That said, I own this album, so it's not unfamiliar territory. This is a mammoth endeavor, and chock-full of amazing material. To my ear, the hits leap out of the speakers with a greater intensity than much of the other material, which is as much a commentary on the serious nature of so many of the songs here. The two-punch wallop of "Sir Duke" and "I Wish" are just awesome — Stevie is at his best when he matches fantastic riffs with rollicking melodies, and those songs have that in spades. But this is a lot to take in in one listen — it's like three albums in one. That, from one perspective, is a testament to the brilliance of this album. But it is part of what makes this less than five stars in my book. It's hard to take it all in at once. But a great talent at a high point in his career and one that certainly belongs on the list of albums you need to hear before you die.

The opening measures of "Planet Telex,", with the bass drum keeping time with the guitar (keys?) delay is super cool. It's been a while since I've listened to this — easy to get caught up in the bounty of material that came after that somehow seems more "important" because it's so innovative and strange, but god damn, the first three songs are so great, and then comes "Fake Plastic Trees" which is immensely beautiful and depressing and dystopian — you feel pain for for the poor girl he's singing about and then about the dude singing. It's a haunting masterpiece of a song. And the performance, especially the vocal performance, is so moving. The melody and delivery give the lyrics a whole other level of weight and meaning. It's really really good. Up to song #8, "My Iron Lung," and there hasn't been a sour note on the album. Yorke and company manage to create an eerie sonic landscape that is at once totally cohesive and unmistakably them, but the album never gets repetitive — the songwriting is just excellent. It's something of a marvel. And this, their second album ... wow. (And not to dis Weezer, but as I was listening to this for the third time on Spotify, a Weezer track came on after, "I'm Tired of Sex," and it was like... "what form of art is this?" It didn't even sound like the same medium.) I'm way less familiar with Pablo Honey, but I can confidently say this is a quantum leap forward in terms of using the tools at hand to create music. At the risk of undervaluing the "5-star" rating — I feel like I've been throwing them out (I would like to revise my "Truth" rating to a 4, please) — this is as close to a flawless album as it gets.

This was an enjoyable listen. I heard sections that sounded reminiscent of Radiohead and Elbow — turns out Doves and Elbow are both from Manchester and both formed within a year of one another, so I guess this was the Manchester sound in the late-'90s early 2000s. I also heard a track that made me think of Simon & Garfunkel, which could just be a product of having heard them recently. I listened to this more than once this weekend, neither was a particularly focused session, which may account for the 3-star, but I think its more that while I enjoyed it, nothing landed as particularly striking. I'll likely listen to more from the band, but it didn't rise to the level of immediate connection the way Elbow did when I first discovered them.

First off, I love this band name. I've heard of them, I assumed they were more techno/dance/high-energy based on the name, but having listened to this, I know I've heard them before. Anyway, clearly not enough to have made me super curious. I like this vibe, reminded me of Morcheeba (not a band I know a ton about, either, but an album I reviewed years ago and kept as part of my collection), but much like Doves, while I enjoyed the album (I actually listened to it twice), I'm not a convert or on a mission to explore the band's catalog. It was cool — I'll probably turn them on if we ever host a party as vibey background music to set a mood. But that's about the extent of the impact the album had on me. Not sure if the live version of "Light My Fire" was on the original release, but that was pretty unnecessary and easily my least favorite track.

If there were ever an album that we, listening in 2022, can't fully appreciate in regard to its immediacy, honesty, and courageousness, this would be it. I just can't imagine what people thought of this when it landed in 1974. That said, this is a musical form that requires a lot of the listener. It's provocative, and "H20 Gate Blues" is particularly captivating, but after a couple of poem/songs, I found my concentration lagging and found myself missing what Scott-Heron was communicating. Is that on me for not being focused enough? On the performers for not being engaging enough? Is it a challenge of this format? Hell, I don't know. I am familiar with some of Scott-Heron (and Jackson's) material, though I cannot remember the last time I sought it out to listen to. For that reason, I'm glad this is on the list.

Truth be told, I'm still listening to this one, but I was in on the 4-star review early on. How do I not already have this guy in my regular rotation of music? I've been familiar with Nick Cave from just about the very beginning — I remember knowing who he was when I first saw "Wings Of Desire" (one of my all-time favorite movies and one I saw in the theaters when it was released ... Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds are performing in a club in one of the scenes). Anyway, point is, I've known about him since the '80s and never really explored his catalog. I've seen him described as "post-punk," which I guess makes sense, but he always seemed too cool for punk in my estimation. In the long line of tone poets — Dylan, Morrison, Smith, Waits, et. al. — this music and his songwriting have an immediacy and relatability (and the aforementioned "cool") that I totally dig. Definitely going to dive deeper into his extensive and continuing body of work.

This was an interesting ride. First time listening to this band, and I was swinging — practically song by song — from "this is a 2" to "this is a 4." Some of the material was really strong — great melodies, interesting songs, cool arrangements. Others were hard to get through — there were definitely times when the vocalists inclinations to vacillate between full voice and falsetto got to be a bit much. But it wasn't just the vocals. There were many moments where it just seemed like the band was trying too hard to impress with Mario-cart keyboard sounds and complex arrangements, and those were the times this album dipped to unenjoyable. I wasn't listening with the song list in front of me, so I don't know which tunes were the ones I enjoyed, but this is one of those albums where I could cherry-pick half the songs and put together an impressive album. But taken as a whole, this was uneven, at least as it relates to my personal tastes.

Here's one I don't get. This album gets accolades for being some work of genius, and I think it's terrible. I've played in some dumpy rock venues in my day, and I've heard my share of terrible bands. I mean awful. And this sounds like a lot of that — the band that's playing before you and, once they start, you think, "how the fuck am I going to get through this set?" and you have nowhere to go. Mediocre riffs, mediocre performance — and that's not even it. The whole point seems to be not to play well. In fact, I was feeling pretty certain that the players on the song "Ace Of Spades" were not the same as the rest of the album (it does not appear to be the case). "Ace" has a musical acuity to it that just disappears after the song ends. It's noisy as hell and just on the edge of musical, but the playing is tight, the tones are massive, and the riff's alright. Then "Love Me Like A Reptile" comes on and the whole things falls to pieces. Somehow, through it all, there is an honesty to the music, the band attains a sense of purpose and cool, which must be what people are reacting to, because the music is lousy.

I'm not sure what to make of this album. Throughout, it was like a splinter in my mind trying to figure out who The Killers reminded me of. I don't want to call it derivative — I mean, maybe it is — but it was more of an immediate connection to something I couldn't define. And it sounds good. Clearly this is a band that goes for big production. Big sounds. The one tune, "Somebody Told Me," reminded me of Blur's "Girls & Boys," and truth be told, I liked The Killers tune a bit more because it didn't hammer on that same lyric/chorus past the point of clever. But on the whole, the songwriting and production started melting into one another, and it began to be difficult to tell one track from the next. Certainly repeated listens and more familiarity would likely remedy that, but I wasn't enamored enough to want to dig deeper, at least not immediately. I'd be more inclined to delve into Blur's catalog, thanks for asking. So yeah. 3 it is.

From the first notes of "Deceptacon," I was already penning a review — "this is precisely the type of music that is NOT for me." I've never been a huge fan of low-fi production and aesthetic, unless in the hands of a really ingenious artist, and this didn't seem to be heading in that direction. But, then I paused and listened with intention, trying to set aside any musical prejudices. There's an undeniable knack for songcraft going on here. Some clever things are happening in the way the songs unfold, some interesting lyrics — you know, there are some decent songs here. And the drummer is pretty damned good. Tight, confident, capable. It gives the proceedings a grounded foundation. But then, there's the guitar. The tone is unpleasant. The playing is — well, it's fucking terrible. It was starting to make me a bit angry. It certainly made the album increasingly unlistenable, despite the other elements that were showing promise and taking this somewhere interesting. At the end of it all, I kept thinking, "why listen to this when I can always spin the B-52s?" So, this was a 2 when I first started listening, then I thought, "no, there's something better going on here," but the guitar playing brought this back to a 2. But it's a thoughtful, gentler 2. Can we call that progress?

This was cool. I feel woefully unequipped to bring a studied review to most rap, based on my lack of familiarity with the genre on the whole. But like wine, I can tell you when I like it and don't, even if I can't describe the subtleties I'm tasting. So it is with Method Man. I enjoyed this album. His smooth, understated delivery speaks to his confidence as an artist, the beats kept me moving throughout, and maybe with another few listens, I'll have a better grasp of what he has to say. I did peek in on the AllMusic bio and album review after listening just to ground myself a little more in where this album stood in the Wu-Tang chronology (this was the first solo album from anyone in the collective), and learned that Method Man and I share a birthday. He's four years younger. Ain't that a bitch.

If I were to have ranked Radiohead's albums in order leading up to this experiment, OK Computer would have topped the list. It's a captivating, moody, eerie sound of paranoia at its best, and it boasts notable, numerous classic songs. (Side note, Sylvia was present while I listened to this — more than once in the past 24 hours — and kept commenting on how this song and this song, oh and this song are popular these days. So yeah, this album has a good chance of being BIG). But damn, The Bends is all those things, and even better. So flim-flam! This album, great as it is, just toppled off the top spot from Andre's coveted list of Radiohead album rankings that doesn't exist into the #2 position. And since we're likely to hear another Radiohead album in a week, let's see what happens then. So yeah, loved the album, and now that there's a massive body of work piled on top of it from Yorke and the crew, you can almost hear the songwriting morphing in real-time from expert alt-pop to something totally new. Yorke seems ever more interested in exploring sounds (including the sound of his voice) in unconventional ways, and you can almost hear Kid A and Amnesiac coming as this album plays. But then, what to rate it? It's a fantastic album, for certain, but I'm surprising myself that this isn't an automatic 5. It's a four-plus, but in this case, I'm rounding down. Struggled with that.

From the stark paranoid android landscape of OK Computer, we come to the party-time metronomic robot blues/pop of Eliminator. What a weird premise. Super processed guitars, thick sequencers, Frank Beard's syncopated quarter-note drumming, and blues-infused guitar producing some of the biggest hits of the '80s. Not to mention the entire album centers around Billy Gibbons' obsession with chasing (and catching) dirty women. But when it works, it's really good. The super-thick-slick sound is an accomplishment on its own, and when the riffs are good and the songs are solid, and Gibbons' incessant guitar work is flowing, this kills. But then there's the rest of the material. Some of the B-sides are just fine, but when Gibbon's sings "TV dinners, they're going to my head," it's really clear that the band is out of ideas. Where most of of the misogyny and adolescent lyrics are delivered with enough of a wink to excuse it as one big party, the weaker material makes the high points a lot less glossy. When this is great, it's a 4+, but the weaker material drags this down to a 3.14159265359...

I don't know how to best articulate what it is about Amy Winehouse that I do not connect with. No doubt, she's got a range and her own style, she's got a unique voice and ... I'm trying to come up with more. Point is, I just don't enjoy listening to her sing. I'm sure this isn't exactly fair, but it just never sounds genuine to me. It's like she's playing at being a sultry jazz-inflected siren, but I'm not buying it. I tried to listen objectively, and this is clearly early work of hers, so you can hear her thinking through the parts on many of these songs—she's got the talent, she's still working on the craft. With another artist, I might have enjoyed the juxtaposition of the studio and live cuts of the same material, but on this I was annoyed that we were hearing the same tracks again. So, yeah, I tried, but I'm just not an Amy Winehouse fan.

So yeah, I was an early adopter of R.E.M. Right out of the gate I discovered Murmur, I saw them on the Life's Rich Pageant tour (Spectrum Showcase!) and I bought Document. They were cool. Then I totally lost my appetite for the band. Marianne suggested that it has something to do with a misperception that they "sold out" or got too popular, but that's not it. I was fine with them getting popular. I just didn't like the music they were making anymore. I pin it on Michael Stipe, but it may be the whole package. The songs were just not appealing, Stipe, certainly, seemed to take himself way too seriously now that people were paying attention to him. Whatever it was, I stopped paying attention. So strangely, as familiar as I am with the band, I didn't know this album. Yes, I'd heard some of the songs, "Man On The Moon" most notably, but I had no idea what was on this album and I turned it on hoping that maybe I'd have an epiphany and realize I was being an asshole and the band was just awesome. Yeah... no. "The Sidewinder Sleeps" into "Everybody Hurts" made me want to punch my dog. I love my dog. I did not succumb. But the urge was there, and it was R.E.M.'s fault. For that, this album gets a 2. It's teetering on a 1. But I'm trying to be my most generous and kind self.

I enjoyed this album. I was drawn in by the recurring theme of personal reckoning and the honesty of the lyrics, though I'd guess the narrator and everyone he consorts with are folks I'd rather not have in my life. Lots of scoundrels. The album was hovering somewhere between 3–4 for me, never quite reaching 4 as musically this didn't have enough diversity to surprise me after the third song. I also did not like the harmonies. I couldn't tell if it was the singer doing his own purposely awful harmonies or some other band member who shouldn't have gotten a microphone, but that was a bad arrangement/production choice. I don't care what the aesthetic. Boo. Never listened to the band before, though the name is familiar. Now I have.

It's been at least 30 years since I've listened to this record — though I heard "Blister In The Sun" in a store or somewhere just the other day — and I remembered more of it than I expected. This struck me as such a wild departure when it was released, acoustic punk with a sense of humor, and I liked it then, but I considered it something of a novelty record. But it's really a good album. The songs hold up, the playing is better than you think it is, and lyrically, there's a lot to like. I was a bit reticent, thinking this was not going to live up to my teenage memories ... why can't I get just one fuck? How subversive. But this is no novelty record. It's definitely affected and not right for all occasions, but it's good, for real.

As I know Scott is an avid Beach Boys fan, this one is hard for me. And it's not just Scott — so many people consider Brian Wilson a genius and the Beach Boys some sort of transcendent band, and I don't understand it. I continue to try. So this is not me shitting all over the band so much as trying to explain what I'm hearing. Harmonies. No doubt, the harmonies on any given song are impressive. But after three tunes, it's like everything is just cranked through the 8-part Beach Boys harmony machine and it all starts to sound like an endless, meandering "oooOOOooo." Themes. Did these guys ever actually grow out of high school? I guess it's a sign of the times, but the infatuation with girls makes it hard to take the music seriously. Lyrics. They sound so desperate to be cool, they drop every catchphrase in the parlance of the times. If they had just laid down one "Daddy-O" my Beach Boys Lingo Bingo card would have been full. And on what is easily the most enjoyable song, "Help Me Rhonda," I was struck by the actual message of the song: "my fiancée dumped me and I'm brokenhearted, but you're pretty hot and if you blow me, I'll forget all about her." I mean, that's a pretty coarse interpretation of the lyric, but it ain't wrong. I was going to give it a 2, but I'm hovering over the 3. Help me Rhonda!

As if the star rating didn't say it already, this was a dramatically more enjoyable experience than listening to "Automatic For The People." While I struggled between a 4 and 5 on this one, this represents REM at it's peak, IMO, so it gets the 5. It's the most benevolent blend of Michael Stipe — you can understand the words he's using, but I still don't know what he's taking about, and he's painting just outside the lines of his range and sweet spot as a vocalist. The pacing of the album is excellent, paring REM at its most playful (End Of The World) with its most earnest (The One I Love) — at least on this album — and it all works really well. It's also the band at its best in terms of sharing vocal duties. Whoever produced this did a good job with the talents of the band members. Bill Berry's drums sound great (love the gated bass drum on "Lightnin' Hopkins"), Michael Mills is used to his best effect, Peter Buck has loads of different guitar sounds going on — good stuff. This, for me, is where everything coalesced and it never got better for the band.

Lana Del Rey was mostly unknown to me, so this was my introduction. She can sing when she chooses to — the barely audible squeaky delivery was not my favorite — and I really liked her harmonies and musical arrangements. The songs tended to dwell on the same parts longer than they needed to — I felt like she beat every good lyric into the ground. I spent the first half of the album waiting for it to kick into gear, until I realized this was the gear, an album of songs to sing while sleeping. OK, not super exciting. With a 2021 release date, for it to have made this list, I was expecting something a little more memorable. But I literally laughed out loud when the album ended. After penning an album chock full of album closers, to end on "For Free," decidedly the least-suited to the task, cracked me up. (That was probably my favorite tune — the melody was very reminiscent of Joni Mitchell.) Maybe that's Del Rey's sense of humor. I get the impression she lives her life faster than she sings her songs.

I wasn't able to give this the listen it deserves, but I liked what I heard — propulsive and smart, lots to home in on in the production. It did suffer from one of my recurring issues with hip hop and rap, which is that songs start blending together. The drum beats and sounds were similar throughout, which invariably makes the tracks sound similar and that becomes less interesting as the album rolls on. But, considering the short shrift this one got, I'm rolling down the middle and will revisit another day.

Listened while working — this music is timeless. Hard to believe it's from 1959 and still sounds so cool. Miles' trumpet is one thing, but Coltrane's sax just rips through the mix when he's playing. And then there's Cannonball Adderley, which is about the coolest name you can have. The bass also drew me in. I'm not sure what it'll take to get a 5 from me on a jazz album, I guess I'm waiting to find out. But this is excellent .

I really enjoyed digging in early Who with "The Who Sell Out." This one was not nearly as enjoyable. The hits saved this album from being a middling exploration of blues and early rock—in fact, they sound like they came from another era, a glimpse of where the band would be at its best. The rest of the material was sporadically interesting when there were moments that hearkened to brilliant musicianship and how the band would evolve, but I don't think I'll be queuing this up again. And what's with the aerial photo in the industrial chemical factory? It's a 2.something, but "My Generation" and "The Kids Are Alright" are bumping this up to a level 3.

I had never listened to a Bon Jovi album coming into this, though I had a fully-formed opinion about the band (and its frontman). In this case, that has been thoroughly reinforced having sat through "Slippery When Wet." Jon Bon Jovi has a vocal range and a timbre made for this style of hard-edged pop-rock. Great range — dude can sing. When the songs are at their best — you know the mega hits — they're just fine. You've learned the melody by the end of the first chorus, you can sing along by the time we're midway through. Made for radio (MTV), it's easy to understand why these were popular songs. It doesn't make them any less silly. "You give love a bad name" was always just shy of clever — like a framed embroidery you might buy at the Cracker Barrel shop. Feed the masses something that tastes like food but is mostly devoid of substance. What surprised me was just how much of this album I recognized. So, a 3-star rating for how deeply this burrowed into the collective consciousness. But Bon Jovi has been elevated to a status beyond his merits. He's deserved to enjoy a nice life based on his massive sales and popularity. But he's revered as some sort of songwriting genius, and that's taking this music too seriously. "Love is a social disease" might make for a line that makes you smirk upon hearing it, but it's no great revelation. I guess that could have been my entire review.

I enjoyed this — dug the positive, provocative, no apologies nature of the material. The cameos and interstitials created a narrative feel to the album — this seems designed to be listened to as a whole. It's an album that will require more listens to fully appreciate, and I'll circle back to Solange. This was my introduction. Thanks Merryanne's Sound Machine!

I need a documentary or long-form explanation of how Parliament, Funkadelic, P-Funk, et. al. intertwine, but for the moment, I'll voice a generalized impression that the whole Funkadelic universe was more influential and impactful than it gets credit for. I heard so many elements that seemed to filter into later music — Sly and The Family Stone and James Brown and others deserve similar credit, as well (and get it) — and George Clinton has a singular ability to make a record sound like a party. With a funky backbeat. I think a 3-star rating is under selling this album, but it was hampered by the opening title track, which I didn't really get the point of, and my need to listen more (and more intently) to the songs to really appreciate what's going on here.

This was a hard one to rate. I LOVED the bass on this album (drums too), loved the verses, loved the up-tempo R&B attack. I've got a "best of (soul years)" collection from Bobby Womack, not one of these songs are on it, and none of them pack the punch these songs do. His singing is killer. Strangely, from a songwriting perspective, I thought every chorus on the record (with an exception or two) was overshadowed by the verse. The verses flowed and rolled and were just fantastic and then the chorus came in and the energy dipped. So, this was an easy 4, but that hampers it, as does the song order. Why stack the three slow numbers at the end like that? All three songs are just fine (though I'd have preferred one more rollicking track replace one of them), but the album comes to a screeching halt before it's over. So, at its best, this was bangin'. But it's far from perfect. Hell, I enjoyed it a lot. 4 stars.

I wouldn't have counted myself a fan of CCR, though I feel like I know a huge section of the band's catalog. CCR sounds like quintessential America, like they crawled out of the bayou one humid summer evening as a fully-formed unit. The fact that the band's roots are in San Francisco aside, this is a great album. No player is a virtuoso, but the band is confident and can jam and extend a song and make it a wild and interesting ride. And while John Fogerty's singular vocal style is unmistakeable and dude's got a gift, it does have the capacity to be a little grating. Thankfully, the pacing of the album and the strength of the material means every sonic element is doled out in just the right amount at just the right time so it never becomes a detraction from enjoying the album. Had you told me the highlight of any album was an 11-minute exploration of "I Hoiyed It Through The Grapevine," I wouldn't have thought that a good idea, and while it may not be the highlight, it's a standout track that anchors the record. So... as I write this, it sounds like a 5-star album, though I'm giving it a 4. I'd like to blame that on "Ooby Dooby," (I had to look that up, I was going to write "Oingy Boingy"), but I think it's just residual predilection for not loving the band. But this is a great album, and may be even more impressive considering it was the fourth of five albums the band released in a two-year span.

Having listened to a couple of early albums by The Who, the significance of "Tommy" really comes through. The scope of the album, the vision of Pete Townshend, and the ambitions of the band are big and eccentric and you can understand why this is a landmark album for the band and for rock and roll music. When the band is brilliant on this, they shine. The interplay of the vocals is masterful, the harmonies on songs like "Tommy Can You Hear Me?" are fantastic, and Keith Moon proves he's got chops for days. Not to mention, what an out there premise this entire album rests on. 10 stars for creativity and commitment to an artistic ideal. But there's a lot of dead weight, and for all his stellar abilities and singular voice on his instrument, I was so tired of Moon's drumming by the 3/4 mark that it detracted from the album. It encapsulates my admiration/repulsion to this band. There's no question that there's genius at work in so many elements of this band, but somehow, some of that genius is what undermines my enjoyment. I know this is better than a 3-star album, but I can't imagine a time when I'll be looking for something to listen to and decide to listen to this from start to finish. That's why it's a 3-star in my book. A brilliant 3.

There's a time in my life where an album like this might have made me angry — just the sheer disinterest in performing at a level of competence on any given instrument would have rankled me... why waste my time with your music if you won't take a little of yours to figure out how to play your instrument? I'm way past that, I can appreciate (and enjoy) the appeal of a punk-tinged art-splattered indie garage band vibe with limited acumen on instruments and vocals. But for it to be an enjoyable or satisfying listen, the material has to be stellar. This starts off with some promise, the first three songs are compelling enough, but it dissolves as the album progresses and the material gets more hackneyed and repetitive and ultimately, uninteresting and, finally, just noisy.

I thought something must be wrong with the streaming service. What could make an album sound so terrible? Looks like this was the band's intention. It's unlistenable.

I recently heard an interview on the radio with Don McLean. He seems like a genuinely sweet guy. That said, I cringed when this album showed up as the album of the day. I have a running list of "songs I never need to hear again in my life," and "American Pie" tops the list. [Notable others, as I'm sure you're super interested to know, include "Brown Eyed Girl," "Sweet Caroline," and anything that falls out of the mouth of Jimmy Buffet.] The song is 5:30 longer than necessary, it's ponderous, I've heard it way too many times... I'm beyond over it. I skipped it when listening to this album so that I wouldn't start off in a foul temper. And... Don McClean strikes me as a genuinely sweet guy. He's got a lovely singing voice. His songs are perfectly nice. I'm sure his intentions are pure. 3 stars because the title track is an iconic song that I could sing 80% of the words to despite not having heard it since college (aka, a long, long time ago).

I enjoyed this album. There were definitely times where the tracks got repetitive, and there were lots of noises that didn't always contribute positively to the listening experience, but I liked the interplay between the rappers and the tracks and the content from start to finish. I wasn't listening to this back in the early '90s, but I recognize this must have been a bold statement when it was released.

Pretty cool that the day's listening included Public Enemy and Weather Report. So this album — damn, some of the playing is otherworldly, particularly the bass. Tones of the instruments are also really great throughout. When this is at its best, this is sensational. I appreciate the jazz genre tucked into a slightly more structured song format. At times it's too structured, and self-aware and indulgent, but then, if I could play and write and execute these parts, I'd push myself to do it. These guys are playing things — individually and as a group — that not many can. So, perfect? No. Too indulgent and showy for that. Brilliant? Yes. And at its best (the opener, "Birdland" for instance), this is magical.

I went into this completely blind — no idea what this was about, no idea who the artist(s) is, I even skipped looking at the release date. I totally enjoyed the album. Took a hit, geared up, took Tophee on a chilly walk after sunset along a dark country road, and listened to this album. I found it inventive, loved the variety of styles, I appreciated the lyrics and message. There were some compositional elements that got a bit overworked, but that's a negligible criticism considering the scope of the material.

My reaction to this album today is pretty much identical to my reaction when this first came out. I had friends who were intensely into this album, so I was familiar with it, and back then, as now, my overwhelming thought was, "Jesus, man, lighten up." So yeah, I get this is supposed to channel extreme angst and anger and — how the hell am I supposed to know what Trent was going through? Anyway, the sounds are good and he's certainly created a vibe and a mystique and an empire by this point, so good on him. But this is too noisy and overwrought for me to enjoy. Even the "hits" are just too much. I don't relate.

Live rock albums are rarely excellent, in my estimation. Jazz and blues and classical music recorded live has a much better chance of capturing the scope of the event. Not the same as being there in the moment, but you get close to the full experience. With a stadium-sized rock show, with no visuals, live albums almost always leave better than 50% of the experience behind. So it is with "Made In Japan." Deep Purple was possibly the biggest-sounding rock band in the world in 1972 — they were certainly among them — but this album doesn't recreate that sound. Ian Gillan on vocals deserves a 5-star on his own, you can hear the intensity of his performance, and he's one of the all-time greats, just being able to ride atop the massive sound the band is churning out is a feat — and he wails with the best of them. Ian Paice on drums is also in great form on this album, as is the rest of the band. But the throb of the organ, the bite of Blackmore's guitar, the bass... they just don't bring the noise on this recording. And while this is a bygone era, drum solos are almost always a bad idea, and the band spends so much time exploring jams and super-extended flights of fancy — is it really necessary to add solos on top of that? There's too much noodling, and combined with the sub-excellent translation of the live show, what could have been a concise wallop of an album meanders and seems to lack focus, even if the live show itself didn't. It's a 4-plus for the intensity we're not getting to hear, and for including the definitive version of "Smoke On The Water," but the other detractions weigh this album down. I guess they included the live album on this list because it highlighted the best of the band's material at its most awesome, but I bet a studio album from this era would have earned more stars.

What a brilliant freaking album. Iconic pop from the '80s but wholly unconventional. Fantastic blend of guitar and synths. Great mix of male and female contributors. Every song is interesting. Portrait of a profoundly gifted musician at an artistic apex, fearless, free, just overflowing with talent and songcraft and studiocraft and it all comes to a fine point on this album. And while this is really the first time the Revolution gets in into the mix, Prince orchestrates every note — and it's all for the good. It's almost cliché to love this album, but that doesn't make it any less amazing. I always appreciated the flow of this album, from the party-time opener to the strange drum-driven intro of "Take Me With U" to the "Beautiful Ones," which is a beautiful track, to the odd "Computer Blue" that goes on its own unpredictable journey. I really enjoyed "Darling Nikki" on this listen, more than I expected, and it struck me that "When Doves Cry" must be among the songs I've heard most in my life — like all-time number of times I've heard that song — and damned if I wasn't keying in on things for the first time. There's a guitar line that's moving underneath, and I love the extended version (as opposed to the single version). And somehow, "Purple Rain" might be my least favorite song ("Baby I'm A Star" was always one of my faves) in this mix, and yet it's like the best song ever when Prince played it at the Super Bowl. (Treat yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WYYlRArn3g) Damn, I miss Prince.

This was a decent effort, nothing particularly interesting or exceptional, nothing specifically unlikeable. But I kept asking myself, "why this album on the list?" What's special about this? We'll get plenty from Eno as a producer before we're done, why include this album of his music?

Hey — thanks Nicole. Seeing you rate albums that were served up earlier made me realize this was possible. I listened to this album when it appeared in our feed, but I was late to the party to review and was shut out. Great album, might be a five-star if this weren't David Bowie whose body of work sets a high bar, and somehow that seems to factor in. Iconic as it it is, I don't love "Five Years," so opening with that sets me off on shaky ground. But god damn, Bowie sure found his Ziggy spaceman groove on this album and puts on something of a alt-songwriting clinic. What a fantastic artist, love this guy.

Great guitar playing on this album, harmonies too. Such an unmistakeable sound to The Byrds, though I'd never listened to a complete album by the band. Sometimes the lyrics would wander into hackneyed territory, but that wasn't enough to detract from the enjoyment. Solid songs, clearly an influence on artists to come, good stuff.

I guess this is an "early" James brown album, even though he had ten releases before this — I think he has 250 since. Maybe an exaggeration, but dude's got a deep catalog. The material I'm more familiar with, his later more renowned music, I find a bit tedious. I hear what makes him a revolutionary artist, but the repetition just wears on me and I don't love it. This album is largely devoid of that — so many elements of Brown's artistry are intact, but it's so clear how bad-ass he is, and the band is killing. As I mentioned in an earlier review (Deep Purple), live rock albums are rarely excellent, but here's a good example of an exception. The band is minimized a bit by the recording, but the recording captures other elements that make it clear that the band was rockin', the room was rockin', and there was something special going on. I also love the rawness of the performance. He's not nearly perfect as a singer, there are lots of things that might have gotten a retake in the studio, and modern music may not allow for the "flaws" in the performance, but he lets it all hang out because James Brown is capable (and willing) to go places others may not dare to go. Another artist with a troubled story off-stage, but gee whiz, there's something magical going on when he's on it.

Here's one that requires a .5 star option (3.5 in this case). I watched a documentary about Alice Cooper not long ago, worth watching if you like the band at all, and it gave me a new appreciation for the singer and the band. Hard to distinguish, but the band was called Alice Cooper, and later on, the singer took on the name... so, for this album, the band is Alice Cooper. But you probably already knew all that. Anyway, my younger self chalked AC up to something of a novelty act, but as I've listened to more of his/their music, I recognize there's more craft going on than I originally realized, and Bob Ezrin (who produced a few of the albums on this list) deserves some of the credit for that. So, yeah, this was a fun listen, the ending vamp of "Public Animal #9" was pretty funny and I thought of Scott as the "West Side Story" cover played — I appreciate Cooper's sense of humor, which is an integral part of what makes this music enjoyable. All that said, I don't think it's quite a 4, so a 3, but we all know that's really 3.5. [Side note: my favorite AC album, Welcome To My Nightmare, is not on the 1001 list and is a 4.5-5 in my book.]

Surprisingly, I have never listened to an entire Iron Maiden album, so I was glad to see this come up in our feed. I was wary to find it was the band's first album, before Bruce Dickinson joined and likely before they had really found themselves. But there had to be a good reason for choosing this album, right? Well, color me confused. There were moments that spoke to something special going on, notably some of the extended instrumental passages ("Transylvania" comes to mind), but more often that not, I was wincing at the uninspiring guitar riffs and predictable vocal melodies (e.g. "Charlotte the Harlot"). Match that with what was likely bargain-basement recording access and I found the album less than fantastic. I'm looking forward to "Number of the Beast," the second of Maiden's albums on the list, hoping that might help me better understand what puts this band in the top echelons of metal. This album didn't do that. It's a 2.5 for it's better moments, but since I rounded down for Alice Cooper yesterday, this one's at a 2.

This album sounds great. The production, the recording quality, really crisp and expansive (and I was listening on earbuds). While this seems to conform to the standard EDM aesthetic (not that I am in any way an expert), The Chemical Brothers have a knack for building an ebb-and-flow into the compositions. I wouldn't call it lyrical, but there's an arc to the songs. That said, is this music anyone actually listens to in album form? I think it was Andy who made the comment (Fatboy Slim review?) that this is music to get people on the dance floor and moving, and I can see that. But I can't imagine deciding to spin this album as something to listen to on its own merit. I also don't understand the album cover as it relates to the music/vibe. Is it wholly ironic? Are they making a statement? Do they hate hippies? Is there an acoustic guitar anywhere in this mix? So, a 4 because it seems like top-notch electronic music. But I don't know that I need to listen to a whole lot more of it in full album format. Just when I'm raving on a packed dance floor, which happens like... Amsterdam 2001.

I was all over the place listening to this album. I'd be impressed by the ambition in the songwriting, amused by the quaintness of it all, moved by the sincerity of the vocalists, embarrassed by ideas that didn't quite work, and bemused by how helplessly mired in 1967 this album is — all within the span of a song. This is music begging to be made into a mocumentary. I didn't exactly like it, but I appreciated it for all the reasons I've mentioned. It's a 3 star... I haven't discovered a new band I'm going to dig deeper into, but this is like a time capsule preserving something I knew existed but never really spent time exploring.

I totally missed Elastica when they first came out, and I can't be sure what I would have thought of them at the time, but this weekend, I thought they were super cool. Bowie's "Scary Monsters" channeled through Blondie at its most punk. I can't claim to remember all the songs, "See That Animal" is one I remember particularly enjoying, but I was taken by the songs and attitude and affectation of the band. I know we say this, and I'll promise to stop after this review, but it's hard to rate something on its first listen and feel like you're getting the full scope of the album. That said, my first impression was, this is a four.

What can I say, I enjoyed Willie Nelson's album. This isn't a style of music I've dug deep into, so I don't have a ton to compare it to, but the bare-bones approach and intimate sound appealed from the get-go, and while I may have missed all the nuance in the lyrics from beginning to end, the preacher's story and theme was laid out nicely. I assumed this was an early Willie album — the man has released albums consistently from 1962 through this year — so what's early? This was his 18th release. Damn. Any way, not exactly his first rodeo, as they say in the disco circuit, so a more deliberate call out to an older style of campfire music. Anyway, I'll stop pretending I know more about this than I do and just say, "well done!"

First, what an amazing album cover. This band did so much to solidify its legacy right out of the gate — evocative band name, sinister sounding guitars tuned to whatever note that is, ability to turn blues' riffs into sinister slow boils, lyrics that are one part horror movie and one part everyman poetry... it's no wonder this band is still a force. Still, somehow, I never loved Black Sabbath. I totally dig some of their major hits, I absolutely love what they represent, I get what makes them masters of the genre, but I don't particularly enjoy listening to the band. Maybe it's the sludgy guitars, maybe it's the incessant slow throb or Ozzy's particular pitch... whatever it is, they've never been a band I dug into. But this listen gave me a real appreciation for the blues foundation this band is built on and also showcased musicality (and drumming) that might not always get appreciated amid the unholy trappings that the group is best known for. Great debut album.

When the first track started, I turned to Sylvia (we were in the car listening together) and said, "Nice, this guy can play." Third song... "Starting to feel like a case of the sameses. Not hearing a lot of diversity in the songwriting." Midway through the album... "Think he'll kick it up a notch before the end?" Somewhere past the mid-point, dude got excited and kicked it up a notch. "I think I liked it better when he was stuck in neutral." Near the end... "If I were to walk into Molly McGuire's (nondescript local faux Irish bar/restaurant), I'd be glad to hear this guy playing. But to craft an album with your fingerpicking guitar and voice, you've got to write some really exceptional material to make it interesting." This was not my experience with Bert Jansch.

I can't say I've ever understood this album cover, but I just love it. This album strikes gold on so many levels, it's more along the "albums you must hear 1001 times before you die" since this is probably the 900th time I've listened to it. A five-song album that just never disappoints. Great transitions between songs, Pink Floyd records are not afraid to allow negative space. Waters' cynical disillusion is biting and relatable, certainly seems wiser than the establishment he's railing against. Love the use of noises and weird keyboard sounds as interstitial and integral parts of the songs. The drums sound great (well, the toms do, the snare is a hair wimpy) and this is Gilmore at his best. Crazy that the band has at least two more from the same era that are all among the best of their class.

This was a bit hit and miss for me. I enjoyed most of it, particularly the R&B-tinged material. Some of the rap was a little flat, some of it was pretty sharp. A solid 3 in my book.

In the last couple of years, I've come to realize I've under-appreciated how good this band is. "You Really Got Me" and "All Day And All Of The Night" (and "Lola") sit atop the tunes I could rattle off by the band, and none of that really hints at the depth of The Kinks' songwriting prowess, which seems silly to say considering they're massive, iconic rock songs. So I'm no expert on the band (I'd refer you to Scott for that), but I'm on the road to discovery. Bottom line, this is a fantastic album. I didn't have the opportunity to linger on every song and soak up every lyric, but I will continue to dig into the band's catalog because every time I listen to a Kinks' album, I like the band more.

I typically avoid reading or researching these albums before listening and reviewing, but I'm glad I opted to read about this album as it was playing, because knowing that this was completely improvised from start to finish really changed how I heard to it. The ultra-superlative reviews were plentiful — this is a significant milestone in jazz music. Glad I knew that. As a listener, there were many moments that were extraordinary, as in, "how on earth can someone do that?" On the whole, it was an adventure — thrilling, ecstatic, joyful and contemplative, moody, quiet, depending on where Jarrett's mood took him. It's a lot to take in, for sure, but I'm believing the hype. Something of a marvel to hear someone so in control of an instrument and willing to take a step off the ledge and thrill an audience with his playing prowess and the spark of inspiration in the moment. Could be a five for sheer audacity; I'm giving it a four just because the prospect of listening to it front to back again anytime soon seems daunting.

Before I rail into this album, I want to say that I always thought Boy George was pretty cool. When this band launched, I was a bit confused by the outsized shock people seemed to have about this man dressed as a woman — or androgynously, or whatever — he always seemed pretty genuine to me. I was way more shocked/confused the first time I saw a greasy long-haired metal-head wearing a Poison t-shirt. But I digress... So good on BG for bringing alternative sexuality and lifestyles to the fore. But to elevate this band, or this album, and suggest this was some sort of milestone in music? Really? It sounded dated the month after it left the charts. The deeper cuts are middling to forgettable (to annoying), the arrangements are clunky, lyrically it often teeters on embarrassing — I don't care how much you love "Karma Chameleon," the lyric is better suited for The Muppets. I remember everyone gushing... "Boy George has SUCH an AMAZING voice!" He's got a fine voice, but a singular, "drop everything you need to hear this!" voice? Take a look at the other artists on the top of the charts at the time... Pat Benetar, Sting, Lionel Richie, Donna Summer, Steve Perry... there were lots of incredible vocalists out there. And while Wham! was not my cup of tea, George Michael has that voice. I always took that as people feeling the need to explain why they liked this band — like they needed an excuse. In 1983, this was fine. Let a catchy, nonsensical song like "Karma Chameleon" play on the radio. There's a place for it, enjoy it for what it is. But to try to suggest this is something important — musically? It doesn't hold up.

This is where jazz and I were not meant to be together. I hear it — the exceptional musicianship, the intricate and deliberate arrangement, the intentional dissonance and musical interplay. I imagine, as a player, what a rush it must be to contribute and commit to the music in the moment. In a live setting, this might even be thrilling. But I can't say I enjoyed listening to the album. I couldn't find a way in. I appreciated many moments, the flamenco guitar was a surprise guest, but on the whole, there were no threads for me to take hold of, I found the brass too brash and noisy, and the music too dense and disconnected overall. Rather than transported, I was becoming agitated. So, as they say in the breakup game, it's not you, it's me. I tried, but I couldn't relate.

A three-star review seems a little harsh, this band has lots going for it. Good musicianship — the drummer was having a ball — an impressive mix of styles, and an earnest optimism that seemed to gush forth in everything they play and sing. There are a couple of unfortunate production choices that just don't hold up — the delay effect in "Smug" chief among them — which don't help strengthen the album. But I think what ultimately keeps this from climbing into 4-5-star territory is the material. It's well-written, certainly not simple in construction, but it's just so darned peppy. It's well crafted, super-pleasant, and utterly wholesome, and somehow that seems to be a strike against them. I've never listened to an Osmonds album, but I'd imagine I might feel the same. Maybe that's unfair, but sometimes life's a bitch.

Man, this is a hard one to pin down. Musically, this band is so tight and so clean. Disco gets such a bad rap, and I'd hesitate to limit this band to disco, but this is the prototype for funky dance/disco music. [The Outkast references are inadvertent but appropriate.] Tony Thompson (who you'll also recognize from Power Station and Bowie's "Let's Dance" album) on drums is a massive time keeper/groove provider, Nile Rodgers knows how to play funky guitar better than just about anyone, and the rest of the musicians all play their parts to perfection. Yes, the tunes roll on and on, but that's the point. I'll take humans killing a dance beat over techo every single time. Then... there's the vocals. Well, I should say, lyrics, because the vocals are totally right on and immediately identifiable (I didn't love the vocal melody on "Will You Cry," but the rest are perfect for the music). But the lyrics seem like an afterthought, and it holds this record back. Yes, it was a different era, so I'll even overlook some of the misogyny, but even on the biggest hit, "Good Times," the lyrics are trying to bring the song down. ("Don't be a drag, participate; Clams on the half shell, and roller skates, roller skates.") At the very least, it seems they were happy to settle on the first rhyme they came up with. So, for me, it was a tug between being super impressed with the music and wondering why they didn't work harder on the lyrics. Clearly, they did fine for themselves, and it works for the dance floor, because you know the lyric the second time it comes around and you're locked in, but IMO, a little more variety and a little more attention to quality lyrics would have made this a five. As it stands... I'm at like a 3.5... it's Christmas, so this gets the Santa bump.

I still have this one on vinyl (sadly, I don't have my entire collection any more). I didn't know anyone else who listened to it at the time and thought I had stumbled on some rare gem. I guess the album was more popular than all that. On this listen, I had a moment or two of PC concern about appropriation — the notion of "redskin" being a slur has settled into my core — but really, I was just enjoying the drum beats and yelps and campy swagger of Adam and his Ants. I can't think of other artists that quite sounds like this, the band has staked its ground and created something it can claim as its own. Thankfully, it's fun to listen to and entertaining from start to finish. I remember always wanting to get to "Ants Invasion," that was the standout track for me, and I totally enjoyed it on this listen. What the hell any of it is actually about is irrelevant, this sets a mood and sticks to it, and that's what it was all about then and now.

I'm a Wilco fan, but I connect a lot more with the later albums, starting with 2004's A Ghost Is Born. I can't quite verbalize what it is about this album that I can't seem to embrace. It might just be the pain that seems to emanate from the opening wail of guitar on track one through to the bitter end. Even the upbeat tracks have somber chord changes that belie a feeling that things just aren't alright. There are great tracks — 19 is a lot of music to absorb — and the band is killer. Like I said, I like Wilco a lot, but I never loved this album. I probably enjoyed this listen more than in the past. Hard to rate. I guess 'tis the season to round up, and certainly for the best material here, this gets the 4.

Well, if nothing else, I think I get this band and the wild fever it causes in diehard Pixies fans now more than before. I can't say I feel that same fever, but, if I may bring a personal fave of mine to the party, I sense a similarity in musical approach to that of Cheap Trick. Both are built on a foundation of punk/garage/muscular pop, and while CT leans toward cleaner more refined material and performances, this band wallows in the gritty abandon of the sloppier side and tries to steer the beast toward pop. It also seems to me that Josh Homme and Queens of the Stone Age must appreciate the Pixies based on the swings in style and delivery. The first three tracks on this album sound like they could have been three different bands, which sets the stage for "anything goes." But did I like it...? Yeah, though this is one I'd need to live with for a while before deciding what I really think.

My feelings on Phil Spector aside, this is a great collection of Christmas songs, mostly because it doesn't come across as a Christmas collection. The artists and production treat this like a bona fide "standard" record, the arrangements are grand, the performances are heartfelt, and the songs themselves are winners (mostly). Apparently this was released the day before Kennedy was assassinated, so Spector pulled it off the market upon release, killing the mojo it might have had in sales and in the collective consciousness; but Bruce Springsteen certainly heard it, as this seems to be the version of "Santa Claus is Coming to Town" he worked off to create his own classic rendition — sax solo and all. And give me this version of "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" over the Jackson 5's every single time.

This album must have been an honor and a blast to make. The intrigue of the origins of the album make it a must listen, and, no doubt, there are great moments and good songs, though I feel the promise of this unique collaboration outshines the final product. The songs, almost every one of them, linger longer than they should, and the album loses traction as we get to the later numbers. So kudos to everyone involved (amazingly, the Natalie Merchant song is probably my favorite as it doesn't overstay its welcome), I'm sure this is a feather in the cap of Bragg, Tweedy, Bennett and the rest of the collaborators, but it was never my favorite listen.

So, as I'm listening to this album, I thought to look over my earlier review (Californication), and god damn... it sums it up perfectly. So I copied and pasted it. I'm resolving to working smarter, not harder, in 2023. I can't quite put my finger on what it is about this band I don't enjoy. I appreciate their honesty, but something leaves me flat. As in the case of "Suck My Kiss" — I was thinking, "hey, this is a cool tune," but before the song was over, I was less smitten. Kind of emblematic of how I feel about the RHCP. There are plenty of great moments, and while Anthony Kiedis is a singular presence as a vocalist (and Flea as a bassist), I prefer him when he goes with a "less is more" approach, and that's not usually his style. I also wasn't knocked out by the guitar work. I guess this is just not a band I love. I've had bandmates (bassists, specifically) who love this band, and they've been on my radar from early on (1985's Freaky Styley), but I've never been drawn in. I like them on a song-by-song basis, but not enough to go all in.

This was on my extracurricular list until I realized it was already in the 1001, so the timing is pretty interesting. It's a lot to take in, for sure, but this is an extraordinary album. Peppered with influences, in a league of its own — the performances and songwriting are masterful. Cornell has everything you could want in a hard-rock vocalist, and he never found the balance between his wailing high end and rich baritone (?) more adeptly than on this album. Matt Cameron is a beast on drums, Kim Thayill's guitar is massive and the riffs are superb. I think it's really a 4.5 for me, just for its sheer density of material, but you'll not find a better album in this genre. Maybe because this carves out a special prog-heavy-classic-psychedelic-rock niche for itself. Great lyrics, too. This album kills.

On paper, this is a band I should enjoy, but this era of Genesis has a particular ability to dredge up serious disinterest. I began the album paying attention, determined to enjoy it, but I was actively bored two songs in. The compositions, the flatness of the production, Peter Gabriel's vocal elastics... I've tried on many occasions to dig in, but alas, I'm empty handed. Give me "Duke" and "Abacab" era Genesis.

I was having a hard time pinning this one down. One minute, marveling at Waits' stranglehold on his very own musical genre, then feeling physically uncomfortable at how painful it must feel to sing like this — Jesus, man, take it easy. Then wondering if I really enjoy this music, then impressed with how sweet and vulnerable he sounds. Then "Jersey Girl" comes on and I realize, I'm pretty sure I knew he wrote this, but I don't recall ever hearing this version. How did Springsteen hear this and say, "now there's a song I ought to cover"? How do you assign a number to all this?

Here's one I came into with a negative bias. Marianne's a VU devotee, but I was (am) not. I've always thought Lou Reed was a cool character, we even have a story of not quite meeting him but being in close proximity at BAM once when we saw Laurie Anderson. Anyway, he's cool, I like him as an iconic figure. But try as I might, I do not like his music. I did have a new take on things as I listened to this album. In the past, I might have said "I don't get it." Now, so much older and wiser, I get it. I just don't enjoy it. I had hope as "Candy Says" played that perhaps I'd find something I liked here, but with each passing song, that light faded. Maybe it was a repetitive passage that wore out its welcome long before. Or an off-key delivery that I didn't find artistic. Or a mix that made me have to adjust the volume on my player. No need to beat the horse. I tried. I failed. I like the periphery around this band and movement. The music is for others to enjoy.

At first blush, and as the first song unfolded, I was pretty certain I'd have a difficult time getting through this one. It reeked of gimmicky "we're indie and edgy 'cause we're just so innocuous with our elevator music vibe." And while I wasn't 100% knocked out by the lyric in the second song, I was intrigued and ready to hear more. By the time "Lovefool" came on, a song I vaguely recognized, I had to admit that the songs were pretty darned clever in arrangement. I was enjoying the album. Then "Losers" hit and I was thinking this album might have even climbed to a 4-star rating. Alas, the ironic(?) genre-twist of "Iron Man" almost lost me completely. I'm a fan of unpredictable cover songs revealing something hidden in a song as performed by the original artist. This one fell so flat, it brought me back to thought #1: this is way too gimmicky. But the strength of the album's closers turned things around. So a really solid album I didn't expect to like when the first track was unfolding. But then, how to rate it? Better than a 3. Not really a 4. I'm flipping a coin. Couldn't find a coin, so I flipped a thumb drive. Heads it's a 3. Tails it's a 4.

Interesting album, a little too all over the place to connect with. Hampered by a slick production and a "whatever strikes my fancy" approach, I found the songs varied from captivating to clankers and everything in between. I bet each album from The The would be a wildly different listening experience. Maybe I'll find out one day.

Truth be told, I didn't listen to the whole thing, but I think I heard what I needed to. There's definitely something endearing about the enthusiasm and what seems like a leap of faith to produce, but I'm pulling my Scott card and saying the '80s production was something I couldn't get past. I know this was rap coming into its own, I can appreciate the limitations inherent in producing this (theoretically — I have no real idea how this was recorded, sounds like someone's bedroom), but this was a style of rap I could never sink my teeth into when it came out, and the same is even more true today.

It's probably not fair to invoke Oasis and Blur here — maybe that's just fine – but the Englishness emanating from this album is palpable, and The La's seem to be on an island of their own and in the same bucket as the aforementioned bands all at once. Thankfully, they swap all of Oasis' annoying bits with something like earnest retro-pop, though it's so natural, it doesn't ever feel or sound like an homage or consciously out-of-time, it somehow exists in the '60s and the '90s (and the 2020s) simultaneously, which is a neat trick. Apart from "There She Goes" — which somehow I just know, it was always there, I would never have been able to place when the song was actually released — I knew a couple of the other tracks, and there was a very likable quality to it all. It's absolutely better than a 3-star album, but I can't quite get to 4 on this one listen, despite all the nice things I've got to say about it. I think, ultimately, it's a tidy, pleasant listen, an easy 3.5, but I'm already on to the next thing.

I can't say I came into this album with expectations, but still, I was a little underwhelmed. It's solid post-'60s rock, the difference between vocalists is stark, which is interesting on its own, especially given the immediate recognizability of Rod Stewart's voice. Say what you will (I know he's got some detractors in this listening group), you know when he's singing. Ronnie Lane has a fine voice, though not nearly as distinguishable (I thought George Harrison had taken the mic on one track). "Stay With Me" leapt out of the speakers, probably because it's the song I knew best (i.e., knew at all), but also because it's the best song on the album. The rest of the material didn't quite live up to that standard. As has been said by many of us by now, one listen doesn't quite give enough time with an album to really get a feel for the material, so another listen or two might change how I feel about this one, but I can't be sure if that would improve my appreciation of this record or turn me off to it.

So here's an interesting one... On my first listen, distracted and not fully engaged, I was pretty indifferent to this record. But I had an opportunity to listen again, more focused, and I was taken in. Reading a little about Faithfull's personal struggles, including her losing her voice, definitely put her singing and story in an entirely new perspective that made a difference in how I related to the material. I was less smitten with two of the songs that were among the top listens on Spotify, "The Ballad of Lucy Jordan" and "Working Class Hero" (never a fave of mine). Everything else was very engaging in a strange way — it's hard-to-articulate what it is that's compelling. I'd say it's the entire package of songs, mood, production, and performance that coalesce. The closer is raw and aggressive in a way that must have been pretty shocking in 1979, the opener is provocative, and I enjoyed "Witches' Song" a lot. Along with all this, the 4-star rating speaks to my interest in listening to more, particularly the live album, "Blazing Away," and the following studio release, "A Secret Life," that features her working with Angelo Badalementi (who died in 2022 — https://blog.discmakers.com/2023/01/musicians-who-died-in-2022/).

I enjoyed this on the whole. On the positive side: Beats were good throughout, there was some clever wordplay, and some humor, which is a nice touch. The posturing in rap is always difficult for me to take seriously, and to announce that you're not a misogynist a minute from a repeated chorus of "bitch!" is ridiculous, on its face. A bit too repetitive and sample-heavy for my taste, which may sum up why rap is not my go-to jam.

I never quite got what was so alluring about The Beastie Boys. Sounds like a lots of shouty rhyming and beat drops and gang-ups on sentence endings and it's all rather frivolous and inconsequential. When "Fight To Your Right" landed, it was fun enough, but seemed like a one-off goofy play that would fade away. I never loved it, just found it amusing. The fact that they became important and influential is strange to me. "Paul's Boutique" came highly recommended from a trusted source, so I went out and bought it. I listened to it multiple times, trying to like it. I never did. So... sorry... Ill Communication. I do very much like the diversity of the underlying music. From straight up hip hop beats to jazz to garage rock, there's an effortless amalgamation of styles that never seems like a put-on. And I bet stumbling on this live in a sweaty basement in Brooklyn in my 20s would have been tons of fun. But god damn, it's the same shouty rhyme-y gang-y delivery over it all that just wears on me. I'm giving it a 3, but that's rounding up from a 2.something.

This rating is not exactly reflective of my enjoyment of this album. I didn't dislike it, exactly, but try as I might, I couldn't get to 3-stars. I suppose this music occupies territory I don't understand. I bet there are dozens — hundreds — of bands who sound very much like this that no one pays any attention to. They exist on the cutting floor of music history. I couldn't figure out what it is that makes this special, important, interesting, likable. I didn't find the lyrics particularly insightful or profound, the music was OK, but the vocal melodies — as such — were also not particularly inventive. So yeah. I miss the point of this band.

This is great. Interesting to listen to a black performer recording in 1959 on MLK Day. It had me thinking about what life might have been like in 1959's America and how this music fit into the social fabric of the day. Of course, the fact that this is pre-'60s has its stamp all over the album in terms of the recording quality and the arrangements (I cheated and read a little and learned that Quincy Jones arranged the first six tunes on the album). Those details did ultimately serve to detract just a little from my enjoyment. I found the arrangements were a little too predictable after a couple of songs — maybe the song order didn't help by stacking the horn section numbers and the ballads with the backing singers. I also thought the sax player was a little too wound up. Charles sounds great, vocally. He's dynamic, but not overly so. Another limitation — I'll also chalk this up to the times — is the lyrical content. Lots of lamenting a lost lover, or an impending loss of a lover, or a long-lost love. But yeah, good stuff. I did have to ask myself, if anyone put out an album today titled "The Genius of ... " would I think he's being a pompous asshole? (A: Yes.) I didn't think that of Mr. Charles, though the title did make me chuckle. Sets some seriously high expectations.

This is my kind of weird. At first, I was going to comment about how familiarity with the material alters these reviews as I wasn't sure how I'd react to this album if this were my first time listening. But then, I remembered that I was all-in on this record from the first time I heard it, back when I was 12. I had seen Talking Heads play "Take Me To The River" on SNL in 1979 and this was among the first LPs I ever owned. So, I guess I just like this music. Still, couldn't quite get to a 5-star. Why? Not sure. I think it's almost baked into the music, the artistic, consciously demented delivery makes this a bit too experimental, which means not every song lands — or maybe not every part of every tune does. But there's a vision here, quirky and off-kilter as it is, and this band is solid and the material is great. David Byrne gets most of the attention, but Tina Weymouth is a badass, and Chris Frantz and Jerry Harrison contribute mightily — this is a band and album that succeeded because of its individual parts aligning. Love it. Was happy to see this come up in our feed.

I was all in on a 4-star review until the last two songs tried to dissuade me. As I detected elements from one song to the next that hearkened to other artists — Elbow, Talking Heads, King Crimson, Bowie, Psychedelic Furs — I wondered if this album was some kind of writing experiment, where James Murphy (yes, I had to look that up) binged an artist for a week and let that influence his songwriting. I had a whole story drawn up. Perhaps that will be my next venture. All my fantasizing aside, I enjoyed this album a lot, and the aforementioned potential influences only elevated my interest. The eclectic batch of songs were all interesting, and while I'm more a fan of acoustic instrumentation, the techno/electronica was expertly orchestrated. So yeah. Ok, 4 stars.

I try so hard to take Bob Dylan seriously, but holy hell, I swear he’s been putting us all on from the get-go. First set: The affected vocal delivery is too much. Most of the vocals go by like the mumbled ramblings of the guy I want to avoid in the post office. Yes, I still go to the post office. The lyrics I can understand make no sense to me. I’m at a complete loss and finding it hard to concentrate or pay attention to the songs. The harmonica playing is difficult to endure, and on “Tamborine Man,” it launches into absurdity. I was laughing out loud at the audacity, duration, and non-musicality of it all. Second set: I guess I enjoyed it more, but "enjoy" is used loosely. All of the notes from the first set apply, it's just all a bit more intense. At least there's something other than Dylan to key in on to abate my intensifying distress. But not really. One star for the album. One star to preserve my marriage. I promise, I tried.

I love this album. From the opening "beep beep beep" of "Planet Claire" to the camp surf-guitar rock opera of "Rock Lobster," from hearts crackin' like Krakatoa to the unnamed moon in the sky, from every one of the 52 girls to... OK. You get it. The album is a 5-star affair up until "Hero Worship," which starts the slide into the final three tracks, which I still like while recognizing they're not as strong as the first 75% of the album. If we were to take the best of the second release ("Dirty Back Road," "Private Idaho," "Quiche Lorraine," "Strobe Light") and mash it with the best of this, you've got a masterpiece on your hands. Kate and Cindy's vocals, especially when harmonizing, are magic. Lyrically, this is so goofy, punctuated by one-off insights that make me chuckle every time I listen to it. Anyway, not a perfect album, but this band came out of left field 53 miles west of Venus and stirred the hot lava in my heart.

I may be a few decades behind, but here's a band I've discovered through this listening group. I knew the name, I thought I had listened to Blur before, but this is all new to me — and I'm really liking it. The songwriting is clever and catchy and feels consequential, whether or not it really is. Great energy, just odd enough to be interesting, serious without coming off as self-aware. Whatever, that's all rubbish. I like the music. Could be a 5-star but for the early-'90s curse of making albums longer than they needed to be. Drags a little toward the end, but damn good.

I waver on my feelings about Neil Young. Sometimes I think he's a bit self-important, but mostly I admire how he's remained fiercely artistic into his later years. He's one of the few music artists who doesn't seem to have become complacent as he's gotten older, and that's something to be lauded. This is an excellent set of songs, I liked the acoustic-to-electric transition (not coincidence that we recently listened to Dylan's Live 1966, I'd say). Young, like many great songwriters, has an ability to write what seem like simple songs, but in reality, they bear the stamp of creativity that — I don't want to use the word genius as that gets thrown around too much — speaks to a sophistication and understanding of the craft that is on a level up from most of his peers. One star off for not always loving his singing voice. But I do appreciate the "if it's perfect it ain't art" approach that is part of Young's music.

Damn. I knew her name, but this was my introduction to Nina Simone, and she's intense in all the best ways. There's a sadness and depth to her voice that gives every note added weight. Anger and vulnerability. I don't know if those are the right descriptors, but in the same way Billie Holiday infuses every song with significance just because she's singing it, Nina Simone has that same effect. "Four Women" is powerful, "Lilac Wine" sounds like it could have been in Twin Peaks, but "Wild Is The Wind" was something else. I was familiar with Bowie's take on the song, which I always liked, but all those descriptors — sadness, depth, vulnerability — were on hyperdrive in her performance, buttressed by the manic piano. Crazy that the wind is howling outside as I write. Her voice, that piano, the wind chimes outside my window... it's all coalescing. My head just exploded. Happy now?

I feel the need to preempt this review with a note that I'm not a Courtney Love hater. I'd consider myself ambivalent. But as I know she's got her detractors and this is not a positive review, I thought it worth spelling that out. My dislike of this album comes down to one thing: as a vocalist, Courtney Love is a one-trick pony and that wears thin real quick. If there were some variation on the theme of overwrought, out-of-tune, predictable verse melody to shouty shouty amped-up chorus, maybe it would work. But there isn't. So it doesn't. It all leads up to this feeling more like a concept of a band that was willed into existence than an organic collection of players that produced this flavor of music. In the end, that doesn't even matter. It's boring when it's supposed to be arresting. Or something. It ain't. I disagree with this album's inclusion on the list of must-listens. Two stars because Love is better than most at shouting.

Well, here's another where a second review by the same artist is prompting a nearly identical review from me. With all respect to those folks who admire this band, I fail to understand what it is that makes this group so beloved. The harmonies, for sure, are impressive. But it ends there for me. Lyrically, there are moments of cringe that pop up all over the place (I mean, is "Caroline No" a lament over a "once-cute" girl who has found feminism?). The adolescent themes just keep coming. And it seems like the height of laziness to fade out of 70% of the songs in the middle of a chorus, but that seems to be the formula of the moment on this one. Again (as in my last Beach Boys review) I'm hovering between a 2 and a 3. Last time I went with a two, so I guess I'll split the difference. But that's feeling generous...

While only a Swiftie by proxy, I am familiar enough with Taylor's catalog to know this is a curious choice for inclusion in the 1001 list. Sylvia, the #2 fan in the house, suggested that Folklore would have been a better choice, though even that seems like it wouldn't have made the top three in the rankings had he been the one to choose. All that said, I enjoyed the album, and while I wasn't quite at a 4, considering I rated Pet Sounds at a 3 and liked this album considerably more, I couldn't rate it the same. This whole system has its flaws, many of which I bring to the table. So... the album... certainly a bit samesy from front to back, which detracts from the overall experience, but I appreciate that Taylor and company set out to make a particular flavor of record, and they didn't stray. The album sounds great, and there really isn't a bad track in the lot. Standouts for me included "'tis the damn season" (snarl) and "no body, no crime." I may never be a true diehard fan, but that doesn't mean TSwift doesn't bring the goods.

I'm at a bit of a loss on this one. I took a minute just now to read the AllMusic review, which was a solid five-star write-up (yes, out of five), which didn't clear things up for me. Well, I guess it answered the "would anyone out there actually rate this a five-star album?" question. I guess I'll see if any of you are in the same boat. I'll say this, I never lost patience with the record. With a band like the Grateful Dead, which kept coming to mind as this rolled on, I do find I get agitated — not enjoyable for me. With this, I didn't go there, exactly, but I was struck by the general disinterest in adding structure to the proceedings. It was loose to the point of rambling, and had I not been tasked with listening to it, I don't think I would have stuck around to hear more after the first song and a half. There were moments that flowed, some noodly passages that transcended, but they were the diamonds in the haystack. Most of it just drifted innocuously out of the speakers and filled space. Did I like it? I don't know. I don't expect I'll listen again to try to discern that. So this is two stars, but that doesn't reflect a dislike for the material so much as an inability to connect with whatever was motivating this band.

Once again, I found myself referencing a previous review to ground myself — this time not by the same artist but by Bob Marley. I was a little surprised that I rated the Marley album a four, but that album is chock full of classic songs. On one hand, I almost like the sound of Peter Tosh, at least on this album, a little more, it's just a bit smoother—not quite as angular. But the reggae rule holds, which is to say that after a handful of songs, I was just waiting for the album to end. I was not invested, it was just playing on and I was ready for something else. Certainly, by the time "Ketchy Shuby" came on, I was totally done. Truth be told, as much of an advocate for the legalization of marijuana as I am, I even found the opener lacking. I had heard the "legalize/criticize" rhyme one too many times halfway through the tune. So again, more about me not loving the genre. Plant a couple of bumping tracks in a party playlist and I'm in. 10 in a row and you've lost me.

Here's one that speaks to state of mind and environment and their effects on my experience with an album. I was enjoying this just fine as I listened and jogged in the cool afternoon yesterday. I found the monologue-on-repeat about the druggie cyclist sort of annoying but it fit the vibe and had a payoff of sorts, so... OK. I was enamored with the title track, finding the preacher's (or whoever that idiot is) mispronunciations funny and loving that they looped Missing Persons and Duran Duran as that was in heavy rotation in my high school days. I related. There was a track that jarred me out of enjoyment —maybe Musclecar, maybe Zenophile, and maybe neither of those was on the original release (2005 remixes) — so should they count? I don't know. Listened again this morning over coffee as I got the day started and liked what I was hearing a whole lot less. Totally over the cyclist. Had to turn it off as I was finding it distracting and not promoting a good mood. So a 3. Sometimes, it's right. Other times, it ain't. Spotify with these multiple versions of albums... not always the bonus it presents itself as.