A strong 2. Considered a 3, but the few good moments don't outweigh the soporific quality of most of the album.
49%
A strong 2 stars.
Nice guitar work, decent instrumentation in general, but quite repetitive and the songs are not nearly interesting enough to be so long.
76
Based on this new scale (my previous ratings are now all inaccurate):
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
I had to look this artist up. When I did, I did not expect that I'd enjoy this very much, as I'm not a fan of R&B, which was the first genre Wikipedia used to describe this artist.
This is actually a pretty genre-less album and I found it to be a refreshing, enjoyable experience.
55
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
If I were rating these based on lyrics and general songwriting, it would have a much higher score. However, I also have to evaluate its delivery, which is why this cannot get more than three stars.
Bob Dylan is a great songwriter and composer, but in order for me to realize he's a great composer, I had to listen to other musicians cover his work.
39
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
The album is good at what it does, but what it does isn't exciting to me. Some okay bits, especially the slightly bluesier songs near the end.
6
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
This is bad. The only thing that made this not get a 0 overall was the instrumentation. The vocals were terrible. Absolute waste of time and this is only an album you should hear before you die if you've been convicted of crimes against humanity and must be punished accordingly.
49
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Interesting album. The vocals didn't really move me, but the compositions were pretty good.
79
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Solid album. Drumming was fun.
20
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
While the album isn't without its interesting moments, it doesn't appeal to me very much overall.
75
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
This is when The Beatles got more interesting. Almost proto-prog. Good stuff.
22
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Cabaret music. She has a good voice, but it's cabaret music. This is about as high a score as it can get.
79
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Really good album. Long for this kind of list, but some really good stuff, here.
49
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Pretentious rock opera concept album with good drum fills, thanks to Keith Moon. Pinball Wizard's good, as are other bits, but overall, I can't rate it higher than this.
22
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Ugh, surf rock. Nice vocal harmonies, I guess.
18
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
This is just not for me. I get that she's an important figure in folk music, but I just can't. Some of those notes just hurt me.
21
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
More interesting than compelling, this album is more famous for its importance and influence than for its aesthetics.
43
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
I like jazz, but I'm not a big fan of jazz singers. This album has moments that are jazz, moments that are jazzy and moments that are neither. It's pretty good, but forgettable.
7
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
For some reason, I'm not surprised that this list would include at least one atrocity committed by the world's most notorious musical terrorists, U2.
As much as I'd want to give everything U2 ever made a score of 0, at the very most, there were a handful moments during the album that had me tapping my foot. Granted, these moments were actually the brief pauses between songs, but still. The silent bits were great, is what I'm trying to say. If U2 had only recorded the silent bits, their contributions to the world would have been significantly less harmful.
Anyway, shame on anyone who thinks that people need to hear this before they die. What has humanity done to you, anyway? Here's a tip from me: if you've managed to get through life without ever having heard a U2 monstrosity, then don't change that. Just skip this torture, along with whatever other abominations by U2 this sadistic list may recommend.
38
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
I appreciate the punk flavour sprinkled on top of this, but it's far too generic to earn a better score.
40
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Decent. I disliked this kind of music at the time, but today, I can see that this is a decent album.
19
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
This is just boring.
51
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
This was better than I'd expected.
69
Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Eric Clapton's a racist shitbag, but he's not without talent as a guitarist. I'm not a fan of his playing, but that doesn't make it bad. Pretty good blues album. overall.
29Based on this scale:
1 - 0 to 19
2 - 20 to 39
3 - 40 to 59
4 - 60 to 79
5 - 80 to 100
Decent first song and last song, forming the bread around an otherwise uninspired album. Good voice, but poor songwriting and worse composition.
16/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Repetitive and dull.
35/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This is generic bubble-gum pop, with occasional catchy bits. I'll say this much; this is far from the worst album I heard this week, thanks to this list.
89/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
While the first band to have been described as heavy metal by a journalist and while their song "Communication Breakdown" is arguably the first heavy metal song, I think most people can agree that Black Sabbath's debut was the very first heavy metal ALBUM ever. While Led Zeppelin were largely a heavy blues band, Sabbath's influence is far more obvious in most of today's metal.
What a beginning it was. Iommi's iconic riffs, Ward's frenzied fills, Butler's unmistakable bass lines, with the eerie voice of music's most recognizable vocalist sprinkled on top, to create a proto-doom-metal experience that was just too much for people to handle in 1970.
Absolutely brilliant.
95/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Absolute fucking masterpiece. End of story.
16/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
As the top reviewer brilliantly said, they should have stuck to carpentry. This is a special kind of boring. It gains a few points with a brief instrumental bit at the end, but not enough to move it out of 1 star territory.
18/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Entirely unremarkable. Also, I tend to cringe at any genre name with the word "post" in it.
50/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I wasn't sure about how I felt about Bjork's music when I first heard it in the 90s and today, I'm still not sure. Interesting compositions that are often cleverly delivered, but as a listener, I have to ask myself if it does anything for me, beside making me say "oh, that part was pretty cool" every once in a while. It's one of those things I can enjoy on some level if it's on, but I can't picture myself listening to her album on purpose.
18/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This app thinks I dislike folk music. That's not really true; I just disliked what it showed me so far. However, I have very little patience for most country music (though I think Brad Paisley plays a mean guitar). Combining country music with this saccharine vocal style is enough to make me quite cross.
The few points it managed to earn were from some of the short instrumental passages.
57/100
Based on this scale
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Full disclosure, I'm not a big fan of rap. I have nothing specifically against it, but when I listen to a song, the most important aspect of it to me is instrumentation and the least important aspect of it is its lyrics.
Rap is mostly about lyrics, with little regard for instrumentation. That's tough for someone like me. However, this album explores enough sounds to grab my interest, for moments, here and there.
I'm not into what he does, but he's pretty good at doing it.
71/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This album has some great songs on it, but a lot of the other songs feel like filler. The Who has never put out an album of the same caliber as the likes of Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd, as far as I'm concerned. Still overall a very good album.
90/100
Based on the following scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Ah, Highway Star. I got a speeding ticket when this song came on, even though I was sitting at my desk.
Some great songs with minimal filler. Great stuff!
Oh, one reviewer called Blackmore's solos uninspired. I almost swallowed my tongue. Then, I looked at their history and had a laugh.
Amazing album.
36/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This album did not know much commercial success and I can see why. Pretty uninspired and generic. It's a well-produced consumer product, so it gets two stars, rather than one.
Oh, that bluesy number at the end earned it a few more points.
2/100
Based on the following scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I'm trying to like electronic music. I really am. Today, styles descended from this are massively popular. Maybe it means that along the way, this stopped sucking. Either that, or it means that the masses like things that suck.
But yeah, this is sort of like the soundtrack to being given an anal probe by aliens and it leaves one wondering which was more unpleasant; the probe, or the music. At least, the probe presumably served some sort of purpose.
37/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Not bad, but the band got better a bit later on.
55/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
It felt a bit bland at first, but then the slightly "proggy" elements came in. Even then, the blandness wasn't wholly abandoned, but it managed to be interesting at times. Some nice bits with instrumentation.
56/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Hmm, electronic music again? I'm going to continue to try to like it.
Y'know what? This has interesting bits. Two Hearts in 3/4 Time had me grinning. Frontier Psychiatrist is fun too.
45/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I would have probably enjoyed this more years ago, but I no longer do acid. Interesting, but not likely to make me listen a second time.
59/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Man, did this album ever rock my world when it came out. I was 10 years old at the time and if that version of me had rated this album, it would have had 5 stars.
Today, things are a bit different. No, I'm not talking about MJ's penchant for kids; I can separate the art from the artist. What I'm talking about is an album that has its fair share of filler content. At the time, it wouldn't have bothered me. Today, it does.
Beat It (best song by far, due in no small part to Eddie Van Halen's solo)
Billie Jean (the one other reviewers will say is the best)
Thriller
PYT (as much as I separate the art from the artist, it's hard not to find this one a bit creepy, but y'know, it's okay if I ignore the lyrics)
The Girl Is Mine (if it weren't for Paul McCartney's presence, this would fall under the filler songs)
Those songs are varying degrees of interesting. The rest is filler. A little less than half (arguably) the album being filler isn't bad, by pop standards, but when people call this "the best album ever", I laugh. This does not belong with the likes of Dark Side of the Moon or of Led Zeppelin's... entire discography. Or Tool's "Big Four" albums, if this list hadn't snubbed the band.
It's a good pop album, but the overwhelming majority of pop is garbage, so the bar isn't set very high.
20/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This starts off sounding like a tribute to Tom Petty. Then, it gets more boring.
56/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
It's Ray Charles. It's comfy, without offering me the mind trip that so many other musical journeys provide.
40/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Like the Internet, I love Dolly Parton as a person. Her music, however, is just not for me. She does cool stuff with her vibrato, mind you.
Not my thing, but she writes nice songs. I bumped this up to the minimum score for 3 stars.
70/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
A lot of reviewers hate this, but when this came out in '89, it was a lot of fun. At the time, raw sexual energy didn't upset people the way it does now.
Some people dismiss them as heavy-glam-rock clichés, while failing to realize that these clichés pretty much exist BECAUSE of Aerosmith. When it comes to sexually overdriven rock, they were it.
20/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This is not nearly interesting enough, musically speaking, to be as pretentious as it manages to be.
Also, the vocals have a Bonoesque quality about them. Ew.
It barely made two stars, because I've heard worse.
25/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
When the album started, I couldn't understand why this album was so poorly reviewed. By the time I got to the song "Tides", I was ready to give it a score that would have given it a strong three stars.
Then, the whole rest of the album happened. That was a weak one star.
So, two stars it is. There was enough that was good about the album to keep it there, but there was too many outright annoying bits to justify going any higher.
100/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Led Zeppelin's entire discography is almost perfect.
The people who did not give this 5 stars will be the first against the wall when my reign begins.
41/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Meh. Three okay songs. Sounds like a tribute to the Beatles.
64/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Ah, Supertramp. Prog pop's the best kind of pop. That's not saying much, but I rather like it. I'm more of a Breakfast in America kind of guy, mind you.
54/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Early punk rock, where simplicity is a quality. Fun album, lots of foot-tapping.
58/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Short, simple, fast and funny in a juvenile way. In short, punk.
48/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This is a bit better than their usual surf pop nonsense. I don't see how this is "prog pop", but it's better than Animal Sounds, or whatever that stupid album was called.
81/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This is the reason I tried this; to discover artists I didn't know. Really great album! The piano and drums are really enjoyable.
53/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Not my favourite Bowie album by a long shot, but better than I thought it would be when I saw that it was a collaboration with Brian Eno.
44/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I was 22 years old when this came out. I think that may be why I think grunge is an overrated subgenre of rock. They thought they were reinventing the wheel, but they were just rehashing the same old rock tropes, with dirtier hair and more heroin.
It's a tough album to score. Fell on Black Days is good, Black Hole Sun is good and Spoonman is absolutely fantastic. The Day I Tried to Live isn't bad, but is about 4 minutes longer than it needed to be to make its point.
The rest of the album is uninspired, generic and an outright chore to try to finish. The guitar parts often feel like they're the end product of a random riff generator. Chris Cornell's voice is often the song's only redeemable quality.
So the album's high points save its overall score from falling in the two-star territory, but overall, it's mediocre. This won't go over well with all the 40something year olds who were teens when this came out. People tend to perceive whatever music they liked when they were 16 as the pinnacle of all music. They're usually wrong. I know it's subjective, but still, they're wrong.
I appreciate that Soundgarden were bringing a more metallic feel to the punk-influcenced grunge movement, but aside from that, meh. Still, this bears repeating; Spoonman is a fucking banger.
22/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
1981 cookie-cutter pop. Life's too short to waste time on this.
70/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Really cool live album.
36/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
She had a nice voice and at times, the instrumentation was almost interesting, but these two factors couldn't really make up for the otherwise soporific nature of the album.
59/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Very strong 3. Some really nice guitar parts and cool string arrangements, but none of the songs moved me enough to warrant giving it a higher score.
37/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
They're good at what they do, but what they do is a cappella. Granted, it's more interesting than most a cappella, but it's still a cappella. My patience for it is thin.
51/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Freedom at 21 is really good and a few other numbers on the album are decent as well, but it's not without its formula.
10/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
No. Just no. Stop it with this nonsense. Why? Is this a prank?
22/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Good rap is a rarity. This album is no surprise.
36/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I'm torn. On the one hand, I dislike Christmas music, but on the other hand, there is some legitimately good vocal work on this album. Strong 2 stars.
20/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Suspicious Minds narrowly saved this from getting 1 star. It feels more like a consumer product than like art. Late Elvis felt more like a Vegas act than like the earlier version of himself.
30/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This album sits somewhere between "ok" and "just there" for me. It has moments, but I don't think I'll ever listen to it again on purpose.
21/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
When I loaded up the album, I saw that the first song on the album had far more listens than the other songs. While that's not always indicative of much, I sort of felt like this album was going to blow its load on the first track and the rest would be boring.
It turns out that as far as blown loads go, "Squares" wasn't much of one in the first place. "Human Being" wasn't a complete waste of my time, but otherwise...
59/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
As a drummer, I really wanted to give them four stars, just because Stewart Copeland is so good. Message in a Bottle, Reggatta De Blanc and Walking on the Moon are all quite good, but the rest of the album is too unremarkable for me to justify four stars, so they get a a strong three.
20/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This barely escaped 1 star, because every now and then, there'd be an interesting guitar phrase, a beat that was less boring than the rest, even if it lasted too long, or just a moment of near-creativity.
Otherwise, very little instrumentation; mostly loops. Maybe I'm supposed to pay attention to lyrics, but if I wanted lyrics, I'd read poetry. I ignore lyrics in music.
Honestly, I very nearly decided to give it one star. It's just not very good.
Also, there are way too many of those spoken interludes. What part of the word "music" eludes these artists?
I was really close to changing my mind and giving it one star, but then I got to the track Monsters. It wasn't great, or even particularly good, but I didn't feel like skipping it as I felt like skipping the other tracks, so it saved the album from the rating it probably actually deserves.
29/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This isn't entirely without merit, mostly due to North American Scum, but it's quite repetitive and the tracks are all roughly seven times longer than they need to be.
19/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I'm a Montrealer, so I feel that it's my duty to like this. If so, I've failed in my duty. I don't understand why anyone would listen to something so mind-numbingly bland on purpose. I tried to give it two stars, because it's not quite as bad as some other albums to which I gave one star, but this doesn't deserve the second star, so I gave it 19/100, the maximum score for one star.
Also, it's way too long. This is punishment.
Half Moon Run would have been a much better option for this list.
60/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Standard issue album by some of the most famous horny-hard-blues-rock bands out there. At the beginning of the album, I thought I was going to give it an entry-level four star score. After all, it has more foot-tapping moments than the overwhelming majority of albums I rated three stars. Then, I felt it dip toward the higher end of three stars. Then, back to four. Then, back to three. Finally, I settled on 60%, giving it the lowest score for four stars.
Brilliant? Hardly. Fun while it lasts? Sure.
Still, it'll get low average reviews today because overtly horny people tend to upset today's young people.
54/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Solid. Better than I expected.
17/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This list is hellbent on proving to me that electronic music sucks. Another one of those albums that keeps making you wondering when the thing will even start.
I mean, the thing starts with Dirge. At first, I thought "oh cool, a guitar!" Then the guitar went on to do nothing interesting.
Man, the track was long and boring.
It was all downhill from there for the next few tracks. Aisha had a few interesting moments, if you ignored Iggy Pop's stupid monologue. The tracks that came after were a bit better than the earlier tracks. Whatever points this atrocity managed to earn, it did so in the second half of the album.
This is not for me at all.
57/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Hip hop is mostly not my thing, but this isn't bad. The jazzy bits help, though there's no actual jazz in there.
80/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
First, I need to take a moment to address the top review for this. Its author thinks that people reading poetry over beats created in Ableton is more important than this classic rock album. Please. Absolutely nothing in the entire history of hip hop is as musically interesting as three of Blackmore's notes on guitar. While I agree that live albums shouldn't be on this list, I most certainly do not wish that some hip hop album had made the cut instead.
However, the absence of TOOL on this list is outright tragic.
With that out of the way, Child in Time is enough to be worth the price of admission, even if the version on 24 Karat Purple is arguably better.
Lost some points on having too many versions of the same songs, but otherwise, it was a good time.
Also, 0-3-5!
21/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Bittersweet Symphony starts out like it might turn out to be interesting, but quickly becomes boring.
The rest of the album is worse.
The thing is, this is more boring than outright bad, so I had to give it 2 stars.
39/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
As far as I'm concerned, Metallica stopped being a metal band the day the Black Album was released. They should have changed their name to Rockallica.
As this album happened in 1999, the band was already a full decade past its pre-sucking days. While the presence of older tracks on this album is welcome, the overall delivery is disappointing. Lars Ulrich is not a live drummer and it's painfully obvious here.
Also, when it comes to integrating an orchestra into metal, Dimmu Borgir (to name but one) released a far superior product to this. Metallica's effort make the band and the symphony feel like two separate entities playing in parallel, rather than acting as a cohesive whole. It's a fucking mess.
I would love to punch Bob Rock in the face for having convinced James Hetfield that he could sing. He can't. He used to scream well enough, as long as his vocals were layered over multiple tracks. Now that he tries to sing, it's painful.
Master of Puppets is on the shortlist of best albums ever. It's sad that the same band was responsible for... this.
Perhaps most importantly, my cat hates it.
53/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
This is a case of having to separate the art from the artist.
As a person, I can't stand Kanye West.
As a genre, I'm not a fan of hip hop, but I can appreciate it in moderate doses.
As shitty a person as Kanye West may be, this album is on the better side of the spectrum when it comes to hip hop. I don't pay attention to lyrics in music, so while the bits I picked up were idiotic, that is irrelevant to me. If I want lyrics, I'll read poetry. That's probably why I'm lukewarm on hip hop as a genre.
Anyway, this isn't bad.
58/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I expected more from this. The three hits were good, but the rest felt like filler, with decent moments.
22/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
While it has occasional grooves that don't suck, this is better in tiny doses. A whole album of juvenile rappers yelling nonsense at me is a bit much. It's like going to Baskin Robbins and trying all of their one flavour.
It's not nearly good enough to be this long.
At one point, I was like "okay, I get the point of this long, repetitive song." It turns out I was only 5 seconds into the song, so this "long song" was in fact a set of several. Holy fuck, these guys have no creativity.
Please stop yelling at me with those squeaky little voices.
79/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
If it weren't for uninspired tracks like Atomic Punk, this would have made 5 stars. It's an excellent album, but it's not entirely without filler.
16/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
All right, you've convinced me. Electronic music must be garbage, because every bit of it in this list has been garbage.
Stop. Nobody needs to hear this abomination.
When I heard the first track, I thought it could only get better from there. Surely, the bottom of the suck barrel had been reached and broken.
I was wrong. It got much worse from there.
For a second, I thought Make It Mine may break from the cycle of suck, but it did not.
31/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Not actually bad, but not good either. The best parts can best be described as "okay" and the worst parts are just boring.
I tend to ignore lyrics, but from the bits I noticed, they're probably the best thing about this band.
79/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Simple, heartfelt blues. This was such a nice change of pace from the Britpop and electronica bullshit through which I've had to suffer.
Didn't crack 5 stars because there are some weaker tracks, but the good tracks are absolutely fantastic.
14/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Daphuq? Is this a joke?
Debut album, no less?
"I want to put myself out there. Oh, I know! Concept album! Soundtrack for a movie that was never made! That's the ticket!"
Some moments didn't entirely suck, so still better than U2, but c'mon, man. Nobody needs to hear this before they die, unless it's their punishment.
21/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I like neither The Byrds, nor country, so this was not very enjoyable at all.
28/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Not actually bad, but eminently forgettable. Case in point, I listened to a couple of songs, but had to put it away and came back a few days later. I had completely forgotten what I'd heard so far.
This list has no shortage of boring shit on it.
Here, the music is often interesting, until the singing ruins everything. If your voice has a naturally soporific quality about it, then just sing lullabies and leave the rest of us alone.
59/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
High three stars. Fun punk rockish album.
23/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
I had so much fun reading reviews for this. People were really upset by the lyrics. I mean, yeah, they have not stood the test of time at all, but they were written by guys who are now dead. I find it hard to get upset about it. Maybe it's because I'm old. Not old enough to have been alive in 1960 when this cookie-cutter album came out.
My problem with it isn't really lyrics, because I mostly ignore lyrics anyway. My problem is how generic this was. It gets "saved" a little bit by the fact that it had some guitar licks that, while also generic, sounded nicer than what one usually hears in pop.
Also, hey.. that was the original Love Hurts? It was weird to know the lyrics to one of their songs, but I guess that's Nazareth's fault.
I don't know if one needs to hear Nazareth's version before they die, but I know for a fact that they absolutely don't need to hear this version.
32/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Generic 90s rap with a couple of quasi-moments.
22/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
There's no question that Adele is a very capable vocalist and her voice is also quite pleasant. However, the music itself always falls flat for me. It's not not very inspired or creative. It's generic music with a talented singer riffing on top of it.
I don't pay attention to lyrics until I've heard a song several times. If I want words, I read poetry. For me, music is about instrumentation, but the only instrument that gets to shine on this album is Adele's voice.
The album opens with the hit "Hello". It showcases her voice well, but aside from that, it's bereft of anything that makes music compelling.
Unfortunately, it gets worse after that.
It's not outright bad; it's just uninspired and generic. An artist whose voice is the only thing that redeems her work.
An old professor of mine used to say that only uninteresting people get bored. He'd say "If you can't be alone with your own thoughts, how interesting can you possibly be?" Today, I'm pleased to report that I can sit alone in complete silence without being bored. However, I cannot sit through an Adele album without being bored. Adele's work is so uninteresting that it creates a gigantic vortex of bore that turns things that used to be interesting into boring things.
She must be stopped.
Anyway, she's too good a vocalist for this to get only one star, but just barely.
70/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Solid, fun album. I wasn't familiar with this band. Some of the songs were a bit long for what they were, but most had something interesting in them.
39/100
Based on this scale:
1 star - 0 to 19
2 stars - 20 to 39
3 stars - 40 to 59
4 stars - 60 to 79
5 stars - 80 to 100
Generic, cliché glam rock with good guitar.
