sounds vaguely like lsd era beatles but not as good.

its alright, nothing mindblowing. 2.8.

Took a lot of notes per song then closed the tab without saving. Basically a white band to bring black music to white people. Little richard sounding songs, heard it through the grapevine cover, bluegrass/blues standard sounding stuff. First original sounding song on the album is the one that just started after I zoned out with the unnecessarily long ending of heard it through the grapevine and accidentally closed this tab, long as i can see the light. Pretty cool tune, brass section and piano. travelin band remake, dont need to listen to it twice, this is the most obvious little richard one, the lack of woos is disturbing me. live version of up around the bend. born on the bayou. Cool tune i guess.

Highway star. Good intro song, sweet bassline, cool keyboard/organ. maybe im a leo. cool riff. Both songs have melodies and a sound that remind me of 8 bit video games. pictures of home. cool mix of solos, guitar then organ then even bass for a second! never before. funky intro. smoke on the water. classic, not sure why its so iconic, every other song so far has been just as good if not better. maybe just because the main riff is catchy and the chorus? lazy. sweet organ intro, trippy, cool. followed by guitar, cool instrumental through the first half. space truckin. catchy chorus. Cool guitar strumming in later verses adds some 'texture' or something. dig. little drum solo action when a blind man cries. ballad. pretty good

i aint the one. guitar jam, cool keys too. music and guitar tone reminiscent of aerosmith. tuesdays gone. classic, ballady, meh. gimme three steps. awesome bassline. fun jam simple man. top shelf song, good music, melody, chorus. things goin on. folky/bluegrass intro, cool riff then some bluesy/ragtime keys. mississippi kid. tinny diddy with a little slide guitar and finger style. poison whiskey. jam. guitar song, sweet riff. cool solos from guitar/keys. free bird. iconic, song is alright, probably so iconic simply from the solo, which is kind of a bluesy face melter. mr banker. classic blues sound. rhythm/lead guitar and vocals only. down south jukin. similar to 3 steps, kind of cool. demo versions.

drive. ok, cool orchestral strings elements try not the breathe. reminds me a bit of gaelic folk but with more production. meh. sidewinder sleeps tonite. this is some 90s shit. not much going on, over a bed of organ. everybody hurts. big hit. not a great song. used in every ham-fisted movie/commercial where the word 'hurt' can be applied. new orleans instrumental no. 1. Um, ok. Boring, but fine enough. sweetness follows. everything is just so boring, overproduced, like youre in a cloud of mediocre music. I guess people like this band for the lyrics. monty got a raw deal. cool arpeggio i guess. More of the same, has a little of that gaelic folk. ignoreland. more music cloud, vocals sound far off. star me kitten. cosmic mediocre music cloud. man on the moon. has an actual chorus and clear guitar. best song on the album so far. nightswimming. nice clear piano. vocals with some echo for some reason but at least present and somewhat clear. music cloud comes in and out but piano remains consistent at least. find the river. sounds like an actual song too, album ends strong, background vocal melodies instead of music cloud in other songs, its fine, not great.

plainsong. big, flowy, echo. interesting choice for an intro. pictures of you. the cure seems to love chorus/flanger pedals. and really long intros. background/elevator music. closedown. 2 minutes in, song starts. jesus christ. lovesong. a song that actually sounds like a song. a very overrated one at that. last dance. bleh. lullaby. well i do want to fall asleep. fascination street. these are 2-3 minute songs with 2 minutes of fluff intros. what the hell. im already bored with the song before the lyrics start. prayers for the rain. cool melody at least the same deep water as you. intro was only 90 seconds this time. same dramatic montage shitty movie sound. disintegration. 1:45 intro. homesick. at least this one sounds like a proper intro, piano/guitar accompaniment, actually musical instead of ambient noise. nice harmony, drums come in with main riff only about a minute in. best intro so far, albeit still to long. strings come in 90 seconds in, then synth at 1:45. kind of ridiculous, now its absurdly long. lyrics start after 3 minutes. fuck this lol. untitled.

speed of life. cool eclectic instrumental. sweet baseline, spacy synth intermixed. breaking glass. nice baseline again, modern guitar comparison would be jack white maybe. what in the world. odd. dissonant. not sure, definitely not very enjoyable. sound and vision. always crashing in the same car. be my wife. a new career in a new town. warszawa. weird and interesting art decade. weeping wall. subterraneans. not impressed honestly.

innocuous pop for the most part. the slow ballad songs are forgettable, the big singles are kind of catchy, hard to pinpoint why it caught on so much at the time, 1999 was a weird time in music.

green onions. for some reason I thought this was a zz top song. rinky dink. thinking music on a game show, or ambient fair music. pretty cool instrumentals. organ and a little funky, pretty cool for early 60s.

its fine

not good. 90s uk music was weird. sounds like blur and oasis and austin powers and all of the rest of them. id give it a 3 but the more of these albums i come across i realize i have to get more drastic with ratings, this isn't a 2 as in the garbage that was the cure/REM but its not as good as some i've given 3s. His voice is actually pretty good. The music is just formulaic and mostly uninteresting, and the songs themselves feel very time and place and trying to be what was popular at the time. angels is the corniest fucking song. all of these songs are fucking corny.

very few interesting songs. sounds like what i imagine was on any beatles influenced radio station in the 60s.

meh. I wish you could rate these on a decimal system, all of these 'listenable' but wouldn't listen to again or purchase albums are getting kind of tiresome and rating them a 3 seems too high and too low at the same time.

this is ruining my night. I rage quit the relaxing game I was playing because I couldn't, and didn't even want to, focus on anything because this music is so fucking stupid. It's going to be a struggle to finish this, worse than REM and The Cure certainly. Dreaming of the queen is listenable. to speak is a sin is fine when the singer isnt singing. Skimming through must because I just couldnt. 2 songs on the whole album that didn't make me want to run to the nearest living thing and kill it.

pretty bizarre vocals. first song is just weird. Creepy as fuck, terrible vocal choices (plaaaayyyyaaaaayyy heeeeyyyy ayyyyyy). Talking about always remembering her as a child, girl. What the fuck. This guy is a creep.

sounds vaguely like lsd era beatles but not as good.

cool album cover moderately interesting pop. closer to 3 than a 2.

weird. not bad though. ridiculous lyrics. closer to 3 than 2.

super cool, pretty punk rock. Interesting music, lots of variance song to song, really good bass lines.

pretty cool. I wonder if this was new in 1959? Seems like pretty cool but not amazing jazz, but given the time maybe more profound? Pretty sweet regardless.

kind of redundant songs, chanty lyrics.

its fine i guess.

its fine, don't love it.

not very good. Chanting and stuff just to be weird but not particularly interesting. 2.1

Solid. 3.6.

It's Metallica. Never been a huge fan or anything, but this isn't one of their bad albums at least. Solid 3.5 at least.

Better than the last Bowie album, I like the flow of the songs, good continuity in the album as a whole, good composition and even some cool solos and stuff.

Don't really care for electronic music in general, but its fine. Background noise.

Only 4 songs on the album, seems experimental. Imagine it was kinda cool for 1973. A little jazzy, a little psychedelic/avante garde. It's fine.

pretty dope, 3.5 or higher but below 4.

Some really good tracks on this one. Jamming, waiting in vain, turn your lights down low, 3 little birds, one love/people get ready. 3.7.

flanger/chorus, whispy vocals, but kind of heavy. Interesting at least. Songs all sound the same, all the music is just washed out flangy/chorusy cloud. It's Ok. 2.9.

Wasn't into it when it came out, as I had been going to hardcore shows for a few years by this time, and it wasn't anything new, just a heavier version of mainstream hard rock/hardcore-lite like Korn or something. Pretty sweet drums though. Songs generally sound the same, everything detuned, repetitive, wait and bleed was the big single, probably because its one of the few with actual singing so more digestible for mass audience. Production/mixing a lot better then contemporary hardcore acts. 2.9. Sidenote, the costume/mask stuff is fucking dumb.

sounds like a shitty german version of stomp or some shit. I can only assume this is included because its an early version of what would become 'industrial' music or something. It sucks, and every song sounds like there are dudes banging metal trash cans. I bet Rammstein listened to a lot of this. 1.3.

Classic, not a whole lot to say.

Solid. 3.5.

pretty sweet. 3.8.

Ambient mood album with some poppy elements. It's fine. 3.4.

Interesting at least. 3.1.

lmao. 80s goth kids act like this was some type of new music, or cooler than the rest of the '80s' music. It's literally just 80s pop with a deep voice guy talking a lot. It's not bad or anything. 2.8.

Not a huge fan of the beatles in general. Solid album though. 3.5.

It's fine. Not my style but kind of cool and she has an interesting voice. Good mix of songs, doesn't all sound the same. 3.8.

Look what I can do on my laptop. Sweet for the 90s.

Catchy and fine. 3.2

Surprisingly good. Turns out I don't hate Yes, I hate Yes' "hits". 3.6.

drivel. 2.1.

Cool enough. Probably more impressive in '74 when it was released. 3.1.

pretty good, like proto-grunge/indie or something. Not too dated sounding honestly, probably because its mostly just good old guitar/drums/bass for the most part. I can dig it, don't love it or anything but it's good especially for 1988. 3.6.

Enjoyed it more than I thought. Some songs are annoying, but most are pretty good. 3.9.

meh. 3.1

Jazzy and awesome. Can't understand and still love it. 4.3

Not my thing. 2.7.

It's just Ok. 3.0.

not great, a lot more choir-y r&b bullshit songs than I would have expected given her voice. Several songs where she shows it off though. 2.8.

Pretty cool I guess. 3.4.

meh, 2.4.

Perfect 90s sound, well made, a couple classics. Top shelf 90s r&b. 4 flat.

It's fine. 2.9.

It's listenable, unmistakably depeche mode, good background music. Don't love it though. 3 flat.

2.9

pretty good, 3.1

Classic, exemplifies 90s west coast rap. 4.3

Redundant annoying garbage. I don't care if they were the pioneers of making music on a laptop.

2.6

no

pretty good. nostalgia, mid 90s hits. 3.5.

Pretty solid pop, catchy, good voice. Not my thing but it's pretty good. 3.2

pretty cool, not great, kind of repetitive but interesting at least. 3.2.

its fine, not great. Was probably better for its time. 3.1.

Can't find it anywhere

Boy band level shit. 1.7.

Terrible.

Meh, pretty boring. 2.3.

Epic, even though it's short. 4.5.

pretty cool, interesting beats. 3.6.

pretty sweet, great guitar, country/bluegrass. 3.8.

Maybe it was cool for 1988, sounds pretty experimental and noisy, lots of effects for some reason. Not really enjoyable, no notable tracks.

it's like ... part musical ... part ... what you get if you tell germans to make a david bowie album? Not feeling it, 1.3.

Pretty cool. There's some interesting avante garde kind of songs, then some regular mellow jazz kind. I dig it. 3.4.

kind of innocuous. Not particularly good or interesting, background music for some sort of boring movie montage. 2.5.

Better than the first album of theirs I got. Extremely boring, but distinct '90s' sound even though it came out in 1983, so probably pioneering in some ways. 2.6.

Fucking. Garbage. Avante Garde my balls. Can't even give it a rating.

Some really good tracks, and some bad ones. The crappy 80s drum track sound doesn't hold up in my opinion, but isnt too annoying in most songs. Title track is my favorite. 3.7.

I want to really like it, but I don't. The music is fantastic, the voice isn't. 3.1.

synth pop, trash can drum machine track. All of the bad things about the 80s, but decently melodic and a couple interesting tracks. Not bad. 2.8.

I havent really like any REM album I've heard yet, but this is fine. I can at least appreciate the sound they are producing given the era it came out, much better than a lot of popular music in the mid to late 80s, I'm guessing they are so well regarded because they were early pioneers/influences for 90s alternative. 3.2.

its 15 minutes long

whatever

bad

Pretty awesome. Good voice, music, lyrics, songwriting/composition. I dig it.

Classic of my childhood. Pretty good sound, decent variety, not exactly groundbreaking or anything but just good solid 90s alternative. 3.3.

Surprisingly listenable. Pretty interesting, and recognizable songs. 3.0.

Pretty cool for mid 50s. Early rock, heavy blues influence. Doesn't really hold up over time IMO, recording isn't great, but definitely holds its place in history, probably below Little Richard but still respectable. 3.1.

I think usually people consider Melancholy the SP magnum opus, but this album is absolutely fantastic. Everything I like about Melancholy I like about this album as well. Top shelf. 4.3.

1.8. Not for me.

iconic punk. 3.1.

It's ok. Cool soul style, but none of the authenticity or originality of old school soul. This is kind of a UK Mass Market version from 2019. 2.8.

2.7

Pretty good. Kind of a mix between punk and goth of the era. Where is my mind became pretty iconic and is a great tune. 3.4.

Not very good, but kind of interesting I guess. I bet Imagine Dragons listened to this and was like 'Hey, we can do that' but lacked any of the talent or imagination of this band. 2.5.

pretty easy listening. 3.7.

Bad

Charmingly weird. Not great and probably wouldn't listen again, but you can hear a lot of different influences in the music, and for 1979 I think it's kind of cool and holds up pretty well. 3.3.

meh, its fine. I don't care for it and it's not particularly interesting. 3.0.

Whimsical kinda boring folk music, with a terrible singer. No thanks. 1.8.

Pretty bizarre. Seems like parody of the 60s music at the time, kinda scathing. Not great to listen to though, which I guess is kind of the point? 2.7.

not my thing, not terrible but not really notable in any way. 2.4.

the funky songs are great, the ballads or whatever not so much. 3.2

its alright, nothing mindblowing. 2.8.

garbage. 0.

Good guitar. I like it, don't love it. 2.9.

Pretty dope, especially for 84. 3.2

pretty basic 60s hippie shit. Its ok. 2.6.

Boring. Poser throwback to psychedelic rock I guess. 2.4.

Pretty good. Their version of proud mary is pretty iconic. Songs are listenable, I don't love CCR or anything but they're pretty good. 3.3.

Even the none hits are great, and the hits are iconic. 3.9

I don't really like Pearl Jam, but this is a very well made album. 3.4.

pretty dope. 3.7

its alright, nothing special. 2.7.

Not great, kind of forgettable. 2.8

Pretty good, great beats, kind of an oldschool vibe even though it's from 2008. I dig it. 3.3.

It's fine. Voice goes from interesting at the beginning then starts to wear on me. Overall pretty good.

Easy to listen to, not great but I'm not mad at it. 2.8.

Dope riffs, 3.3

Meh, it's ok. Sounds like they tried to mix it up between some sort of pop-punk and straight pop to appeal to a wider audience, but it all kinda sounds the same. 2.8.

Bad

Kinda cool. I'm not huge into industrial rock, but given it's age it holds up, and I'm sure influenced a lot of later acts. pretty good. 3.4.

Not bad, pretty rough recording and a lot of it sounds the same. A couple good tracks, cool style. 3.1.

Not bad actually. Not my thing at all, but the songs are decently composed, interesting melodies and the synth is interesting on a lot of tracks instead of just solely the same redundant loops like so much pop at the time. 3.0.

2.6

whatever

typical hippie shit. 2.8

vocals are atrocious, but the rest is a pretty good fuck you to hair metal of the time. 3.1

pretty cool, interesting enough, good variety. 3.4.

its bob dylan alright.

Pretty good. More soul/r&b than I remember from her popular more pop tunes. Not really my thing, but the music and her voice are infinitely better than someone like britney spears. Good mix of songs, well produced. 3.7.

3.4

I would have hated the 80s. 2.7.

first half of the album is alright, 2nd half has a lot of stereotypically 80s garbage. 2.6

pretty good, 3.5

I remember loving RHCP as a kid. By the time I was a teenager, they were putting out what I consider garbage. This might be their last good album before the poppy mess started, as I haven't heard the one they released just after. Everything from Californication on is fucking garbage, but this album holds a special place. Lots of great tracks, mix of funk and rock, some iconic hits. 4.2.

Way worse than I remember

So much fuzz. Not a fan. 2.3.

Corny as fuck, but not that bad. Some interesting musical arrangements, even if it can't escape that ubiquitous shitty 80s sound at times. Horns give it big boost. 2.8.

Boring.

80s shit

2.5

pretty good. I don't think it sounds particularly special, good melodies, good voice. Just good. But for '71 maybe it was boosted by originality or something.

unironically dope. I've only really heard their hits, but this album is in eclectic journey with some really sick beats/samples. 4.2.

Boring. Not bad, but not my thing at all. 2.3.

Not only does every song sound basically the same, but it sounds like a dozen other bands at the same time. I don't know who was copying who and I don't care, it's not interesting.

Pretty good. No fat on the album, so many strong basslines, good vocals. I can dig it. 3.5.

Masterpiece.