One of the iconic live albums of all time, it is a bit amazing that this was recorded in 1962 (released in 1963). A year and half before the Beatles would appear on the Ed Sullivan show. At a time when the biggest hits on the Billboard charts were “Big Girls Don’t Cry” (Frankie Vali and 4 Seasons) and “He’s So Fine” (Chiffons). Into this safe and comfortable world burst James Brown, in a live setting, saturated with a primal energy that had to frighten the grown-ups. Listen in the context of its time and it is even more impressive. His energy, reflected back by the crown…. Well, it is impressive. I was too young to have caught this when it was fresh, but it’s an album I knew by reputation long before I ever heard it. And I’ve owned this for a long time. This is why Jame Brown is known as the Godfather Of Soul, and The-Hardest-Working-Man-In-Show-Business. The sound quality is better than one should expect for a live album in 1963, but you need to recognize that it isn’t known for its crystal sound quality. This is a testament to a moment. This absolutely belongs on this “must hear” list, a wonderful time capsule of music from an earlier era. It is notable that this album was recorded before the Civil Rights Act, before the Beatles, before JFK’s assassination. A dramatic recording from a dynamic time. 5/5

Another iconic album that has been in my collection for many years. The debut album from Black Sabbath, an album many credit with creating Heavy Metal (TM). Unquestionably iconic. That said, this is not my favorite Sabbath album, and I never owned it on vinyl. I think they were still developing as an entity at this point, and their next 4 albums are objectively better. But that just means “really good” instead of “outstanding”. Overall, it’s just not as “tight”, as their latter albums, which is supported by the reports the whole thing was recorded in a single 12 hr session, with virtually no overdubs. Evil Woman is the only cover version in the Sabbath catalog, and it strikes me as an A&R man’s addition is search of a hit. I’ve often wondered how much better this could’ve been with a bit more care in the process, a bit more faith from the record company. But this is the first, the one that defined (not redefined) heavy music. And there’s a several great songs. This is a solid album, groundbreaking. But I’ll still prefer Paranoid, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath, or even Vol. 4. All of which I owned on vinyl since the 70’s. Another solid 4/5

The first song starts out with the following lyrics, choked out syllable by syllable, over seemingly random meandering synthesizer strings: “A juxtapositioning fate / Find our mutual coordinates / Moments of clarity are so rare / I better document this / at last the view is fierce / all that matters is this / who is open chested / and who is coagulated” I’m just not sure how I can take that seriously. This is the second Bork album I’ve received in the 1st 75 days. I rated the 1st at 2/5, with the comments “I thought the first couple of songs were pretty good. Sort of an ambient, ethereal feel. But with each passing song it held my interest less and less. Just not really my ‘thing’. 2/5….” Well, the second album jumps straight into the bit about each song holding my interest less and less. This doesn’t offend me, I don’t hate it. But I sure don’t like it either. As with the prior Bork album, it’s just not my thing. I’m bored by this, and that’s disappointing. Frankly, as I get further through this, it’s starting to kind of irritate me. I’m taking a break at about 1/2 way through, but I’m not expecting it to improve…. - - - - It didn’t. I admit, I gave up somewhere in the middle of the 7th song. I guess I’m just not cool enough. 1/5

Paul Simonis one of the great American songwriters of the 20th century. And this is one of his best pieces of work. Just the title track and "The Boxer" secure a 5/5 for this one, but there's so much more. 8x Platinum in US, 11x Platinum in UK, it was certainly successful. Besides the hits, there's several great deep cuts, including one of my favorite S&G songs "The Only Living Boy in New York". That said, there are a couple of throwaways. The only head scratcher is thecover of "Bye Bye Love", which is a live recording with the vocals too low in the mix, and the crowd too high. It is jarringly out of place. But not nearly enough to drop the score. Yep, this is an album that everyone should listen to before they die. 5/5

The Beatles are probably the most important band in 75 years. Read the biography of almost any rock musician from the late 60’s through the early 80s and you’ll find out they were inspired to take up music by the Beatles. The Beatles released a dozen albums in just over 7 years in the UK, and 11 of them reached #1. Yellow Submarine “only” made it to #3. This was repackaged into 17 US releases, 14 of which hit #1 (with the other 3x hitting #2). They are iconic, they are pervasive. In the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s, anybody who listened to music knew Beatles songs, even if they didn’t realize they were Beatles songs. So, what about The White Album? This is the 9th UK release, coming on the heels of the perfect trio of “Rubber Soul”, “Revolver” and “Sgt. Pepper…”. The bar couldn’t be set higher. And this album comes close to meeting expectations, but falls a little short. A double album, with 30 songs clocking in at over 90 minutes. It’s certainly ambitious. And there’s no shortage of brilliant music. From harder songs like “Helter Skelter” and “Back in the USSR”, to some of the prettiest songs they did, like “Blackbird” and “I Will”. And everything in between. And there-in lies the problem. This album is all over the place, and sometimes seem like the members are lurching 4 different directions from song to song. I’ve seen it referred to as having a “fragmentary style”. Strains within the band are well documented, and reportedly, only 14 of the 30 songs feature all four members performing. Revolution 9 brings Yoko Ono into the process, and should never have seen the light of day. In retrospect, this album showed that the Beatles were not going to last much longer. BUT (and a big but) it all works out and the wealth of high-spots outweigh the weak spots. I wish it were more cohesive, I wish that it were more concise. I wish that “Revolution 9” had been discarded. I wish I could go 4.5, but that’s not an option. And I can’t give 5 stars to an album that devotes 8+ minutes to Revolution 9. So 4/5 it is.

More interesting as a “moment” than a musical collection. It seems like Cash made a living playing prisons, and this is one of those shows. The interactions with the inmates are as interesting as the songs, but there’s an awful lot of random talk that doesn’t add anything. Even still this is only 34 minutes, and includes playing the song “San Quentin” twice. And an abbreviated version of “Folsom Prison Blues”. It leaves me wishing for more meat. Perhaps a bit more editing of the talking would’ve allowed some additional material. Overall OK, 3 of 5. I won’t be adding it to my collection. 3/5

"Le Freak" is one of the huge songs of the disco era, a real high-point of the genre. Also the only song from this album I had heard (and have). The whole album is very solid and stays in it's lane (disco / Funk), but does it well. Further, it <i>sounds</i> great (I'm listening to the 2018 remaster via Spotify). Bernard Edwards' bass is strong in the mix and quite enjoyable. All said, a good representative of the genre; C'est Chic was Billboard's 1979 R&B Album of the Year. All good, but not a genre I'm all that excited about. A very solid 3/5.

This album was completely new to me. By mid 1993 I was pretty much out of the "popular" music scene. I think I've heard the name, but don't think I've ever heard any of Bjork's music. So I went into this with an open mind and a blank slate. I thought the first couple of songs were pretty good. Sort of an ambient, ethereal feel. But with each passing song it held y interest less and less. Just not really my "thing". 2/5

One of the best debut albums ever, one of the best albums of the late 60’s. One of the best keyboard based rock albums. From the opening of “Break On Through” to the last strains of “The End”, this album doesn’t let up. I’ve had this on vinyl since the 70s, and on CD since it was available. HIGHLY recommended, 5/5

I’ve never been much of a Metallica fan, but tried to go into this with an open mind. But over 1hr into this 133 minute album, I’m wondering if I can slog through to the end. It doesn’t suck, it just that too much of it is essentially the same to me, kind of a a constant beating drone. Not enough melody, lots of head banging wall of sound. I like the symphonic part, but that loses its novelty pretty quickly. “Hero for the Day” is a nice change of pace, and the symphony is really good on that one. Likewise with “Devil’s Dance”, with it’s “Kashmir” inspired strings. But I had to wade through over 45 minutes of wall-of-sound to get to those. It doesn’t help that I’ve never liked James Hetfield’s vocals, just not my “thing”. I can see why lots of people love Metallica, but I’m not one of them. I guess that summarizes the whole experience. I’ll finish disc 1, and give myself a break before disc 2. Which isn’t much of an endorsement. 2/5

An iconic album, deserved. This captures the spirit of Allman Brothers Band, arguably at their peak. Widely considered one of the best live albums in rock. They’re the original Southern Rock band, but don’t have the same foot-stomping, honky tonking feel that a lot of most of the bands that followed. ABB has more of a bluesy, jamming musical style, a bit “smoother”. But they can certainly rock out, too. If there’s a downside, it’s that the extended jams can go on, evidenced by Whipping Post which takes the 5 minute studio version and stretches it out to 22+ minutes. Or Elizabeth Reed which doubles from its studio version to almost 13 minutes. This is 7 songs in 76 minutes, it is not concise. Still, one of the essential albums of 70’s rock. 4/5

When I saw this was a 2017 album, described as “an electropop record incorporating piano-based melodies, pulsing synthesisers and dense electronic beats.” I wasn’t very enthusiastic. But the point of this project is to broaden my base, so onward! And it’s pretty decent. It is mostly melodic, which is important to me. It is well produced, and Lorde has a solid vocal style (with hint of Melonie meets Patti Smith). On the other hand: lyrically, it’s a consistently “down” album, another example of a singer baring their soul for 40 minutes. The album cover captures this, a sad looking woman (Lourde?). Lying in bed, staring blankly ahead…. I like sad songs as much as the next guy, but it gets overwhelming for a whole album. My biggest issue is the sound; almost all electronic, except for the occasional bit of piano. I looked at the Wikipedia page for this album, just to see if there were any “real” drums : Personnel section lists 11 individuals under production, and 15 individuals under technical (engineering / mixing). There are no musicians listed. None. That flies right into my preconceived notions of what “current” music is. There’s instruments in there, but they apparently don’t merit mention. Bottom line? Not my style, but very solid. I wouldn’t mind individual songs showing up on a playlist, especially the songs that feature piano. But the overall album? Probably won’t listen to it again, but might. Don’t see myself buying it though. 3/5

Mid 2000’s indie rock…. Pretty solid, good clean/clear sound. Nothing really grabbed me, but all of it was good. I should probably listen some more. Which I could give it 3.5, leaning more 3 than 4

AC/DC is one of the instantly recognizable bands of hard rock, and Highway To Hell is one of their most recognizable songs. This probably AC/DC’s second best album (behind Back In Black), and one of the two AC/DC albums I own (along with Back In Black). They’re very good at what they do. That said, they’re a bit of a one trick pony. 4+/5

"Life During Wartime" is an great song and massive hit. And featured an iconic MTV video. But outside of that song, it's not my favorite. Not my favorite Talking Heads Album, not my favorite album from 1980. One of the things I liked about Talking Heads' first two albums was the focus on concise songs with pretty simple instrumentation. That's gone here on the 2nd of the their Brian Eno produced albums. In their 1st 3 albums, the average song length is under 3:40, here it has ballooned to just over 5:00. Lots of synths and polyrythms, and looping grooves. Which is OK, I suppose, but really drags when songs are stretched out forever. They get points for evolving. I'll give 5 for the hit, 3 for the rest... call it 3/5, 'cause I can't do 3.5

Nice set of “classic” blues from a classic blues man. The recording is better than I expected from a 1964 recording. I didn’t love the backup band, they seemed a little out of sync on the opening song, and overall had a bit of a “Vegas” feel all along. But overall a great time capsule, and a worthy listen. 4/5

I actually own this album, I must’ve been in a angry mood one day in the early 2000’s. I doesn’t really get played a lot but there’s several decent songs. That said, all of it deserves the “Explicit” label. And outside the few decent songs, some of it is pretty bad. it’s loaded with tough posturing, misogynist lyrics, and lots of Kid Rock singing about how awesome Kid Rock is. And misogynistic deserves to be mentioned again. The album is certainly well put together, well produced. And every once in a while I want to turn the music loud, cruise my Midwest suburbs in my VW sedan and feel …. We’ll something. And this fits. But not for 70 minutes straight. And not with my family in earshot. 2.5/5 for the couple of decent songs. round to 3… barely.

I struggled a bit with this. On the face, it is pleasant enough. But it just doesn’t work for me. Many of the songs drag, and there’s no memorable moments. The sound is sparse and open, which works, but the songs drag. The vocal style leaves me cold, often sounding like the Violent Femmes singer, but heavily sedated and almost most mumbling at times. Which is a problem for a vocal driven album. It doesn’t suck, might even be ok for background music of a slow afternoon. I don’t hate it, but it drones on to the point I don’t like it. My weighted (by time) average of the individual songs is 1.9/5, sounds about right. round up to 2/5

Wilco is one of those bands that I feel like I ought to like, and I’ve meant to try out. I have and like Uncle Tupelo’s Anodyne, so that’s a good sign. It is also almost 77 minutes, which is a bit long. I actually split this listen into 2 sessions. I really like the sound, very clean and open, lots of acoustic guitar, piano, banjo, etc. call it alt country, indie, whatever; it’s a style I like. This would be an high 4 if some of the fat were trimmed, maybe a 5. As it is, it it’s barely a 4. But still a solid effort, I’ll listen to this again. 4/5

Songhoy Blues is described by Wikipedia as a “desert blues band from Timbuktu, Mali”. I figured this would be interesting, and I was right.not just interesting, but really good. This is, naturally, not in English, so I don’t know if the lyrics are good or bad. But I REALLY like the music. The closest I can come in mood/tone is Charlie Parr’s Stumpjumper, but that’s just a general similarity. An easy 4, maybe higher if I get more familiar with it. 4/5

Perhaps if I had been 16 when this album came out, I would’ve liked it. Not sure it would’ve been a favorite even then. However, I was 31 when this came out. I had a wife, 2 kids, a solid start on a career. I just didn’t have the testosterone driven anger at the world, that this seems to call upon. And I’m good with that. I’ll go 2/5, just for “Enter Sandman” is a very good song, I do own that one. But don’t listen to it very often. 2/5

When Dookie came out, I thought it was pretty good, bringing some energy to the wasteland that was MTV. I won’t call it punk sensibility though. By the time this album came out, I was in my early 40’s and just couldn’t muster the cynical anger that defines this music. Yeah, you think America sucks…. I just can’t care. I do like the Weird Al reinvisioning of Canadian Idiot, at least that’s good humored. Anyway, I don’t hate this, I just can’t muster the energy to share their anger. 3/5

This is a great album, from a great singer. It’s got a great feel, great “swing”. Most of this album is Redding covering contemporary songs, including some which were very well known. Plus his original version of Respect. Straight soul and R&B from Stax records (Memphis). This is one that I own, and one of my favorite 60’s souls/r&b albums. But I can’t quite call it essential. I’ll round down from 4.5/5, but it is really close.

I have to say, I didn’t hate this as much as I expected to. Not to imply that I leaked it. There’s no redeeming value here. The lyrics are mostly misogyny, plus glorifying violence, drugs, guns, whatever. Lots of profanity and constant use of the “N” word. No melodies, just rapping over snips of rhythm. Frankly, it all blurs together for me. Obviously a lot of people appreciate Tupac, and rap / Hip Hop. And that’s ok. But it’s not for me. 1/5

The first 1/2 dozen songs are pretty good, sort of latin/samba sounding. Pleasant enough if somewhat background-y. But the further I went, the more the electronic themes came more forward, and the less I liked it. And by the last song I was ready to be done. Some of these songs would be good on a playlist, but others would be skips. Certainly nothing I feel the need to actually own. 3/5

This album was new to me, which is a little surprising, given the vintage and the style. I (of course) knew of the Youngbloods, and their hit “Get Together”. As I listened, I realized I also knew Sunlight. This is a solid album, and grew on me throughout the listening. Early country rock, in the same neighborhood as Buffalo Springfield, early Poco, Byrds (Sweetheart era), Etc. My overall rating is a bit more than the sum of the parts. No 5 star songs, but no clunkers, either. This will be one I’ll be revisiting.

Very solid 60’s R&B. An enjoyable listen, especially “Cry To Me”. There’s seven charting singles on this album, and those are the standouts. But it’s all good. A strong 3 but not enough to round up to 4. 3/5

Just a guy and his guitar, mid 60's folk. Good enough, but not really anything special. I prefer Leo Kettke or John Fahey. Easy 3/5, but no higher.

Well…. I don’t like this one. Often irritating, occasionally merely boring. Every once in a while both. There were some decent moments where they almost sounded a little reminiscent of Modern English. It it is all based on repetitive electronic rhythms. 1/5.

Dave Brubeck’s 1959 classic is essential. The first Jazz album to sell 1M copies, and peaked at #2 on the Pop charts. I’d rate this in my top 5 Jazz albums of all time. Included in the National Recording Registry as being “culturally historically or aesthetically significant”. Besides all that, it’s just a great album. I love the use of unusual time signatures. Despite this explorations of various (and sometimes varying) time signatures, it is all accessible, with a “subtle blend of cool and west coast jazz” (quote from Wikipedia article). Smooth and Easy: 5/5, and highly recommended.

I expected to hate this, I’m not a hip hop fan. But, I only disliked it, so that’s something I suppose. But I’m barely 2/3 the way through, and not sure if I can make it through the whole thing. I tried pulling up the lyrics to see if that helped…. It didn’t. The Wikipedia article says they “set out to create the hip hop equivalent of Marvin Gaye’s Let’s Get On”. I think I’ll pull up that classic to flush this one out of my brain. 1/5

This is pleasant enough, early 80’s pop, very synthesizer driven. Good to very good, but a little bit soul-less. I see that Winwood did everything here, writing, producing, engineering, all instruments. That, along w/ the synth emphasis, probably account for this. “While You See A Chance” was the big hit, which does suffer a bit from having been really overplayed. There’s some nice moments here, especially “Night Train”. But “Dust” found me checking to see how much was left…. That one is not worth the 6:20 devoted to it. Solid 3, but nowhere near a 4. I’d rather listen to anything from Traffic, Spencer Davis Group, or Even Blind Faith (Winwood’s earlier bands). 3/5

This is a pretty interesting album. Some songs I rather like, some I kind of don’t. I think my biggest disappointment is the instrumentation. Probably 1/3 of the songs include “drum box” rather than real drums, which gives a predictably mechanical feel. All of the songs have the layered, polished production typical of turn of the century pop. These are not what I expect from Emmylou Harris, and I think this would’ve been a much stronger album with a more “traditional” sound. It won a Grammy for “Best Contemporary Folk Album”, but it is more contemporary than folk. It’s a solid 3, but might’ve ranked higher (for me) if it actually sounded like an Emmylou Harris album. 3/5

I understand that this album captures an important moment in music history, considered the first live blues album. That said, I have studio versions of about 1/2 this album (from Anthology), and prefer those versions. But that’s a comparatively minor quibble, and only keeps this from edging towards a 5. This is a solid 4.

I was unfamiliar with this artist/album, so I read through some of the comments before listening. Just about every one mentioned the vocalist’s vibrato…. And/or their “annoying voice”. And now I get it. Not my thing. I’ll call it a constant, distinct warble, excessive vibrato. The album’s sound is lush and clean, very good sound. Piano and strings dominate. That said, the songs are quite “down”; dirge like. Certainly maudlin. My favorite part of this album is the cover photo of Candy Darling, but even that sets the tone, as it is “on her deathbed”. Overall, this is a real downer of an album. I can respect it without liking it. 2/5

I went back and forth on this album. A couple of songs were pretty decent, a few were just ok, and a few didn’t really resonate with me.but none of it was compelling. It also lacked any real sense of coherence, or overriding message. I saw that the album was recorded over a 5 year span, maybe that’s the reason. It felt more like a collection of leftovers from a series of albums, leftovers. Overall 3/5

Solid enough pop-punk from the 1st half of the 90’s. I hear a good bit of Green Day influence, a bit of Nirvana…. And the singing style sort of reminds me of Weird Al. It all adds up to good enough, if not especially memorable. a solid 3/5.

When I saw this album tagged as Hip-Hop and electronica, I was worried. I One comment in the Wikipedia article called it “both a party album and a progressive aural assault”. Yay? It seems more electronica/pop than hip hop, though. Each song is repetitive. Very, VERY repetitive. Musically and lyrically. Which makes some sense as dance music, but doesn’t keep my interest. The more hip-hoppy party’s still have that dance feel, and the lyrics aren’t angry and “explicit”…. Just repetitive and dumb. It seems to pick up and hint at several world musical styles, hints of Bollywood stylings, African rhythms, etc. This actually works pretty well, and provides interest where lyrics and soundscape don’t. Nothing I’ll want to hear again, but I can kinda get where it is coming from. I’ll go 2/5, but just barely.

Another 2000’s era dance-pop and electronica album. Madonna here is almost 20 years into her career as a “queen of pop”, it seems a little tired, and not particularly creative. The dance beats here are incessant which I guess is the point. But they’re also very generic sounding to me, and entirely mechanical. Whatever effort is made to be original is provided by various synthesized beeps and boops and such…. and vocal effects. All of which can be interesting in small doses, but these aren’t small doses. I find it all irritating. Cher did the Auto-Tune thing 2 years earlier, and better. It also spotlights that Madonna doesn’t really have a great voice. This is probably great background music for an early 2000’s dance club…. It is very well put together, it is vert professional. But it’s not essential, or even especially interesting. Oh yeah, the bonus track cover of “American Pie” is somewhere between embarrassing and offensive. I almost docked the rating a point, but decided to let it slide as it’s not part of the official track list. But, man, that remake SUCKS. It takes some gumption to cover a massive classic and make it your own by sucking out all of the emotion/soul of it. 2/5

I discovered REM back in early 1983 when Murmur was fresh and new. And exciting and different. I saw them live in October 1983, one of the top 5 shows I’ve seen. And I was a huge fan of their first 4.5 albums (including the Chronic Town EP). But I never really latched on to Document and the subsequent albums, perhaps because I became a father and refocused. And perhaps because they shifted their style, and got really popular. I know (and own) the “hits” from this album, and they’re certainly worthy, so I was happy when this came up on the generator. Overall it’s a good album, though I still prefer the earlier sound when the vocals were unintelligible (and often incomprehensible) and the band seemed less political. The fact that they planned the album release for the same day as the US presidential election doesn’t impress me. Stick to music guys. The 4x singles are really good, the rest of it is just OK. I went into this expecting at least 3.5, probably rounding to 4. But I just can’t get that high, this is below all the other REM albums I own. A kind of disappointing 3/5

I suppose this was pleasant enough…. Voice and guitar, occasional strings. But it is forgettable, not a single song stuck in my head. This would be decent background music, I suppose. Bland and blasé, but not enough that I couldn’t slog through. So that works out to a 3/5

Meh. As mid-80’s UK synth-pop goes, it’s pretty decent. That said, it doesn’t really hold up for a double album length (64 minutes +). They could’ve scrapped the uninspiring covers, and a couple of other songs and had a tight, concise album that would’ve been better. And covering an iconic song like Springsteen’s “Born to Run” is almost as bad as Madonna covering “American Pie”, which I was subjected to just 3 days ago. Still, a few good songs, and a testament to a time period. 3/5

A great soul/funk album. I remember when the title track and Freddy’s Dead were on on the radio. Those are 5 star songs. I’d also heard Pusherman, but the res of this album was new to me. The sound is great, the groove even better. I wish I could give this 4.5 stars, but we’ll have to go 4/5

Hunky Dora has several iconic Bowie songs, including my favorite Bowie song (Queen Bitch). And several really solid songs. But also a couple songs I can’t rate above 3. I really like the overall package, and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. It’s the kind of album I can back to all along. But not quite essential, so I can’t pull the trigger on a 5 rating. Very close, but 4/5

I’m a little concerned when an artist comes up from the late 60’s or the 70’s comes up that I’ve never heard of. And I’ve never heard of Scott Walker. After listening, I’m not sure who this made it to a “must hear” list. Over-orchestrated music, that sounds like a mix of bad musicals and something you’d expect over the closing credits of a James Bond knockoff movie. The lyrics are overblown, like a middle schooler with a thesaurus, trying to sound deep. I found a review on Allmusic that summed this up nicely: “uncommonly ambitious lyricist cloaked behind over the top, schmaltzy orchestral arrangements”. Spotify had the lyrics available, it’s worth reading along just to marvel at how bad they are. I pondered giving this 3/5 just for being audacious and a bit different. But I think Walker is serious, and saw this as some sort of statement on…. Well, I don’t know. By the time I made it into the 2nd side I was just putting up with it. Still, I wasn’t offended, didn’t (quite) feel the need need to turn off. But I can’t go above 2/5

I wasn’t sure about this album when it started. Vibraphone, Bandoneon and violin? Not an instrument grouping that Imagine, one expect. The opening track seemed a little unfocused. But as the album progressed, it really sucked me in. There’s a complexity in the songs/arrangements that is really interesting. I’ll never be enthralled with the key instruments, but it works well in this setting. I’ll be listening to this again, and can see it potentially in my collection in the future. Solid 4/5

Call it Electronica, or synth-pop or whatever, it’s just not my bag. It’s smooth and rhythmic and has lots of synthesizer noodling; well done, but it is (to me) boring and largely forgettable. They’re clearly good at this, the sound is good. But I just don’t like it. 3/5

It is rare for an artist to release 3 consecutive essential albums, but between 1969 and 1972 Neil young did it with “Everybody Knows This is Nowhere”, “After The Gold Rush” and “Harvest”. He also managed to squeeze in “Deja Vu” with Crosby Stills Nash and Young in that span. These are all albums that made an impact, tgat could be considered <I>important </I>. This would be a great album independent of the others, every song is solid, and it includes several of my favorite NY songs. I have 16 of the 21 albums NY put out between 1969 and 1990. After The Gold Rush is certainly in the 1/2 dozen I’d rate 5 stars. 5/5 Aside: it seems that this album is blocked on Spotify, that’s a bummer. But not a problem since I own it on vinyl and CD.

Neil Young’s albums from the early/mid 70’s all have a organic feel. Or whatever is the opposite of overproduced. “Tonight’s the Night” takes it to another level, feeling almost unproduced. It is somewhere between a wake and a celebration of friends/band mates Bruce Berry and Danny Whitten, who had both died of Heroin overdoses. The feel here is a bunch of guys hanging around the studio, laying down a few tracks in between a few drinks (or whatever), honoring their friends in the best way they knew (musically). In concept, it could’ve been a hot mess, but it all works. It’s “real”, it has emotion. This has been one of my favorite NY albums for years, and “Tired Eyes” is one of my favorite songs. An easy 5 star rating.

The Jam are my favorite band from the 70’s English punk/new wave era. I much preferred them over the Clash, the Sex Pistols or the Damned, but they were never really appreciated here in the USA. That said, this is “only” my third favorite album of theirs, behind “Setting Suns” and “Sound Affects”. All in all, a really solid album, with some key songs. Not quite as complete as the subsequent albums, and easy 4 stars, but not quite good enough for 5. 5/5

Jimi Hendrix is one of those artists who we’re just expected to love. And while I certainly respect Hendrix, I’ve never liked him as much as I’m supposed to. There’s some great stuff on here, but the overall package isn’t quite great. It certainly doesn’t come off as cohesive, ping-ponging from the pointless sound effects of EXP to a nice shuffle number to the jarring contrast of Spanish Castle Magic, to the melodic Wait Until Tomorrow. It is mostly very good, but the overall is less than the sum of the parts. My favorite songs from this album are “Little Wing” and “If 6 were 9”, and I prefer cover versions of both (by Derek and the Dominies and Roy Buchanan, respectively). Don’t get me wrong. It is a solid 4, a little bit below the debut, and above Electric Ladyland. But none reach the 5 that everybody would expect/demand. 4/5

So, this Australian band is “ frequently compared to Nirvana” (per Wikipedia). I guess that’s the current day equivalent of being the “next Beatles” we used to hear 40 years ago. Listening to this, I can tell they were inspired by Nirvana, maybe even trying to copy Nirvana. Not especially original. But the result is, at best, a pale imitation. It’s not bad, but it certainly isn’t memorable. 3/5

First lines of first song: “I don’t believe in an interventionist God / But I know darling that you do / but if I did I would knee down and ask him / not to intervene when it came to you”…. Dylan it ain’t. I guess it’s supposed to be deep. Musically, this is pretty good; spades, piano driven Melodie’s. I don’t much care for the singer’s tone/style, has a spoken feel, not a lot of tonal variation, and sometimes seems to be straining to reach. But the killer for me is the lyrics themselves. As above, who actually uses the word “interventionist” in a melancholy song? And where’s the faux depth of “seasons came, seasons went / the winter stripped the blossoms bare / a different tree now lines the streets / shaking its fists in the air”. The overall affect is just irritating. Melancholy songs, atonal singing, stupid lyrics. The more I listened the more irritated I got. A d the lower my rating. I’ll settle to 2/5, even though it irritates me.

Jimi Hendrix is an iconic figure, one of the royals of rock. An innovator of electric guitar. Blah, blah, blah. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with those pronouncements, and have great respect for Hendrix. And in his short career (3 studio albums), he released some brilliant music. Probably 8-10 brilliant songs across those 18 months. But back to blah, blah, blah, and my point. For every brilliant Hendrix song, there’s a couple that are fine and the occasional one that I don’t like. The highs are VERY high, but there’s a lot of misses and lows. Electric Ladyland is a double album, 74 minutes run time. About 1/4 of it is as-good-as-it-gets, easy 5+ stars. But about 1/3 is below good. In my iTunes library, this album averages out to 3 stars. But here, the result is greater than the sum of the parts, and the album that closes with “All Along The Watchtower” and “Voodoo Child (Slight Return)” can’t rate below 4. 4/5

Aja came out my senior year of high school, and was pretty much inescapable for the 2 years. The overexposure turned me off at the time, and I wasn’t a fan. Steely Dan had always seemed like a band that took themselves a little seriously, and they really ramped that up on Aja. I saw a quote on Wikipedia that perfectly sums it up: “the conceptual framework of [Steely Dan’s] music has shifted from the pretext of rock & roll toward a smoother, awesomely clean and calculated mutation of various rock, pop and jazz idioms” (credited to Michael Duffy of Rolling Stone). That quote even captures the pretentiousness that I associate with later Steely Dan. That was 46 years ago, and as I’ve mellowed, I’ve come to appreciate this album. All that other stuff is still true, but that doesn’t change the fact this is a very good album. Yes, it is “clean and calculated”, but it’s also nearly perfect. It is heavily jazz influenced, the sound is really (really, really) great. The instrumentation is detailed and varied, it features the best takes from the best players they could find. The individual songs are all great. That said, it is almost too perfect, clinical. Perhaps a little lacking in soul or depth. The lyrics are sometimes too clever, and faux “deep”. But that’s just a Steely Dan thing. At 18, I would’ve rated this album a lower, but my tastes have broadened. I married into this on vinyl and eventually picked it up on digital. I’ll give this a solid 4. I’ve complained a lot about the flaws, but that’s just because they bring it down from a 5. 4/5

I had never hear of Aimee Mann, but given that it is early 90’s pop, that ‘s not shocking. I pretty much quit listening to the radio in the early 90’s. And it peaked at 127 on the Billboard 200. All that, combined with a score here of 2.78, didn’t have me too optimistic going in. but guess what. I rather like this. Very catchy songs, the vocal style reminds me a little of Sheryl Crow…. Maybe? It has a good clean sound, not overproduced. The right mix of instrumentation. “ Hooky” melodies. Nothing to deep, just solid and pleasant indie-ish pop. There’s a couple of songs that could’ve been trimmed, though. And it lacks anything truly memorable. 3/5

This is the Johnny Cash I expected, when my first album here was his At San Quenton. I was rather disappointed in that one. This one is the real deal. First off, at 45 minutes, it is 10 minutes longer than San Quenton. It's a better song selection, and better performances. And a better atmosphere. It is better in every measure than San Quenton, which came out a year later. This is the "man In Black" at his best, in a prison singing mostly songs of prison, and people on the fringes. A little tough to rate, I respect this album, and it's a watershed recording. But it's not an album I've owned, nor do I expect to buy it now. But I expect to listen to it again. I need to stick w/ my rating system. It's somewhere between 4 and 5, but I think this one rounds down. So 4/5

This is a really fascinating album. Love Ray Charles’ singing and piano, and the concept of reworking C&W could’ve been a risk. But he really pulls it off. The whole album works, and there’s several standout songs. My only gripe is the early 60’s sound, there’s a bit more orchestra than I’d prefer. But that’s minor. I’ll certainly listen to this again, it may well end up purchased. 4.5, I’ll round this one to 5/5

Some albums are obvious inclusions, even if I don't really prefer the genre. Some are hard scratchers, and this is one of those. I know who Syd Barrett was, but had never heard any music from his post Pink Floyd days.... I didn't even know there was any. After listening to this, I'm still not sure why it is on this list. It's not necessarily "bad", but it's surely not good. Parts of it sound like a guy playing to a handheld tape recorder, The best moments are generic hippy trippy late turn of the decade stuff, kind of a poor man's version of Strawberry Alarm Clock (the deep cuts, not the hit). Or Strawberry Alarm Clock meets Velvet Underground, all get high and record the resulting jam. The album was recorded over 16 months, starting shortly after he was dismissed from Pink Floyd for his "increasingly erratic and unpredictable" behavior. And it features 5 different producers, over 13 songs filling 37 minutes... Again, it's not bad, but neither good. It's rather disjunct, unfocused. The sound quality varies from cut to cut, and occasional songs seem to just stop (as opposed to a fade out or finish). And often feels sloppy, as if these were 3 years' of demos slapped onto a record. Frankly, it is a mess. Still I'll give it 2 stars, for the effort, and small props for being different.

Hmm…. Another odd one. This is a 1964 (released in 1967) live album from a French performer (born in Belgium), who I’d never heard of. Recorded in French, and sounding stereotypically French. I looked around Wikipedia, and there’s very little information on this album. But there’s more on Jacques Brel: he was active musically through the 50’s and 60’s, and into the 70’s, releasing 14 studio albums and 2 live albums between ‘54 and ‘77. Also appeared in 10 films between ‘67 and ‘73. Apparently, his songs were covered by several folk as diverse as a David Bowie and John Denver. And Scott Walker…. His Scott Walker II album includes 3x Jacques Brel songs, and is on the 1001 list, and I rated it 2/5 a couple of weeks ago. So, what of the album? This sounds like a French version of a mid 60’s Vegas crooner, maybe one of the Rat Pack. All nice enough, seeming rather polite. Perhaps even quaint at the same time worldwide Beatlemania was in full swing. It’s also remarkably short, just over 28 minutes. Being a French version of mid-60’s crooner is not bad, mind you, but I surely don’t think it rises to the level of Sinatra. I like this better than that Scott Walker II album (that included 3x S.Brel written songs). Give it low 3 stars, an interesting period piece. 3/5

Punishing Kiss? This can’t be good. And the cover art? Not a promising sign. How did it chart? #104 on the UK albums chart, nothing elsewhere. But maybe the music will be a pleasant surprise. Nope. At best this comes off as the score to an off broadway drama. Or perhaps the soundtrack to a 2nd wave animated full length movie…. But not up to Disney’s level. Something deep and dark, exploring the depths of the dark human spirit…. But animated. You know, the dark dichotomy of a “Punishing Kiss”. I guess there are people who like this stuff, but I’m not one of them. The vocals are “overacted”, as the singers seem to try and REALLY stress the seriousness of the lyrics. And the lyrics are pedestrian, at best. Musically, it’s well recorded, clean, lots of instrumentation. But the overall impression is as overblown as the vocal stylings. It all takes itself so very, VERY seriously. I like the MNE reviewer who called this “madly irritating, written-to-order art-school digression.” I don’t know, maybe it’s just all too deep for me, but this just leaves me cold. I don’t give many 1’s, but this gets one. I didn’t hate it, but the whole thing irritated me, and by the the time the last 10+ minute song started, irritation was approaching “pissed off”. So I bailed. 1/5

2 hrs and 15 min of hip hop. Oh yay (sarcasm). But the whole point of this thing is to get exposed to new (to me) music. So, let’s dig in…. Looking at Wikipedia, this is basically 2 solo albums from the 2 members of OutKast. I guess that’s why it’s so long? Breaking it down: Speaker box: starting w/ hip-hop isn’t my thing…. In that context, this album isn’t 1/2 bad. There’s a lot of 70’s funk feel in a lot of it, only moderately diminished but the synthetic rhythm section, this works pretty well. Too much of the vocals are still the “how many words can you jam into a phrase”, but they’re not every song is seething anger, which I appreciate. Still, there’s some songs that I don’t like, and there’s a lot more “n-word” posturing. I expected to hate this but don’t mind a lot of it. Still, at 56+ minutes, it’s just WAY too much. I had to take a break at 45 minutes, only about 1/3 through the whole set. A couple of these songs would fit fine on a playlist, but sheesh. 2.5/5.0 The Love Below: this one sounds a little more “organic”, at least a little. And perhaps more pop, than pure funk. But on the whole, not as interesting. I’ll rate this 2/5…. At best. When I started listening to this, I was thinking sold 3. But as it went on and on (and on), the rating went down and down (and down). Especially the second album. We’ll settle in at 2/5 though, because there were 3-4 songs towards the beginning that were pretty good.

Wow, I really don’t like the vocal stylings here. Sort of whiney U2 vibe, very 80’s Brit-pop. The instrumentation is also very 80’s Brit-pop. Certainly a product of its time and place. That said, it’s pretty good overall. The beats are driving, the melodies are good…. Pretty much everything except those whiney, warble-y vocals. Buy the end of the album they were really bugging me. A solid 3/5, but could’ve edged higher with vocals more like what was coming out of Athens, GA at the same time. 3/5

The debut album from one of the original Rock and Rollers. I am, of course, familiar with Holly's hits, with and without the Crickets. I have 1/2 of this album from a hits collection, these are essential songs if you're interested in the roots of rock. Generally. I prefer some of the cover versions to there originals, but these are where it all started. Some well known covers of songs from this album, that I own: Maybe Baby -Don McLean / NGDB Not Fade Away - Rolling Stones It's Too Late - Derek & The Dominoes (Eric Clapton) That'll Be The Day - Linda Ronstadt And that's just the ones I own. Most of this album has been covered y multiple artists. That's called influential. Really solid album, although I still prefer the hits album that swaps the "deep cuts" here from other hits. Super solid 4/5, but not quite 5.

In the late 70’s, Simon & Garfunkel’s Greatest Hits was one of 2 albums that almost everybody owned (along with Eagles’ Greatest Hits). Including me. The downside of the hits album is that I never really felt the need to dig into the deep cuts. This corrects that, at least some. 4 songs from this album carry over to the aforementioned hits album, although 3 of them show up there as live versions. Regardless, all 4 are outstanding. This album is pretty fast paced, with 12 songs in about 28 minutes, an average length of 2:30 per song (and only one song over 3 minutes). Pretty typical for a pop record from 1966. But these songs aren’t fluff. These are Paul Simon songs, one of the great singer/songwriters of the era. And he packs a lot of meaning into these small servings. There’s only 2 songs that I don’t think are very good to great. “Simple Desulrory Philippic” is a homage to / satire of Bob Dylan. It’s too cute by 1/2, and doesn’t really fit the rest of the album. And “7 O’Clock News / Silent Night” is a little too heavy-handed for my tastes, with the Christmas carol overlaid by a newscaster reporting the ills of society. Wikipedia says the it ‘rather bluntly makes an ironic commentary on various social ills by juxtaposing them with tenderly expressed Christmas sentiments”. Neither song sucks, nor offends. But they do detract from the whole. So where to rate? Do the 10 gems offset the 2 that are “meh”? I will either pick up this whole album, or just the 4-5 best songs that I don’t already own. Oh, how I wish for 1/2 stars, this would be a clear 4.5/5. After consideration, and comparing to the hits album, and 1870’s Bridge Over Troubled Water, I’m settling with a round down to 4. 4/5

Pretty generic, mid 80’s Brit pop. There’s nothing especially memorable here, but nothing that’s bad or offensive or anything. Pretty close to boring. The album title is odd, there’s certainly nothing in this music that is remotely related to Steve McQueen. Maybe it’s ironic, and I’m just not cool enough to get it. There’s several albums from 1985 that I would suggest as notable (must listen) before this: Three O’Clock - Arrive Without Travelling, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers - Southern Accents, Guadalcanal Diary - Walking In The Shadow Of The Big Man, John Fogarty - Centerfield, Katrina and the Waves, Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms…. Etc, etc, etc. Whatever, call it a 3/5 and hope for something interesting tomorrow. 3/5

Let’s start by recognizing the opening cut, “Search and Destroy” as one of the greatest rock songs of all time. The Stooges were inspirations to the Ounk rock movement, and Search and Destroy is one of the signature songs of “proto punk”. But, going into this listen, Search and Destroy was the only song I’d heard on the album. Quite simply, this album rocks, in the best possible way. I’m trying to figure out how I overlooked this for 50 years…. It’s raw and real, and the sharp edges aren’t buffed out. But it is not just noise, these are actual songs, well constructed and performed. It has the loose feel of the Velvet Underground, but has a hard driving passion that VU never tried for. It has the drive and attitude of The Ramones, Band, but a few years before they came to be. Plus a hint of or maybe early Alice Cooper Band. I’ll be listening to this album again, and there’s a good chance I’ll end up purchasing it. 5/5

Wow, she’s not a very good singer, especially the first couple of songs. Unless this is affected to follow the whole bit about copying the Stones’ “Exile On Main Street”. I do like the overall sound (of the music), it has an open, sparse, not-overproduced sound that is refreshing for the early 90’s. Lyrically, there’s nothing dramatic here, nothing outstanding, but neither insipid. On the other hand, there’s a lot of profanity that comes off as gratuitous. I don’t mind profanity, but I do mind gratuitous. Meanwhile, some of these songs are quite good. All are at least OK. I’m left thinking high 3, leaning towards rounding up. But over a full hour, it starts to lag a bit, and I sure wish she could sing a little better. so I’ll round down. 3/5

Janis Joplin was a musical force, who burned brightly, but burned out quickly. This is the 4th of her studio albums, released 3 months after she passed away. It is also the high-point of her discography. This album includes several masterpieces: "Cry Baby", "Me and Bobby McGee", "Mercedes Benz" and "Move Over". The rest of the album is just very good. The least compelling song is "Buried Alive In The Blues", which is notable as an unfinished piece. It is an instrumental, because Joplin died before recording the vocal tracks. All in all, this is a great record, and an important record in the history of rock. Easy 5/5 .

"Cars" was a great, fun song that was hugely popular when I was 19. With its robotic, technical sound it was pretty unique. I still have the 45rpm single from back then. Unfortunately, this album is lots of more-of-the-same. Tehre's several pretty good songs, and no horrible ones, but this is a one trick pony, and the trick is a bit dated. 3/5

This is 100% new to me, and a very nice find. I'm not sure how to classifty it, but it certainly has groove. Generally smooth sound, but not bland. I'll need to listen to this a few more times, but it's a solid 4. 4/5

This is certainly a niche record, a "once a year" kind of thing. That's ok, of course, and these are solid versions of Christmas classics. It's bathed in that Phil Spector Wall-Of-Sound (TM), which works in this early 60's framing. Members of the Wrecking Crew ensure the music is perfect. The Ronettes' version of Sleigh Bell is especially good. All of it is good, and several of the arrangements have become "standard". But, it's just not a record with broad appeal. I' don't own this one, and won't be adding it to my collection. 3/5

This is Neil Young’s last album of the 1970’s, a remarkable decade that saw him release 9 studio albums, 2 live albums, a soundtrack album, and a 3-disc compilation. Oh yeah, and CSNY (1 live album, 1 studio album and 1 hits album)…. And an collaboration album with Stills. Frightfully prolific, and at much of it is essential. Including Rust Never Sleeps. This is a fascinating album, mostly recorded live, but all new songs, and presented without crowd noise. Somewhat similar to Jackson Browne’s “Running on Empty”…. Side 1 (of the original vinyl) is essentially acoustic, more introspective. Side 2 brings our Crazy Horse to rock out. Somewhat similar to Still’s prior Alive album. It all works, well, though the song “Welfare Mothers” is a little trite, and maybe a touch offensive… I own 6 of NY’s studio albums from the 70’s, purchased in the 70’s on the original vinyl. (And a couple others from the 70’s purchased later…. And sone pre and post 70’s stuff, of course). This is probably #5 in my rank of the 70’s Neil Young output, probably #6 if you include CSNY.. I actually hadn’t played it in a while before this, and it was like revisiting an old friend, very enjoyable. But I prefer side 1 by a lot, and “Hey Hey My My” is the only iconic song here. I really want to go 5 here, but just can’t quite convince myself. After struggling, I’ll round 4.5 down to 4.

Well, I really like the way this started off, the first song really kicked. Then, 41 seconds in, the vocalist came in and ruined it. It's a shame, because musically, this album is really good, in a 2000's indie kind of way. I pulled up the lyrics around the 3rd song, and kinda sorry I did. Not exactly deep and meaningful. Actually, not remotely deep and meaningful. But I do like the music (as I've already noted). Bottom line? 3/5 swap out to a decent singer, and add even a semblance of interest in the lyrics and this is a solid 4 (at least). just could've been so much more... 3/5

Early 1980, and I was doing some freelance photography for the college newspaper, as a favor to my girlfriend's roommate. And to get access to their darkroom. One day I noticed a stack of records that had been sent to them to review. Nobody had claimed this one, so I jumped on it. I had the Clash's 1st album, and a couple of 45's / EPs, so I figured this would be worth having. That's a big win! This is one of the most iconic albums of the English punk rock scene, though it marks a big step towards the mainstream. It also an iconic album overall, ranking #8 non the original (2003) Rolling Stone list of 500 Top Albums of all time. This album still has some of the angry posturing of the earlier Clash, but it is tempered, and the rough edges are a bit more polished. And the heavy-handed politics of later Clash albums is largely reined in here. Their US commercial breakthrough, their first album to crack Top 100 (#27) with their 1st US Top 40 hit (Train In Vain at #23). The sound is great, the songs are great, there's a wide variety of stylings to keep it from getting monotonous (a minor problem with their 1st album). It is a bit long as a double album, but I'm not sure what you'd drop to shorten it. This is one of the few albums that I'd rate as IMPORTANT (TM) in the context of rock music. 5/5

Led Zep’s first album is the opening blast from one of the best hard rock bands ever. “Good Times Bad Times” may be the best opening track of any debut album in rock history. A great introduction (warning?) about what was in store. That said, “I” is not my favorite LZ album. Depending on the day, that’s either “II” or “Zoso” (IV). This one stays pretty close to the reworking of blues standards formula, but they sure do it well. I’ve said before that LZ is the greatest rock band. Not my favorite rock band, but up near my top. But from the music to the image and back to the music, they ruled the roost from 1969 through the 70’s. If you asked me to list the best Rock / Hard Rock albums of the classic rock period, this is an easy addition. 5/5

If you were listening to AOR radio in 1973/74, you’ve heard every sound from this album. It was everywhere, and cemented Paul as the most commercially successful ex-Beatle. John’ “Mind Games” came out about the same time, and while that’s a great song, I don’t think it’s a great album. Likewise with George’s song “Give Me Love”, or Ringo’s song “Photograph” which were both released around the same time. Pretty impressive time for the guys. That said, Band On The Run is by far the best overall album. It’s McCartney, so it is catchy tunes, great Melodie’s, well played and produced. Lyrically it’s nothing too deep and meaningful, but not like some of the fluff he put out occasionally. This album is party of the mid-70’s rock soundtrack. If you were there, you know it. If you weren’t this is a great collection of classic rock “deep tracks” 5/5

Yes is the quintessential 1st generation Prog Rock band, and this album kicked off a run of 5 essential prog albums in 45 months. They defined the genre, and turned out an amazing suite of albums in a short period of time. Props to ELP and Genesis, but Yes led the pack. This is a great album, with some of their best known songs: Your Move (All Good People), Perpetual Change, Starship Trooper... Great stuff. From the personal standpoint, the single version of I've Seen All Good People was the first prog song I remember hearing on the radio, on my little transistor radio in the backyard of the family home. ELP's Lucky Man came out before, but peaked at #48 in the US, and I don't remember hearing it until later. I am and have been intimately familiar with this album for 50+ years. I’ve had this on vinyl, I’ve had it on CD, I have it on digital. This is not my favorite Yes album, but it is probably a 3 way tie for #2. And an easy 5/5

The only song I knew going in was "Give Up the Funk (Tear the Roof off the Sucker)", which is a great funk song, something that got a fair amount of exposure back in the day. I have a digital copy of this one. But I hadn't ever heard the whole album, so I was pretty interested when this came up today. This is a pretty solid album in the realm of funk, most of it is quite good. I was groovin' the whole time. That said, "Give Up The Funk" is the only song that's really memorable, and the "radio announcements" part of the opening song weren't my favorite. I think this will deserve some additional listens before I make a final judgement, but I'll give it a conditional 4/5

The first song starts out with the following lyrics, choked out syllable by syllable, over seemingly random meandering synthesizer strings: “A juxtapositioning fate / Find our mutual coordinates / Moments of clarity are so rare / I better document this / at last the view is fierce / all that matters is this / who is open chested / and who is coagulated” I’m just not sure how I can take that seriously. This is the second Bork album I’ve received in the 1st 75 days. I rated the 1st at 2/5, with the comments “I thought the first couple of songs were pretty good. Sort of an ambient, ethereal feel. But with each passing song it held my interest less and less. Just not really my ‘thing’. 2/5….” Well, the second album jumps straight into the bit about each song holding my interest less and less. This doesn’t offend me, I don’t hate it. But I sure don’t like it either. As with the prior Bork album, it’s just not my thing. I’m bored by this, and that’s disappointing. Frankly, as I get further through this, it’s starting to kind of irritate me. I’m taking a break at about 1/2 way through, but I’m not expecting it to improve…. - - - - It didn’t. I admit, I gave up somewhere in the middle of the 7th song. I guess I’m just not cool enough. 1/5

I was a teenager when this album came out, was familiar w/ Marvin Gaye’s “What’s Going On” and “Let’s Get It On” albums…. But had never heard of this one… hmm…. Looking at Wikipedia, I see it’s a divorce album, not just an album about failed love, but an album recorded as part of a divorce settlement (awkward). And an album that didn’t do especially well at the time, but has grown in esteem. Anyway, it’s ok as an album, the sound is pretty similar to “Let’s Get It On”. Lyrically, there’s quite a lot of overt bitterness here…. This is a message to his ex-wife, dumping some emotional baggage on her. I think that detracts from the overall album, it’s just too front and center, and pervasive. It all comes off as a little self-indulgent. Unlike some other divorce albums, like Dylan’s Blood On The Tracks, Phil Collins’ Face Value or Tom Petty’s Echo. Meanwhile, there’s no hit here, and while the music is solid, there’s no really memorable pieces. “A Funky space Reincarnation” is the best song here, and reached #23 on the R&B charts. Bottom line. It’s ok, but I’d rather listen to Let’s Get It On. Solid 3/5

Let's see what the project serves me today: mid 90's band/album I've never heard of. OK... Genre is "Electronica", average rating is 2.74... uh-oh. Skim some reviews, found this: "this is a huge throwback for me. My pacifier and glowsticks, oversized pants, pigtails, pumas and DANCING!"... Double Uh-Oh. But, the point is to listen, so let's listen! pause Listening to this, I’m reminded of an old joke about Grateful Dead music. “Q: What does a deadhead say when the music stops? A: Wow, this music sucks!” Maybe Orbital would be awesome if I was at a Rave, doing whatever drugs you do at a Rave. But I’m not, never was, never will be. So this is NOT awesome. And it is very, Very, VERY repetitive. I guess this is ok for what it is: background sounds for a mid 90’s party. Not really intended for you to pay much attention to, or sit and listen to. I thought about giving this a 2, and I might have, if didn’t just keep on going and going and going…. By the 50th minute, the irritation level had ramped up to max and I only listened to 1/2 of the last 3 songs. 1/5

Never mind was a watershed album, a new sound that captured everyone’s attention. I know (now) it wasn’t Nirvana’s first album, nor were they the first grunge band. But they were were the first to explode, and this is the album that broke out. I was in my early 30’s when this came out, and I was mightily impressed. I can imagine the impact it would’ve had on me if I had been 17. The first five songs are outstanding, and the rest are very solid. That said, this is not an album that I listen to very often. It is overall dark, and unhappy. It starts to wear the further along it gets. Kinda of like the Sex Pistols, which came out when I WAS 17. I’d play side one of that album at top volume before heading out with the guys, but rarely side 2 (back in the vinyl days, kids). And it just doesn’t get that much play these days. Part of me says this deserves a 5 for the first 1/2 cultural significance, Weird Al did a spoof of Teen Spirit after all. But I settle to 4, because the 2nd half drags, and it’s simply not something that gets played (by me) very often. 4/4

I miss 1977. A year that saw the release of Fleetwood Mac’s Rumours, Pink Floyd’s Animals, Styx’s Grande illusion, Meatloaf’s Bat Out Of Hell, Steely Dan’s Aja, Foreigner’s debut…But also the debut albums from The Sex Pistols, The Jam, The Clash, Elvis Costello, Talking Heads. And even Ian Dury. Point is, it was a wide open time, open to a wide range of music. And I liked it all. I own (and have long owned) almost every album mention above, except Ian Dury. I have singles of Sex and Drugs and Rick and Roll, and of Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick. Fun, a little bit whacky, decidedly original. Not boring. But, before today, I’d not heard the whole album. So let’s get to it: This album was everything I hoped for. Fun, a little bit whacky, decidedly original. Not boring. It built nicely, peaking with the latter songs. I’m going to want to listen to this again, spend some more time with this one. 4/5

I know the name Coldplay, but I don't think I've heard anything by them. At least not knowingly. It is a lot more "pleasant" than I expected, Pretty melodic, has that sort of guitar sound that i equate with a lot of Christian Contemporary music. kind of a pulsing, doubling the beat kind of thing. With a decidedly mid-tempo beat. The vocals are a little high-pitched, but clear and not strained. The overall sound is clean and clear. It's all fine. Just fine. As in only fine. Somewhat "backgroundy"... Nothing to especially like, or dislike. It was intersting to read the reviews here, seems that Coldplay inspires a lot of VERY postitive and VERY negative reactions. I guess it cultural, where you may have been (personal space) in 2000. Looking at them without that lens, I can't really generate a lot of emotional response one way or the other. Solid 3/5.

Sticky Fingers was the first Sones studio release of the 70’s, coming out in Spring 1971. This was a staple of “Album Oriented” radio, and was a notable part of the soundtrack of my teens. “Brown Sugar”, Bitch” and “Can’t You Hear Me Knocking” are top notch, with “Wild Horses” as a solid change of pace (though not as good as “Angie”). One of the first Rolling Stones albums I owned. An Iconic album from an iconic band, with some iconic songs; complete with an iconic album cover. What’s not to like? Well…. Like a lot of Stones records, the highs are VERY high, but there’s a fair bit of middling songs, and a couple that are not so good. For me at least, the last 1/3 of the album isn’t compelling, while the first 1/2 is outstanding. And like a lot of Stones records, often the lyrics aren’t politically correct. Especially by current standards, but even back in the day. At least they were consistent, and unapologetic. The only questing is if those couple of average songs can drag this down from 5 to 4. After a fresh listen, I’m settling on 5.

Another iconic album that has been in my collection for many years. The debut album from Black Sabbath, an album many credit with creating Heavy Metal (TM). Unquestionably iconic. That said, this is not my favorite Sabbath album, and I never owned it on vinyl. I think they were still developing as an entity at this point, and their next 4 albums are objectively better. But that just means “really good” instead of “outstanding”. Overall, it’s just not as “tight”, as their latter albums, which is supported by the reports the whole thing was recorded in a single 12 hr session, with virtually no overdubs. Evil Woman is the only cover version in the Sabbath catalog, and it strikes me as an A&R man’s addition is search of a hit. I’ve often wondered how much better this could’ve been with a bit more care in the process, a bit more faith from the record company. But this is the first, the one that defined (not redefined) heavy music. And there’s a several great songs. This is a solid album, groundbreaking. But I’ll still prefer Paranoid, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath, or even Vol. 4. All of which I owned on vinyl since the 70’s. Another solid 4/5

Paul Simon’s Graceland is one of those albums that I consider to be “important”. It had been 3 years since Simon’s last album, which had only reached #35 on the US charts, and 6 years since his last top 40 hit. Simon had just turned 45, he was recently divorced, and his star seemed to be fading. He’s quoted as saying he was “in a tailspin”. In response, he did something completely different. He was given a bootleg cassette of music from South Africa, and ended up going to South Africa to create an album with local musicians. And what an album! Graceland features a sound that was heavily influenced by the South African music scene, and has a sound and feel that stretched into new areas. The influence varies from light to heavy, but is always present. The result is Simon’s most successful album. Multi platinum around the world, Top 10 in at least a dozen countries. And deservedly so. The songs range from brilliant to very good. It opened the door for wider recognition and discussions about the political situation in South Africa, it exposed countless people to new types of music. It’s filled with memorable songs, and the total is greater than the sum of the parts. 5/5

I dunno, maybe I’d dig this electronica stuff if I (still?) did drugs. Or if I had done (at some point) the “right” drugs. But I don’t, or I didn’t, so I just don’t get it. This is better than some of the electronica this project has served up, but it is still, at best, background music. It’s got some decent grooves, but nothing happens with them…. Except repetition. My main reaction to this album is BORED. Each song, after a minute or so, just merges into the overall background. Actually, background isn’t the right word, it implies a certain not-intrusive feel. This is not quiet music. Again, I imagine this being the sound of a dark club with flashing lights and lots of folk doing drugs that didn’t exist when I was in my 20s. And even when I was younger, I wasn’t into that kind of scene. The best analogy to my days would be to say this is More Iron Butterfly than Pink Floyd. You know: In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida, the cool little 3 minute song that’s really a 17+ minute exploration of… …. Well, something mind altered. Not that I would know… That said, Alsha, with Iggy Pop vocals (more spoken than sung) rises above it. It could be a pretty decent 3:30 song, but it drones on for almost 6 minutes, and loses its edge. Really just not my thing. I’ll give it 2 stars for the almost cool Iggy Pop song. I didn’t give up on the listen, but I wasn’t sad when it was done. 2/5

I probably shouldn’t have read some reviews before listening, but I did. “Underwhelming”, “I’ve never understood the hype”, ultimately one dimensional”, “fairly uninspiring”…. Uh oh. Especially worrisome we’re several comments about the drumming being the same across the album. The problem with that is that once it is mentioned, you can’t help but notice. And once you notice, it is hard to ignore. Like quite a few albums I’d heard through this project, it’s not bad. But neither is it especially good. Certainly not “must hear”. Solidly in the OK but no interest in hearing again. A good bit of this is downright lethargic. And most of the songs go on and on without adding anything. Over 1/2 the songs are 6+ minutes (we’ll 5:55+), all would be better if truncated by at least a minute. I’m not against longer songs, just longer songs with no reason. And the band name is just more evidence that all the good band names were gone by the year 2000. 3/5, but barely.

OK, this will be interesting, I've only had a slight exposure to anything Bollywood. On the other hand, I do have several movie soundtracks in my collection, and cam appreciate the form. This is actually pretty good stuff. A little out of my "zone", a little weird and certainly different. But it's fun, and a little funky, and not boring. My only real complaint is that it's not especially well produced. In particular, the vocals aren't crips and clear. Overall, 3/5 with props for being interesting. 3/5

This is my 87th day doing this project, and the 9th Electronica album I’ve been assigned. More than 1 in 10 rate. Coming in to this listen, Electronica is my second worst rated genre, at 1.88 average. After this rating is added, that’ll drop to 1.78. I just hope I don’t get subjected to any/many more. Sorry, this just isn’t my thing. And this specific Electronica offering is probably my least favorite of the Electronica albums I’ve had to endure. 1/5

The Police exploded onto the music scene during my freshman year of college, and dominated the airwaves over 5 albums in just under 5 years. I have all their albums on vinyl, all bought when current. They brought a different sound, new and exciting. People would stop by my dorm and ask “what is that?” When it was playing in those first couple of weeks. Of course, soon everybody knew. Looking back through the lens of 45 years, it is easy to forget just how unique this sound was at the time. The Police were one of the drivers bringing New Wave to the masses at the end of the 70’s. It is interesting that Regatta de Blanc is the first Police album to show up here. It is actually the lowest charting (US) of the 5 releases, only making it to #25. It is a really solid album, but doesn’t have as many standout songs as their other records, but doesn’t have any real low points. It is probably my 2nd favorite of the 5 releases, only a hair below the debut. They really lean into the “White Reggae” thing here, as evidenced by the album title, but still includes a couple of straight rockers, “It’s alright for you” and “no time this time” which are both excellent. It’s a great album that has stood the test of time. Hugely successful, influential…. 5/5

The debut album from Chicago is notable in a lot of ways. It is an auspicious debut, reaching #17 on the US album charts, and selling double platinum. It includes several really great songs including 2x top 10 singles (Beginnings and Does Anybody Know What Time It Is?) and another top 25 (Questions 67 &68). This was a new sound, horns like this kid had never heard (in pop music). Killer guitar, shifting soundscapes.an impressive start. It's also a bit audacious. How many bands release a double album as a debut? And there's the rub. 32 minutes of this album are outstanding; really really great. But the album runs 76+ minutes, and a good bit of that is not compelling. I wish they had been more concise, maybe cutting a song or two (looking at you, Freeform Guitar and Poem 58). I just wish the whole thing was a bit more concise. It could've been stunning, instead it's just really good. This is early Chicago, before Tery Kath (guitar) died, and before soft rock stardom took over. Full disclosure, I own this album. All in all 4/5

Just 3 days ago, I was complaining that over 10% of my “assignments” here were Electronica, and how it is my second worst rated genre. I didn’t note then that the only genre ranked below Electronic is Hip Hop. So here we go, an album tagged both Electronica and Hip Hop. Groan. But also tagged Pop. Well let’s give it a shot…. I like this a lot more than some of the other Electronica or hip hop albums I’ve been served here. There’s songs that remind me of Madonna, and of the Spice Girls…. Maybe Paula Abdul. These are actual songs, with melody and such. Certainly dance music, but retaining the basic concepts of being music. Overall, it’s ok, better than any of the other Electronica albums I’ve listened to. It gets a little repetitive, especially when the bonus tracks roll along. But really decent overall. 3/5

I'm not sure what I expected here, but not what I got. Richard and Linda Thompson are one of those highly respected groups / performers that I've never heard. I mean, this made the Rolling Stone list of 500 Greatest Albums (albeit at #479), one of 2x R&L Thompson albums on that list. Anyway, I quite like this album. It is very much English Folk, somewhat reminiscent of Steeleye Span. With what I think is a renaissance type mood. I've listened to this twice today, and I'mm sure I'll listen to this again, and I expect it to grow on me. For now it's 4/5

White Stripes are one of those bands that everyone gushed about during the early 2000's. But I know more about their image than their music. The whole Red/White/Black thing... Were they siblings? Spouses? Both!?!?! And Jack White being touted as the greatest guitarist of the millennia. The only song I could identify as their was 7 Nation Army, which is one of the most overplayed bits in ages. Anyway, on to the music: Overall, this is fine. Pretty good even. Not my favorite, but certainly solid. Probably the closest I have in collection to this is Them Crooked Vultures. The highpoint was "The Denial Twist", because I'm quite familiar with Weird Al's parody "CNR". You know how it is. or you should. Anyway, yeah it's good. Certainly NOT boring. I'd probably go 3.5 if I could. But this one'll round down to 3 3/5

Not expecting a lot here, last Madona album to come up here didn't really wow me. I was a little surprised just how far down she is in the mix here, I thought she was a spotlight voice. Then again, I think I had a similar comment on the last Madonna album here (Music). The sound is overall lush, certainly well produced from a music standpoint... but the vocals are too far away. Overall, I like this a little better than Music. But it's really nothing special. And LONG. If these were 3-4 minute songs, it would be better. But each songs repeats for 5-6 minutes, which is simply monotonous. Since it exceeded my (low) expectations, I'll go 3/5

Deep Purple is an interesting beast. With 4 distinct configurations over their initial run, designated Mark I, Mark II, Mark III and Mark IV. Over those 4 configurations they released 10 studio albums in 8 years, plus 3 live albums. I've often thought their constant changes really held them back from even bigger success than they had. Smoke On The Water is one of the best known songs in rock, and Machine Head is a brilliant album. The double live Made In Japan is universally considered among the top live albums ever. All of which were the Mark II band. In Rock is the configuration that broke the band into the stratosphere, and defined the sound that they would be instantly recognizable. This album rocks with Ritchie Blackmore's guitar, and Jon Lord's organ, which are 2 of the really defining keys to Deep Purple's sound. The album starts hard with Speed Kind and really doesn't let up. Really solid 70's hard rock, one of the bands that kicked off the entire heavy metal genre. All of the Mark II albums are very good, but only Machine Head is essential. Well, Machine Head and Made In Japan. And In Rock isn't far behind those benchmarks. Aside: This album is not available on Spotify, only 2 songs. And I only owned 2 songs (via an anthology collection). But it is on Youtube, which worked fine. Solid 4/5

Hip Hop is my lowest rated genre, barely beating Electronica…. It is just not my thing. I’ve had on other Public Enemy album, it rated 1/5 for me. I don’t like the lack of any sort of melody, nothing approaching a “hook”. No discernible verse-chorus type structure. I just don’t like the scratches and squeals and samples and such. This seems to be a very well respected album, with Platinum sales, and 4x songs that were atop 11 on the Rap charts. It ranked #300 on Rolling Stone’s greatest albums list. It was certainly successful. It’s well put together. I can see where the messages resonate with a lot of people. It’s just not a style of music that I like. Similar to I don’t like Opera. All that said, I like this one a little better than the previous one (It takes a nation…). I but I didn’t make it all the way through the 63 minutes, so I guess it’s still a 1/5

I know of Pere Ubu from back in the day, and I have the 1976 single “Final Solution” on a compilation album. But this album will be new to me. I’m pretty interested to listen to this. I “warmed up” by playing the aforementioned Final Solution, which I like (rated 3/5 stars on my iTunes). So on to the album. I like the overall sound here, a little “unpolished”, good driving rhythms. Not a huge fan of the vocal stylings, but reminiscent of Television. And some of the more experimental passages aren’t my favorite. But this isn’t boring, it’s different, and there’s several high points that take me right back to 1978. Really, this is the kind of album I came to this project to hear. That said, this is certainly niche, and not something I expect to purchase. Solid 3/5 for being ambitious, and interesting.

I’ve owned this album since it was current (1990). I really liked it when it came out, and still enjoy / appreciate it. It really throws back to the blues-rock of the late 70’s, which I grew up on. Maybe reminiscent of Bad Company meets Grand Funk, with a big hat tip to the 70’s Stones and a few hints of Zeppelin. This got a lot of play on Mainstream Rock radio, that would’ve been how I discovered it. I was in my early 30’s, with a wife and 2 young kids and my job that had me on the road a lot; this was like comfort food for me. 33 years later it still gets played, but I wouldn’t call it essential. The high points are very high: Twice as Hard, Jealous Again, Hard To Handle (great Otis Redding cover), She Talks To Angels (one of the saddest songs of its time), Stare It Cold…. The rest is very solid. There’s nothing too dramatic here, just good old fashioned straight ahead rock and roll. And there ain’t nothing wrong with that. 4/5

Hmm…. A Scottish band from 1984 that I’ve never heard of. Could be interesting. Check reviews, average rating is 2.87…. Uh oh. It’s ok, nothing special. But then again, I never really “got” the rhythm sound of the 80’s. And especially the UK synth-pop bands. The drums are way too treble-y / compressed, there's way to much of the synth sounds that dominated the era. The songs are kind of down beat.... But it works OK, for what it is. And what it is is not what I prefer. 3/5, it wasn’t boring.

I only knew the name Radiohead, was totally ignorant on the music. Overall, pretty decent. Well done, good sound. Don’t love the singer but not too bad. I can see why lots of people like this. But it didn’t really “wow” me either. May grow on me if I listen again. 3.5, round down to 3

I would probably like this if I used or had ever used, hallucinogens. But I don't / didn't. I had some friends in college (late 70's) who had some Hawkwind, and they were into a lot of the harder "mind stimulants". That must be the key. Don't get me wrong, I like prog music: yes, ELP, Genesis... even Triumvirat, Crack The Sky and Nektar. Pink Floyd, ya know. But this compares to Yes like Yes compares to ABBA... It is pretty far out there. This is an early 70's live album, but the quality seems poor even by those standards. Space Ritual is very muddy sounding, and the vocals sound very far away. The squeaks and whistles and "space sounds" are right up front, though. On the other hand, maybe that's on purpose? Musically it's not horrible, but the jams don't really have any direction, and the weird sounds rather bug me. Looking at Wikipedia, I see that Lemmy was the bass player here, before going on to Motorhead. I'm not sure what that means, but it is an interesting factoid. I don't hate this, but a cleaner sound, and a bit more concise presentation would help a lot. And some of it is pretty decent. But a lot more isn't decent. As it is, clocking in at almost 90 minutes, this just seems like wretched excess. Sorry, this is a 2, I struggled to make it a little past 1/2 way through.

I’ve never listened to the Cure (before this). My impression is based on their reputation as providing “introspective gothic rock” for this kids who dressed all in black and moaned about hating life. I watched their induction ceremony to the rock and roll hall of fame, which pretty much reinforced that. So let’s actually listen to an album and see what we think: The sound is pretty lush, a “big room” feel. Lots of synth. The pacing is generally sluggish, the vocals are sort of strained, a tormented soul calling out. Modern English meets Dumptruck. Wikipedia called the band’s sound “dark and tormented”, and I guess that fits. But this album isn’t that harsh, and it rather works. Not the kind of thing that’ll end up in my collection, but I can certainly respect it. The hit Lovesong is pretty good, pulls the elements together nicely. A bit faster, a bit less mopey, the keyboards are brighter, and an accessible 3:29. A nice change from most of the album’s 5-9 minute songs. Now this mix could be really irritating, but like many releases in the early days of CDs, it is excessively long, clocking over 70 minutes. Overall, I’ll give this a 3/5, I’d go 3.5 if I could.

I’ve listened to more Hip Hop in the 100+ days of this project, than in the whole of my life previously. And I’m still not a fan. This is not really bad, though. The soul aspect helps along. And the beats are more shuffling than pounding. But still too much fixed beat, too much mostly spoken vocals, not enough melody. Too much auto tune (anything more than none is too much). But there is some sense of these being actual songs, and that’s good. I was feeling generous, was going to give a three, but the longer it went, the more I lost interest. I found myself checking “how much more” when it was just past 1/2 through… too often. By the time I was about 75% through, I was down to a 2. Sorry, just too much. 2/5

Well, I saw this was another Hip Hop album, and my expectation were really low. But it’s also from 1982, so maybe there’s hope. I’ve heard of grandmaster flash, but didn’t have any associations.Fortunately, my expectations were misplaced. The first song “She’s Fresh” really nails the funk, pegs the scale. “Its Nasty” rips off (sorry, samples) the riff from Tom Tom Club’s “Genius of Love”, but build it into a better song. “Scorpio” has a good groove, but I don’t dig the mechanical vocal effects…. Guess that was cutting edge in 1982 (yes I was there). I’m not a huge fan of “It’s a Shame”, more beat box and scratching standard 80’s rap, not much groove, but harmless. “Dreaming’” is an homage to Stevie Wonder, complete with a spoken dedication, and interlude. Frankly the “dreamin ‘bout you Stevie” stuff is kind of creepy. “You Are” continues in the same vein as Dreamin’, sort of standard soulful slow dance song, with lots of synth strings. Nice piano, though. There’s a spoken part that reveals the “You” is Jesus Christ, which comes off as discordant in the context of what sounds like a seduction song. “The Message” - oh yeah, I’ve heard this. A little too heavy on the programmed beat, and certainly more rap than funk. But it’s got some funky in there, and is an indication where the style can excel. Overall? Not bad. Several pretty good songs, and several that were ok. “Dreamin’” and “You Are” are almost jarringly out of place, and pretty forgettable. That said I can see why this was popular. very solid 3/5

Bad Company hit the scene in the summer of 1974. The summer before I started high school, a fine time. And the album made a huge splash, topping the Billboard album charts and selling 5x Platinum. And I had one of those 5 million sold, mine was on 8 track tape. Yes, this was the sound of that particular slice of the 70’s. It was all over the radio, and one of my heavy-rotation albums back then. annd still a staple of and almost every song from the album was a staple of Classic Rock today. And I still listen to it occasionally 50 years later. That said, it’s not really “compelling”…. It’s not deep and meaningful. One of my favorites, but never my actual favorite. Just good, solid, mid-70s rock. It’s a notable coincidence that the first single (Can’t Get Enough) was on the charts at the same time as the Rolling Stones’ “It’s Only Rock And Roll (But I Like It)”. And sometimes that’s enough. Bad Company would go on to release 4 more successful albums in the 70’s, but none were as good (or as successful) as this debut. Solid 4.5/5, but rounds down to 4

The Beatles are probably the most important band in 75 years. Read the biography of almost any rock musician from the late 60’s through the early 80s and you’ll find out they were inspired to take up music by the Beatles. The Beatles released a dozen albums in just over 7 years in the UK, and 11 of them reached #1. Yellow Submarine “only” made it to #3. This was repackaged into 17 US releases, 14 of which hit #1 (with the other 3x hitting #2). They are iconic, they are pervasive. In the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s, anybody who listened to music knew Beatles songs, even if they didn’t realize they were Beatles songs. So, what about The White Album? This is the 9th UK release, coming on the heels of the perfect trio of “Rubber Soul”, “Revolver” and “Sgt. Pepper…”. The bar couldn’t be set higher. And this album comes close to meeting expectations, but falls a little short. A double album, with 30 songs clocking in at over 90 minutes. It’s certainly ambitious. And there’s no shortage of brilliant music. From harder songs like “Helter Skelter” and “Back in the USSR”, to some of the prettiest songs they did, like “Blackbird” and “I Will”. And everything in between. And there-in lies the problem. This album is all over the place, and sometimes seem like the members are lurching 4 different directions from song to song. I’ve seen it referred to as having a “fragmentary style”. Strains within the band are well documented, and reportedly, only 14 of the 30 songs feature all four members performing. Revolution 9 brings Yoko Ono into the process, and should never have seen the light of day. In retrospect, this album showed that the Beatles were not going to last much longer. BUT (and a big but) it all works out and the wealth of high-spots outweigh the weak spots. I wish it were more cohesive, I wish that it were more concise. I wish that “Revolution 9” had been discarded. I wish I could go 4.5, but that’s not an option. And I can’t give 5 stars to an album that devotes 8+ minutes to Revolution 9. So 4/5 it is.

Proving that Funky can be Fun, Head Hunters is one of the great Jazz albums ever. Peaking at #13 on the Billboard 200 (in 1974), it had great crossover success, and is one of the top selling jazz albums of all time. Wikipedia says it was “Among the defining moments of the [then] emerging jazz fusion and jazz-funk movements…” That pretty well sums it up. I own this album, am quite familiar with it. I’d certainly recommend it to anyone interested in classic Jazz, fusion or funk It is an easy 4.5/5, in this case I’ll round up because of its significance. 5

I'm not familiar with Ryan Adams, so I checked the reviews... it appears that Mr Adams is a reprehensible human being. Well, that's unfortunate. On the other hand, Rock Star and Reprehensible Human Being go together more often than I'd like to think. I'm not sure starts were better in my youth, but the lack of 24 hr news cycle and no social media provided a level of insulation, and maybe allowed a level of willful ignorance on fans' behalf. Anyway, what about the music? I was pleased that this album from the year 2000 is not all synths, autotune and drum boxes, with no hint of rap or hip hop. The opening song has a rollicking feel, somewhat reminiscent of Dylan's "From A Buick 6". That's a nice start, but also the high point. It doesn't drop off much, at least. This is a pretty relaxed feeling album, with a very "natural" feel. Acoustic guitar, harmonica, a touch of banjo. Un-affected vocals. Very "real". Especially compared to other albums from 2000, like Britney Spears, Eminem, NSYNC. Really, this is the type of sound that I generally like, and that's good. But it's just not especially memorable. Still, a lot better than I expected. Might've been pushing towards a 3.5, but gotta dock a bit for the personal "problems". 3/5

Well... meh? This album didn't hook me. It didn't delight me. Nor did it offend me. Or challenge me. I didn't hate it, or like it. There must be some reason it is on the list, some reason why I "must" to listen to it before I die. But I can't discern it. The vocalist generally sounds like he's half asleep. The playing is competent, but laid back. clean and clear, but nothing memorable. At best it hints at Velvet Underground, but without the edge, the spirit, the ... well the danger. Maybe Neil Young's "Tonight's The Night" without the raw emotion and angst. My first thought was to give this a 3, because it is certainly competent. But it creates no real emotional response at all. The Allmusic review sums it up nicely: "Many of the songs tend to drift by without grabbing hold". And a reviewer at Sputnik Music said: "There’s just enough meat to keep the listener interested throughout the sixty minutes of Chore of Enchantment." No, there's not enough meat. Boring is a sin in music. That'll knock it down to a 2.

Somebody was listening to a lot of Nirvana.... At least that was my first thought when I put this on. But it moves in different directions as we go along, and even that first song works. My expectations were pretty low going in, another mid 90's album from a band I've never heard of. With a name like "Garbage". But I'm pleasantly surprised. This is rather good. Actually, quite good. Some of it it really good! The music is mostly upbeat, solid alt-rock. Lots of good bass, which is a big thing to me. The lyrics are a little angst-y, but not excessive. Nothing too complicated. Really good, clean sound. Really, this is the kind of thing I came to this project for. I'll need to listen to this a few more times. 4/5

Well, at least it's clear right off with what's in store, with the 25 second "announcement". Coarse and profane, misogynous, homophobic, violent, that's this album. In the song Marshall Mathers, he raps "I think I was put here to annoy the world".. well A for effort, if not execution. I'm not impressed, I'm not outraged either. It just seems so very trite. And long, at over 70 minutes. That said, the song "Stan" has a pretty cool sound / groove. But the lyrics follow the ramblings of a pathetic fan who kills himself and his pregnant girlfriend because Eminem didn't respond to fan letters fast enough. Cheerful, huh? Most of the grooves are tolerable, better than a lot of the Hip Hop I've been fed through this project. But Hip Hop is supposedly about the lyrics, and the lyrics here are pretty much intolerable. Note: Spotify only has 17 of the 19 songs from this album, but you know, I've had enough and won't dig up those other. I was going to give this a 2 since some of the grooves are decent, but sheesh. The crap messaging knocks it down to 1/5. I have to wonder about what kind of person love this stuff. 1/5

Generic 1980 Brit-pop. I guess it is pleasant.... enough. Really, it's fine... really. I mean, I feel like I ought to like this. And I don't dislike it. But it is nothing especially special. I've never heard of The Teardrop Explodes, and I was still pretty musically savvy in 1980. I was doing the whole "college radio" thing back then, they clearly didn't make any splash in the US. Anyway, easy 3.

Yet another Brit-pop album... I does seem like there's a lot of late 20th century UK bands (that I've never heard of) on this project. Whatever. Looking at Wikipedia, it seems these guys' claim to fame is touring in support of Oasis. Although this album did hit #1 in UK (but apparently did not chart in US). Whatever. This is my favorite (so far) of these, it doesn't sound like all the others. Good solid rock feel, the vocals aren't strained, the bass sounds good. The songs are pretty upbeat and catchy. I'll be listening to this again, I was thinking high 3, maybe round to 4. But the more I listened, the more I dug it. Easy 4

Musically, this is pretty good. But I’m not a fan of Jack White’s singing voice. It seems like a cross between Cheech Marin on “Earache My Eye” and the guy from Red Hot Chili Peppers. Which is not (IMHO) a good thing. But again, musically it it good. The songwriting is solid, the sound is good, nice variations in instrumentation and tone. There’s a lot of very nice piano scattered around. As the album progresses, I’m floating around between 3 and 4. But the further this goes the more I lean 4. Definitely will need to listen again. 4/5

I was a little disappointed here, but that could be a matter of expectations. It's fine , she's a great singer, but it didn't "wow" me. I'd really prefer a studio recording over live. Easy 3, though. I was just hoping for more. 3/5

Proof that all the good band names were used in the 20th century. TV on the Radio? At least we know it wasn't developed by a marketing agency. I've never heard of these guys, but looking at Wikipedia, it seems they were pretty well respected at the time. They have some interesting things going on here, interesting rhythms, some cool vocal things in the background. Overall good sound. Not a huge fan of the lead singer, but not too detracting. Good variation in the songs, without seeming to ping-pong aimlessly. I enjoyed most of this, a couple of songs missed the (my) mark, but not badly. Not quite good enough to give it a 4, but super solid 3. Add it to the "check it out again" list. 3/5

The album kicks off well, with an interesting song, "La femme d'argent". Great groove, nice electric piano. Kind of Deodato meets Brian Auger and a dash of Kraftwerk. At its best, there's a smooth, jazz fusion feel. The longest song on the album, at just over 7 minutes. It takes a notable step down for "Sexy Boy", with a decidedly inorganic sound, and useless vocals which mostly repeat the title over and over and over and over. Not a bad groove, though. "All I Need" rebounds. When they use "real' bass it groves so much better, and the vocals this time are carrying actual vocals. It seems to bounce around between the two levels, really good, and OK. "Talisman" is great, "Remember " is meh.... etc. But there's a charm here, and I overall enjoyed this album. Overall, I'd probably go 7/10 or 7.5/10. But this is a 5 point scale, and integers only. I'm rounding up today, because this is really interesting, and several of the songs are solidly good. So that's 4/5

This is the 2nd Nick Cave album served up here. I rated that one “2”. This is more of the same, except the entire album is songs that relay the details of crimes of passion. Yeah, take a melancholy, mumbling singer, and have him recite grim and gory songs. With a healthy dose of gratuitous profanity. Yep, murder porn set to music. Example lyric: “I sang and I laughed, I howled and wept / I panted like a pup. / I blew a hole in Mrs Richard Holmes. / And her husband he stood up”…. Part of a 14.5 minute slog where he clinically describes 12 murders. No emotion, no passion, nothing. We don’t get a hint as to his motivations, the thoughts or fears of his victims…. Nothing. Just moderately graphic explanations as to how each is killed. Seriously, 50+ minutes of this crap. Apparently this was well received, though I can’t comprehend why. I Rolling Stone reviewer is quoted as saying “never before have manic elements elevated Nick Cave’s shtick to art”. Yeah, whatever…. I’ll stick with “crap”. As before, the music isn’t horrible, though it is overall slow and slogging and dragging. Cave’s vocal style is not really singing, but more spoken in a morose, “I hate the world and myself” sort of tone. Sorry, this doesn’t work for me at all. 1/5

My prior reggae experience is “The Harder They Come” soundtrack, Bob Marley’s “Legacy”, and a couple other pieces by people like Peter Tosh. It’s definitely a niche genre for me, but one I can appreciate, and occasionally enjoy. I wasn’t familiar with Burning Spear, but this is certainly reggae. I’d say generic reggae, but that sounds like a negative. Maybe definitive is a better word. It has the relaxed, laid back groove that defines the genre, the primary driver of the songs. That and the vocal stylings. All very good. That said, it also has the one downside of reggae: it can all sort of blend together. This is a solid offering, certainly worth the listen. There’s several standout songs, and all of it is good. This falls into the 3 to 4 range that is frightfully common as I go through the 1001 albums. I’ll round this one up, it is a refreshing change of pace, and a genre with which everybody should be familiar. 4/5

I’ve had some exposure to country music all along, starting with TV shows like Hee-Haw or Austin City Limits. And a few albums, notably compilations by Hank Williams and Buck Owens. But I wasn’t familiar with George Jones beyond the name. I quite enjoyed this, though. It is classic 70’s country. The hit “Grand Tour” is pretty much the blueprint for “my baby left me” songs, and it really hits the mark. No footstompin’ music, and nothing like the “bro country” of today. This just oozes with heart and soul. Three chords and the truth. Solid 4/5

I certainly know OF the Smashing Pumpkins, though I couldn't name any songs off the top of my head. Digging into this, the sound is certainly familiar, and I'm pretty sure I've heard a few of these songs. But after an hour, it starts to blur together. Yeah it's grunge, and you can certainly hear similarities to Nirvana. It OK, and has a few points that are higher than the rest. but nothing that hangs with me 30 years down the line. Solid 3, but nowhere near making 4. 3/5

Another one that I already own and like. This is Steely Dan's 3rd album, and the last one where they were technically a band, rather than a vehicle for Fagen and Becker. I say "technically because there were more than a dozen other players augmenting the 5 members of the band. Regardless, this is a great album, probably my 2nd favorite behind their first (Can't Buy A Thrill). It has all the things that make Steely Dan great: solid pop sensibilities over a slightly Jazzy groove. precise songwriting, solid musicianship, well produced. But it also has the things that can make Steely Dan a little irritating. They's a bit clinical, perhaps too "clean". The lyrics can trend toward obtuse. And there's just a certain feeling that these guys KNOW they're good, and that they're smarter than all us mortals who are lucky enough to listen to them. With a song about Charlie Parker, and a Duke Ellington cover, these guys let you know they understand and appreciate "real" music. With references to The Queen of Spain, Sqonk's tears and and Napoleon... well these guys are beyond the average. All that said, this remains a very good album. Most of the songs are good to great, and none stink. "Rikki Don't Lose That Number" is a prime 1974 single (#4 in US) and at least 1/2 of it got solid AOR radio play. "Any Major Dude..." "Night by Night" and "Pretzel Logic" are outstanding. All my complaining doesn't change the fact that I enjoy this album, and have for years. Easily at least a 4. But not quite good enough to round to 4. I'll save that 5 for their debut, assuming it shows up on this list.

This is an album that I've heard of for years, it is certainly renowned. But if I've heard anything from it, I don't know it. Wikipedia says "neo soul and R&B album with some songs based in hip hop soul and reggae". I went into this cautiously optimistic. First song is totally hip-hop, meh. The more soul songs are pretty good. The more hip-hop, the less I like it. Lyrics like "So I keep makin' the street's ballads / While you lookin' for dressin' to go with your tossed salad"?? That's just dumb. There's a lot of spoken interludes between songs, but I find them more distracting than adding to the experience. And I frequently found myself wishing the songs were around 4 minutes long vs 5-6. I have nothing against long songs, as long as there's a point. These don't really hold up to the length (IMHO). “Doo Wop” is a high point, the hip-hop singing is offset by the solid musical groove. Then we move to “Superstar”, which leaves me cold. really cold. And so on. The more soul songs are better, the more hip-hop, not so much. There’s several songs that are pretty good for the genre, though, I can understand why it was popular, without loving it. Solid 3.

Make it easy: 5/5. I wish I could give it 6/5. I know this album well, it is one of the albums I would qualify as "important". Something everyone should listen to before they die. This is music with a message. That can be really hard to pull off without being overbearing, but Marvin Gaye nails it here. The music carries the message but the message doesn't get in the way of the music. The iconic songs "What's Going On", "Mercy Mercy Me" and "Inner City Blues" are... well... iconic. Among the best. The rest of the album ties in and it all ties together. There's a reason this album is near the top of everybody's "Best Albums" lists

I remember the name Tangerine Dream, I think a friend's brother had one of their albums (back in the mid 70's). But I don't know that I've ever listened to them. Wikipedia notes the album features Tangerine Dream's "now classic sequencer-driven sound", and this site tags this as electronica which is one of my worst rated genres (123 reviews in). This is very ambient, background-y, kind of random. Instrumental, and mostly keyboard / synthesizers. No drums. Shades of early Pink Floyd meets Kraftwerk. None of that is necessarily bad. But after the 17 minute title track, I'm still waiting for this to do SOMETHING. It's pleasant enough, but doesn't really have any discernable melodies, and seems to sort of meander around between motifs. Another quote on Wikipedia calls it "Layer upon layer of futuristic sounds piled one on top of the other until the whole thing climaxes in some interstellar void". That actually is a good summary. Except 50 years later, it is not so futuristic. Definitely background music, might seem really "deep" if you're stoned. But I'm not. This is rated 2.7/5 on the site, I think that's probably good. Since I can't give it 2.7, I'll have to round. I'll go 3/5 because it's at least a bit different, not like the generic 90's Brit-Pop that comes up too often. That's being really generous, but 2 just seems overly harsh. Side note: only 2 of 4 tracks are on Spotify, representing just over 25% of the album's playing time. I listened via Youtube, where I was able to pull up the entire album.

Well…. This is my first “metal” album here, and I simply don’t appreciate the genre. The vocals are the sound of angry puking, which seems to be a real “thing” in metal. It’s almost like every band is a parody of the style. I looked up the lyrics, and they seem benign, but the “chorus” is generally a single phrase repeated 4-6 times. The music is really driving, high energy…. Relentless…. Perhaps exhausting. And there’s not a lot of variation from song to song. By the time I was 40 minutes (10 songs) in, I was worn out and had to take a break. There’s some moments here. The percussion / rhythms are often interesting. I almost liked Ratamahhatta, which seems to be in a foreign language (but not one that google translate could figure out). On the other hand, Breed Apart found me thinking of a Spice-Girls-in-Hell kind of vibe…. I could almost sing along Wannabe’s “slam your body down and wind it all around”! The instrumental Jasco and the tribal Itsari are pretty cool, but jarring it its deviation from the rest of the album. The last song is basically 12+ minutes of ambient jungle(?) sounds. It makes Beatles’ Revolution 9 seem like a pop song. When I was in university, I went through a period where I would listen to the 1st side of Sex Pistols’ “Never Mind The Bollocks” to get pumped up before heading out to campus parties. I can see this might have a similar appeal. But that was many years ago, and was only for a few months. And only ~20 minutes at a time. I see a similar appeal here. Not my thing, but better than a lot of stuff I’ve heard here. 2/5

This is the first of a trio of essential albums from Neil Young. Between 1969 and 1972 he released “Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere”, After The Gold Rush” and Harvest”. An amazing trifecta of outstanding albums. All of which I’ve owned for many years. From the opening of “Cinnamon Girl” through the last strains of “Cowgirl In The Sand”, the album is outstanding. It has the loose style that Young fostered with Crazy Horse, not sloppy, but “real”. Not polished but full of texture. Cowgirl, Cinnamon Girl are iconic Neil Young songs, along with Down By The River. The title track is a classic. The others are very solid complements. All 3 of the aforementioned songs are 5/5, and this one kicked off the run. Easy 5/5.

This album dominated the early 80’s. 7 of the 9 songs were released as singles, and all 7 made top 10. It is the top selling album in the world. Helped drive the concept of “meaningful” (and big budget) music videos. Influential? Oh yeah. This is impeccably put together, every note a perfect. Everything grooves, the melodies are memorable, the hooks are perfect. There’s a reason this album dominated the world. It’s that good. That said, it’s pop. It’s not jazz, or classical, or even prog. It’s pop, but as good as pop gets. The only downside is the creepy factor of Michael Jackson, which didn’t really come hot until later. Easy 5

Miles Davis’s “Kind Of Blue” was one of the first Jazz albums I acquired, back in the late 70’s. That, and “Bitches Brew” are long time standards in my collection. But I’d never heard this one. Wikipedia says this is “Davis's first fusion recording, following a stylistic shift toward the genre in his previous records and live performances.” And it is not a subtle shift. Starting with electric piano, then electric guitar. It features two songs, one per album side. But the horn is certainly the same. This has the “fusion” sound for sure, the keyboards dominate. The long somewhat rambling songs. But it all works, all the pieces come together into a really nice sum. This (like the best Jazz records) is going to take several listens to really digest. But I’ll make the effort, and can tell my appreciation will grow. There’s a real good chance this’ll get added to my collection. 5/5

All I knew of JeffBuckley coming into this was his cover of Hallelujah, which I don’t especially like. A bit overwrought, and a bit overblown. Faux “deep and meaningful”…. Instead of whining, we have tortured shouting. It does not ring my bell. Apparently this was really successful, and is highly regarded. I can’t fathom why. There’s a couple of songs I don’t hate, that’s something. 2/5

The debut album of the Ramones, a record which shook the world. I remember my older brother playing this at high volume, and being truly amazed. From the opening “Blitzkrieg Bop”, it starts at 100 mph and doesn’t let up. This is not virtuoso, but they play fast. The songs are short and sweet, 14 tunes in 29 minutes! Lyrically, the songs are not to be taken seriously, from “Beat on the Brat (with a baseball bat)” to “Now I Wanna Sniff Some Glue”, this is simply fun. Full disclosure, not only have I owned this album sine the late 70’s, I saw the Ramones live at a small club in Ohio in 1978…. And it was an experience to remember. The only downside with the Ramones it that they are pretty much a 1-trick pony. But what a trick it is. Well worth having. 4/5

This record kicks off with a bang, the energetic “Red Morning Light”. Very fun rocker, nice clean sound. And it keeps on going in the right direction. This reminds me a little of looseness of the Stone’s “Exile on Main Street”, with a bit more Black Crowes feel. But higher energy. Not a huge fan of the singer, but it doesn’t detract. Would like to hear a bit more bass and a bit less snare drum, but that’s just me. This’ll rate another listen. 4/5

From wikipedia: “critic Lester Bangs, writing his inaugural review for Rolling Stone, called Kick Out the Jams a "ridiculous, overbearing, pretentious album". And I say, yeah, so what? I’ll add that it is sloppy, and the recording is a bit muddy. But it is also raw and primal, and frankly wonderful. Call it proto-punk, call it garage rock, call it whatever you want. But you can’t say it doesn’t rock. 4/5

This is all very well done. Adele is certainly a talented singer. And the music is impeccably crafted, perfectly polished to a sheen. So why don’t I like it? It’s all so exacting, pretty. So… well, souless. I felt no emotional connection to any of it. Nothing at all. A very, VERY competent album. Which is really a letdown. I’m following it up with Dusty Springfield’s “Dusty In Memphis”…. Much better. 3/5

Early 60’s instrumental groove. The title track is iconic, peaking at #3 on the US Hot 100, and topping the R&B chart. One of the great instrumental tracks, back when instrumentals were part of the hit mix. Which leads to the downside. This is not an instrumental track, it’s an instrumental album from an instrumental band. A dozen tracks over 36 minutes. And while the song “Green Onions” is brilliant, the rest of it kind of blurs into the background. Maybe what you’d expect in the background of an early 60’s beach blanket movie. I owned Green Onions on 45 back in the late 60’s, and I have a “Hits” album by Booker T and MGs. Their peaks are great, perfect for you oldies playlists. But the whole album wears a little thin, except as background music. 3/5

Rage against the machine? Well, these guys are certainly angry. The music isn’t horrible, but the lyrics are repetitive, and what passes for emotion is simply shouting. Did I mention the lyrics are repetitive. Yes, they’re repetitive. A line or phrase repeated over and over. Sometimes a pair of lines repeated, and then repeated again. With the occasional UGH thrown in. Did I mention that the words are repetitive? Maybe if I shouted it? I know a lot of people like this…. But I got not place in my heart for it. I’ll give the music a 3/5, there’s some interesting stuff here. -1 for the lyrics and shouting. 2/5

Sheesh. “My violence is a dream / a ‘real dream’ / a skinny arm / a crush on living sin”. … what the f is that supposed to mean? I get it, you’re goth, you hate the world. Blah blah blah. I looked at some of the critic’s comments on Wikipedia and I see comments like: “one of [Sonic Youth's] strangest albums", "a difficult album” and “no wave chaos." And "bring[s] form to the formless, tune to the tuneless, and … melody and composition on their trademark dissonance.” Yeah. I can see all those descriptions here, but none of them appeal to me. I don’t suppose it sucks, but I can’t dig it either. But the further along I went, the less I liked it. Started at 3, worked down to 2 2/5

Now here’s a good one. Certainly a familiar one. From the iconic cover photo to the final strains of “Her Majesty”, this is one of the best known albums ever. #1 across the world, 12x platinum sales in USA, well over 30 million sold across the world. A great album, probably the best of the late stage Beatles albums. But a bit behind their peak middle period. This first 2/3 of the album is outstanding, what one expects from the Beatles. A mix of timeless classics (“Something”, “Come Together”, “Here Comes The Sun), quirky-but-catchy songs (“Maxwell’s Silver Hammer”, “Octopus’sGarden”) and just plain great stuff (“I Want You”, “Because”). The last 1/3 of the album is a collage of bits and pieces woven together into a medley (of sorts). It’s a clever bit, but at the core, it is a collection of fragments that couldn’t (wouldn’t) get fleshed out into stand alone songs. It is interesting, and “worthy”, but not wonderful. This isn’t a perfect album, and it’s not quite as good as some other Beatles’ work. Still, absolutely an album everyone should listen to and know. And the #1 rated album on the 1001albums generator site. Obvious 5/5

Aretha Franklin was known as the queen of soul, years before the current crop of singers were even born. And she deserved the title. Recorded in Muscle Shoals, Alabama, this is not as “pop” as what Motown was doing, and has more of that Deep South soul. This is a great album, exhibiting her talents well. Not just technical singing, but she really brings the soul and feeling into these songs. The album was hugely successful, reached #2 on the US album charts, #1 on the R&B charts. The 3x singles all were Top 10 hits (Top 2 on the R&B charts), and all the rest of the songs are equally worthy. This is one of the best female soul albums of the 60’s and one that everyone should hear. Yes, I own this album. 5/5

I usually feel that I'm not cool enough for the Velvet Underground. I grew up in Pittsburgh, not NYC, I've never done heroin. But I do own 3 of their first 4 albums... 'cause we can always try. This is the one I've missed. Anyway, It's a very good album, in a Velvet Underground kind of way. It's very relaxed, casual. What I'd expect from a bunch of people jamming around after a long week of hedonistic excess (perhaps White Light / White Heat). Not exactly "laid back", but more "come down calling". But it all works, really well. The album is absolutely worth hearing, just for "Pale Blue Eyes", but everything else works, too. I've heard it said that Velvet Underground didn't sell a lot of records, but everybody who bought one went out and formed a band. I get where that comes from. But they're certainly a niche sound; not something I'd listen to every day. I'm not sure how I missed this one previously, I think it is destined to be my favorite Velvet Underground album. But I can't QUITE give it a 5, just a bit too niche. 4/5

Crap. Another Nick Cave album. I suppose it might be better than the other 2 that have popped up in my first 140 albums… And then it started off pretty good, with a solid high energy rocker. A little long, but good. My hopes were rising! Sadly, that was just the one song. The rest was meh, at best. I don't understand how somebody can expect to be taken seriously singing lyrics like "we could comprehend our position by the moon / but they've ordered the moon not to shine"... Or "If you're gonna dine with them cannibals / Well sooner or later, darling, you're gonna get eaten". Seriously? Anyway, this is miles better than Murder Ballads (1), and maybe a little better than "The Boatman's Call (2). on the other hand, it drags on for 82 minutes. My comments on Boatman's included: "Melancholy songs, atonal singing, stupid lyrics." My comments on Murder included: "As before, the music isn’t horrible, though it is overall slow and slogging and dragging. Cave’s vocal style is not really singing, but more spoken in a morose, I-hate-the-world-and-myself sort of tone." That applies here. 2/5

“Mark Knopfler has an extraordinary ability to make a Schecter Custom Stratocaster hoot and sing like angels on a Saturday night, exhausted from being good all week and needing a stiff drink.” - Douglas Adams, from the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy books. It is easy to forget (or overlook for younger folk) just how different this album sounded when it came out 45+ years ago. I remember hearing “Sultans of Swing” on the radio in my university dorm room and wondering “What is THIS?”…. Trying to guess if it was Clapton, or JJ Cale, or who else? But it was a new band, Dire Straits. And a big splash was made, as the album hit #2 in the US. But this is not a “grab-you-by-the-throat-and-shake” kind of album. It is smooth and supple, but still drives. The guitar is fluid, not stabbing. And absolutely impressive. Beyond the best known “Sultans…” and the perfect “Down To The Waterline”, the whole album is great. My favorite Dire Strats album by far, an enthusiastic 5/5

This is the second album I've drawn from Air. I rather liked the last one (Moon Safari), scored it a 4 with the comments "It seems to bounce around between... really good, and OK. ... there's a charm here, and I overall enjoyed this album." So that's encouraging. This is a soundtrack album, so it is, by nature, background-y. Which is also a bit, well, boring. Strike that, a LOT boring. It is certainly pleasant enough, but there's not a single memorable moment. Not sure why this is deemed essential. 2/5

Oh yay, another British pop/rock/indie band. (/sarc). This topped the UK charts, and barely cracked the Top 100 in US (#83). I mean, it's ok... but nothing really special. Certainly nothing to separate it from the pack of early 2000's indy stuff. the vocals are OK, a bit low in the mix. Lyrics are OK, nothing special. The music tends towards a little dense, wall-of-guitars kind of feel, which is OK. A couple of the songs are pretty good, none stink. All in all, OK sums it up. 3/5

I’ve tended to appreciate Nirvana, and Nevermind is certainly an “important” album. But that’s the only one I own. This is a live album from the MTV series Unplugged, which featured artists/bands playing stripped down (generally acoustic) versions of their songs in front of a small crowd. A pretty cool concept, some of the shows were pretty good. This show was broadcast less than months before Nirvana leader Kurt Cobain’s death, and released as an album about 7 months after that. It was a final testament of sorts for the band, and is notable for that if nothing else. It’s certainly an interesting album. Some of the songs work well in the stripped down format, and the overall listening experience is less … … dense. That said, Cobain’s voice isn’t best suited for this quieter format, seems strained at times. I with the crowd was mixed a shade lower, but that’s minor. Unplugged was a cool concept, and Nirvana committed to it, with fresh renditions of their songs. This won’t be a favorite of mine, I struggle with the overwhelming “dark” feel of Nirvana. But I like this as much as Nevermind, though in a different way. 4/5

Pretty interesting “Americana” album. Really nice sound, but the singers voice doesn’t hook me. Sort of a Sheryl Crow feel, but rougher. The songs raged from fine to really good. I rather enjoyed it overall, am sure it'll get played again. It fit my mood today so I'll round up to 4.

Country Joe and the Fish. About all I know of them is their appearance in the Woodstock movie, where they were NOT a high point. And there’s nothing in this listen to change. Nothing especially memorable or meaningful. Just generic mid 60’s music. This was released in mid-1966, take a look at other albums released that year: Beach Boys - Pet Sounds, Beatles - Revolver, Dave Brubeck - Take 5, Cream - Fresh Cream, Bob Dylan - Blonde On Blonde, The Monkees first album, Rolling Stones - Aftermath, Simon and Garfunkel - Sounds of Silence… This isn’t close to any of those, in quality, importance, popularity…. anything. I could probably come up with 2 dozen albums from 1965-1967 that are WAY better than this. Heck, I’d rather listen to Strawberry Alarm Clock or the Troggs. Vocals are OK, songwriting is meh, even for the time. Musicianship / recording is meh. It’s not horrible, but it ain’t great. I’d probably go 3, except I just don’t know why anybody felt it was essential. So 2

Very interesting stuff. Another reviewer here noted the “chaotic, frenetic energy of cuban jazz” and that “it felt like the soundtrack to a 1970s spy movie”. I agree on both points, Wikipedia notes that Machito “…brought together Cuban rhythms and big band arrangements in one group.” That’s also a good summary. There’s an incessant energy here that I can only equate to The Ramones, not that there is any stylistic comparison. The percussion is up front, and drives the songs. There’s a lot of unison horns. It all comes off a bit “busy”, not a lot of space in the songs. None of that is bad, mind you. It all works. But don’t see the genre as Jazz and expect Monk or Coltrane. This is the kind of thing I came to this project to discover. Completely new to me and deserving of hearing. It will certainly go onto my “listen again” again list for sure 4/5

This album came out not long after my 13th birthday, and was massively popular. With hit singles "Higher Ground"(#4), "Golden Lady" (4), "Living For The City" (#8), and "Don't You Worry 'Bout A Thing" (#16) it made a big splash. It reached #5 on the Rock charts, and topped the Soul charts. Beyond splash, these songs made an impact on postpubescent me. "Living for the City" was probably the first time that I started to really think about race relations. That and the single "Brother Louie" (by Stories) that came out about the same time... but that's another story. Anyway, this was a huge album, both in popularity and import. The sound is wonderful (it won a Grammy for Best Engineered Non-Classical Recording in 1974), the songwriting is wonderful, the performances are wonderful. Note that besides writing all of the songs, Wonder is credited a playing most of the instruments on the album. This is a great album, a real reflection of its time, mid-70's pop and soul. But deep and insightful, not fluff. It grooves, it speaks, it matters. Full disclosure, I already own this album and am very familiar with it. 5/5

I'm sorry, I just don't get metal. This is pretty high energy, though, and the singing only partly unintelligible. Not that the lyrics are deep and meaningful.... they're not. "Lay down your soul to the gods' rock and roll... argh grrrr grumble... BLACK METAL!!!" or "Ashes to ashes, dust to dust / if god won't have me the devil must".... and not at all tongue-in-cheek…. The singing style reminded me a little of Trans Siberian Orchestra, and not in a good way. The production is remarkably disappointing, very muddled and muddy. Maybe as if recorded from an adjacent room. Really horrible, especially for 1982. Wikipedia refers to it as a "very unpolished and underproduced sound". Every song has the same sonic template, of all sort of blends into a constant drone. I don't know, maybe this was supposed to be cutting edge, or something. But really it's boring. That said, this is overall not nearly as bad as some other metal I've heard. I didn't give me a headache, at least. 2/5

The Kinks were always seen in the US as being behind The Beatles and the Stones, as far as the first wave British Invasion bands. And they were certainly less successful over here. But they're also the most "English" of the three. That said, they are consistently good. I own 8x Kinks albums. from 1964's Kinda Kinks, through 1980's One For The Road. But somehow, I missed this one. Part of an impressive 4 album streak (US releases): Village Green, Arthur, Lola, Muswell Hillbillies... quite a streak. The only songs I knew going in were the brilliant "Victoria" and the only great "Shangri La". But this is a very solid album. Very much in the mood of Village Green, that very slice-of-English-life feel. Solid, but lags a bit behind those other albums mentioned above, but certainly worthy. 4/5

Morrison Hotel, the penultimate Doors album (before the departure/demise of Jim Morrison). Between January 1967 and April 1971, The Doors released 6 studio albums, and a double live album. In the true spirit of “better to burn out than to fade away”, they pretty much imploded by 1971, culminating in the mysterious death of lead singer Morrison while he was appealing an indecency conviction. During the Doors’ original run of popularity, I wasn’t even a teenager, so I only knew the hits. And the songs that played on FM radio through the 70’s. Which is a great set of songs. From Morrison Hotel, that included “Roadhouse Blues”, Waiting For the Sun” and “Peace Frog”…. All very solid songs. Then, in the fall of 1980, on the heels of the movie Apocalypse Now, they released a Greatest Hits collection that made a major splash (top 20 on the US charts) and started a Doors revival. I was in college at the time, and it seemed the Doors were everywhere. My roommate even headed up a Doors cover band, and pretty soon I knew all their music… In other words, this album is quite familiar to me. And it is very representative of the band. Great songs, very keyboard driven, featuring Morrison’s distinctive vocal style (and lyrics). This is one of the four Doors albums I own, and it’s a 3 way tie for second place behind their debut. Solid 4.5, I’ll round to 5 because I really enjoyed today’s listen. 5/5

Ah, teenage angst, 2007 style: “I’m feeling rough I’m feeling raw, I’m in the prime of my life / Let’s make some music, make some money, get some models for wives / I’ll move to Paris, shoot some heroin and f#$k with the stars / you man, the island, the cocaine and the elegant cars”…. Blah blah blah. Musically it’s pretty decent, there’s some good hooks here and there. But there is too much of a RadioShack/Casio “synthesizer” sound. The vocals are mediocre, annd often sound excessively echo-y. And the whole “rich, bored and looking for cheap thrills” thing is just trite. But the music is pretty decent. “In a couple of years / tides have turned from boos to cheers / and in spite of the weather / we can learn to make it together” …. Faux deep, but frankly dumb. It’s all listenable, but doesn’t connect (with me at least). And by the end, I was getting a bit bored. 3/5

Well, as a reggae album, this is a poor imitation. It certainly doesn’t have the soul and groove I associate with reggae.” On the other hand, it is SCOTTISH reggae, so that may explain it. But it doesn’t excuse it. Maybe it should’ve been classified (by the 1001albumgenerator folk) as something other than reggae? Perhaps generic late 90’s pop with hints reggae? Of course, those hints are mostly the singer’s seeminkgly fake Jamaican accent. There’s no real excuse for this being on a list of “must hear” albums. While not exactly offensive, nor is it the least bit memorable. It was a waste of an hour. Think I’ll go listen to some reggae after this. 1/5

Paul Simonis one of the great American songwriters of the 20th century. And this is one of his best pieces of work. Just the title track and "The Boxer" secure a 5/5 for this one, but there's so much more. 8x Platinum in US, 11x Platinum in UK, it was certainly successful. Besides the hits, there's several great deep cuts, including one of my favorite S&G songs "The Only Living Boy in New York". That said, there are a couple of throwaways. The only head scratcher is thecover of "Bye Bye Love", which is a live recording with the vocals too low in the mix, and the crowd too high. It is jarringly out of place. But not nearly enough to drop the score. Yep, this is an album that everyone should listen to before they die. 5/5

The Go-Go’s debut album came out the summer before my senior your in college, and made quite a splash. I had the 45 of “Our Lips Are Sealed”, and at least 1/2 the album got regular play around campus. But this isn’t deep and meaningful stuff. It’s power pop / early 80’s new wave. Just plain fun. The “all girl band” thing was a big marketing point at the time. And I can see where some folks would be attracted to that. But for me, I just appreciated the music, and I was big on the whole genre. Solid pop-rock songs, all competently played and produced. It’s got the hooks, it’s got a great sound, good clean fun. The whole first side is great, and side 2 picks up solidly with “We Got The Beat”. But it falls off a bit after that, but still worthy. A great disc to have play in the summer of your youth, or when you want to relieve those happy days. 4/5

Note: This album is not on Spotify, but I found it on Youtube. This should be interesting, Algerian pop... and it gets off to a really good start. The first song has a very cool beat and groove. The instrumentation is consistent with my expectations from that region of the world. Can't comment on the lyrics, as they're Algerian (I presume). Certainly, a niche album, I doubt I'll listen to it again. But it was interesting, and far from boring. 3/5 to

I only know Isaac Hayes from the Theme from Shaft, which is a brilliant song. So I was interested to hear this. There's only 4 songs on this album, running 45 minutes total. Prog-soul? Well, no, but there is a jazz feel for certain. The album kicks off with a 12+ minute cover of Burt Bacharach's "Walk On By" which had been a big hit for Dionne Warwick a few year earlier. Hayes does it justice, with a relaxed, soulful rendition. Solid but not really compelling. The mix here is a bit treble-y, the bass is a little down in the mix (for my tastes). "Hyperbolicsyllabicsesquedalymistic" is a lot funkier, and nails the groove nicely. But may lose a bit for the odd title, which anchors the chorus. I guess it was cool in '69? At almost 10 minutes, though, it isn't exactly concise. "One Woman" is the shortest song on the album, but still over 5 minutes. This one doesn't do anything for me; a slow soulful ballad. "One woman is making my home / while the other woman is making me do wrong"... meh. "By The Time I Get To Phoenix" is an especially bold cover, given the iconic status of Glen Campbell's version, which was released just 2 years earlier. Haye's version tops 12 minutes, starting with a spoken section which builds a narrative explaining the meaning of the song. One note bass over a simple drum count. For 8 minutes and 45 seconds.... Now, this might be cool in a live settings, but not on an album. This is a significant detractor. Once he gets into the song, it rather drags. Maybe it is just that my expectations were so high, but this REALLY leaves me cold. Not bad, but not as good as I hoped. 3/5

The title track is certainly iconic, but this album is overall solid throughout. Soulful and sultry with a groove that won't quit. Not quite essential, not deep and meaningful, like his "What's Going On". But solid. Aside: I do own this record. 4/5

This really caught my attention. It is tagged as Folk Rock, and I suppose that fits. I’d be tempted to call it Americana, except it’s Irish. And a little more upbeat/rocking. And less stripped down in the sound. It reminds me a lot of a band Three O’Clock Train, and their 1987 album “Muscle In”. But that’s not helpful, since they’re pretty unknown. All that said: I really like this… a lot. Note: Spotify has a “collectors edition” with a whole second disc of material. I only listened to the original track list (disc 1 in Spotify).

<<heavy sigh>>. The anger, the misogyny, the constant “n-word” and profanity... It’s all rather trite and frankly boring. Some of the beats pretty decent, funky and driving. But after 50 minutes, it all blurs together. The use of various interjections and such is, well, it’s been done before. Of course, Ice Cube has leveraged all this hate and anger into a successful career in TV and Movies and commercials for light beer. With a 30 year marriage, and family (including grandkids). I wonder if he plays his old music for his daughter? This is probably better than some of the hip hop I’ve had here, but that’s a really low bar. 2/5

I’m 160 albums into this project, and my only real complaint is the over-emphasis on British acts from the 90’s and 00’s. And here’s another one. The Libertines are more towards Indie, and it seems they were pretty popular in UK. But didn’t make a splash un USA. Overall, it is fine. But nothing really stands out. I’ll take the Fratellis over these guys anyway. As the album went along it seemed to improve, but not nearly enough to round to 4… Anyway, 3/5

This one’s not available on Spotify… bummer. YouTube to the rescue. 1978 funk. I graduated high school in 1978, and was not especially big on funk at the time.. I was a rock and roll guy, with narrower tastes than evolved over time. So this simply wasn’t on my radar. And this specific album has never made to ears. And it absolutely grooves. It’s certainly funky, but the grooves dominate. The songs all pretty long, mostly 7 minutes or more, and they mostly hang around their grooves. It’s all very enjoyable, if not especially memorable. Not a lot of hooks to bring you back. This would be a good album to have on at a party, or cruising. Solid 3

This is a 1989 album from blue legend John Lee Hooker, released when he was 73. Featuring collaborations with several well known younger folk, like Bonnie Raitt and Carlos Santana. I have his 1995 album (Chill Out) which is a similar undertaking (and which I prefer). Both are solid offerings, and a testament that these old blues guys had more soul in their later years than most of today's performers in their prime. Worth hearing, everybody needs to be exposed to the blues. The "modern' recordings sound a lot better than the output from the 40's, 5's and early 60's, and that's a prime appeal of this recording. Solid 4/5

Peter Gabriel is one of the great singing voices of the 70's and 80's. Between his work with Genesis and his solo work, he has a truly impressive catalog. This is the 3rd of 4 albums he released after leaving Genesis, all titled "Peter Gabriel". The marketing folk must've really hated him. This is the most successful of those 4 albums, topping out at #1 in the UK and #22 un the US. "Games without Frontiers" is outstanding (if only reasonably successful) hit, and "Biko" and "No Self Control". made some splash if few ripples. Overall, this is a very solid album, though several steps behind his 1986 masterpiece "So". The sound is great, though obviously 1980. I thing Gabriel was still developing his style as a solo artist, his voice apart from Genesis. Quite a lot of these 1st 4 albums can be defined as quirky, almost trying not to be successful. Which is not meant as a negative, this is original, and interesting, and occasionally compelling. I remember the big songs from this album, the ones that ended up on "Plays Live". But I had not heard the entire album until today. I enjoyed it though, and will put it in the play-again pile. 4/5

I remember “We Are Family” well, I was a Pittsburgh Pirates fan when they adopted the song during their 1979 World Series winning run. It’s a fun song, a real stand-out, and was very popular at the time. I also recognize “Greatest Dancer”. It’s all somewhat generic disco, but very well put together, it all sounds great. This is a Niles Rodgers / Bernard Edwards project, they wrote all the songs, and produced the album, and played. These co-founders of Chic have left their marks across countless songs / artists. That said, there’s not a lot of variation in the vibe. A couple slow dace songs, but it’s all danceable. After all, this is primarily dance music. Don’t expect a lot of deep social commentary. Don’t look for mind blowing musical virtuosity. Nothing groundbreaking. But that’s just fine. This album delivers exactly what it promises, and that’s ok. 3/5

This is pretty solid in an early 90’s indie rock kind of way. Think Dada meets Uncle Tupelo to try and be the “new Velvet Underground”. I rather like the overall sound, the vocals are alright. Lyrics are meh. The songs are insistent, without being frantic. Some songs, like “Summer Babe” are outstanding. others, like “Conduit for Sale” and “Chelsey’s Little Wrists” are muddled messes. Overall, 3.5/5. I’ll round down to 3, because there’s so much noise.

I dunno, I suppose this is fine. Nothing groundbreaking, nothing that really grabbed my attention. One way or the other. Reminds me of a lot of other forgettable music I was listening to on “community radio” in the 80’s. I’d list some bands, but well…. Forgettable, ya know? 3/5

I think they should’ve called this album “afterthought”. It was released 4 years after it was recorded (and the band broke up), and sounds like a rough mix. Wikipedia lists 6 different versions of the record, none of which match the track listing on Spotify. Big Star is one of those bands that I’ve always heard of, but had never actually heard until now. One of probably hundreds of bands that, for whatever reason, didn’t get any meaningful label support. Musically, it’s pretty interesting, and might’ve gotten some traction in 1974, when it was recorded. But in 1978, I don’t know where this album would’ve fit. I certainly never heard it, and it came out during my college years, when my musical tastes were broadening.it is sort of an album out of time. Anyway…. As I noted, this is interesting. I can see where bands like REM would cite them as influences. It’s kind of quirky. Maybe Byrds meet Velvet Underground? There’s some pretty strong moments, but also some flat moments. And it sounds like a collection of leftovers and other bits and pieces, not a cohesive album. Fragments. The Wikipedia article even states the band “didn’t see it as a Big Star record”. But some of these fragments are really solid. I’ll go 3/5 for now, but I think this will deserve a few more listens.

“Pounding out aggression turns into obsession”…. Lyrics from the album opener Battery. Yeah, I get it. But this just ain’t my cup o tea…. I can see why this was popular, and it does what does well. But it’s all a little exhausting to me. I’ll give it a 3 since it is certainly quality, and was hugely successful. But no higher because I don’t like it at all. It’s like opera, I appreciate it without liking it at all.

Love is a bad tgat I’ve heard of for years, but never really heard. I think somebody said they were Jim Morrison’s (Doors) favorite band. So here’s first experience hearing them. And … …. … meh The lead singer doesn’t resonate with me. The music is pretty typical mid 60’s psychedelic pop, think Troggs or Strawberry Alarm Clock (not the hits of either so much, the deep cuts). Some of the songs, it just seems they’re trying too hard to be cool…. Frankly the longer it goes, the less I like it. Whatever, 3/5. Nothing I expect to dig deeper on, but it’s ok.

“Get It On (Bang A Gong)” was a pretty big sone in the early 70’s and used to get a lot of radio play throughout the decades. I presume it still shows up on Classic Radio. And while I had the song on a multi-band compilation album, I’ve never heard the whole album. But T Rex gets name checked a lot, from Mott the Hoople to The Ramones to The Who… So how’s the album? Well, it’spretty good. Kind of catchy, early glam…. Takes me back to the early 70’s Solid 3/5, will listen to again

This album was inescapable during my senior year of high school, and freshman year of college. Almost every song was on the radio, or being played at campus parties... This album was especially popular with the college ladies, I "inherited" my copy when I got married. This is a very well done album. The songs are solid, Meat sings well. Most of the songs have good hooks. But it really comes off like a soundtrack to a Broadway show. If you read the history, that's by design, but not really a style prefer. Really big sound, over the top stylings, subtle as a brick to the face. And I never quite got the popularity. Not surprised that it was popular, but that it was SO popular. Estimated to have sold 40 million units worldwide. "Paradise By the Dashboard Light" was the huge hit, and is basically an 8 1/2 minute song to set up to dumb joke. Spoiler: the song recounts the "will she or won't she" struggle as a young man tries to "go all the way" with his date. Complete with a drawn out baseball analogy about reaching first base, second base, etc. She finally demands he vow to love her till the end of time, and he eventually agrees in order to succeed at reaching "home". So now he's praying for the end of time. Get it? You know, to end his time with her?? ha-ha-ha. If that's too subtle, there's 2 out of 3, where Meat sings: "I want you, I need you, but there ain't no way I'm ever gonna love you. So don't be sad, 'cause 2 out of 3 ain't bad". They's a nice message for the ladies. I don't really mean to gripe, it's a solid album, I own it (via my wife) and listen to it occasionally. I'll give it a 3/5.

I discovered Randy Newman in 1977, when “Sort People” was a hit. I wondered at the time how so many people could miss the point that it was a song that tore down prejudice. I picked up the album, and loved it. Then I picked up his previous album “Good Old Boys”, and really enjoyed it, also. New man’s lyrics are cutting, and cynical, and tend towards demonstrating absurd by being absurd, often not in an especially nice way (“Short People” and “Rednecks” are good examples). Anyway, on to Sail Away: I know (and own) 3 of the songs here, the title track, “…Hat On” and “Political Science”. All are brilliant. Musically, this has an old-time sound, pretty relaxed. Primarily piano and strings, sometimes lapsing into an almost New Orleans / slow-ragtime feel. I don’t know music theory, but the piano is captivating neat little melodies. It is all very concise, 12 songs in 30 minutes. Newman has a tendency to present these cynical, sarcastic observations on human life, then kick you in the gut with a crushingly sad song. “Old Man” is such a song, a song about dying alone (or almost alone). It is all wonderful but it is also music you need to pay attention to, to think about. Bottom line: 5/5, I’ll need to fill out my collection.

I had never heard of Fred Neil, so I started by looking at some of the reviews. And that was encouraging, sounding like the kind of album I would like. But it didn’t meet those expectations. Don’t get me wrong, it is not bad, just a bit uninspired and uninspiring. Neil has a voice more in the realm of a lounge singer, which isn’t ideal for these introspective folky songs. Sort of Andy Williams sings David Crosby. Neil’s rendition of “Everybody’s Talkin’” is the clear high point, but doesn’t match Harry Nilsson’s 1969 cover version, which is less of a dirge and has lots more soul in the vocals. Anyway, it’s fine, just fine. 3/5

I know “Family Affair” from this album, I remember it on the radio, and have owned it on digital for many years. Great song. But I didn’t know anything else from the album. The rest of the album is mostly…. Well…. I guess I’d say it is unfocused. It all has a good groove, at moments great. But it all just sort of muddles around. Wikipedia states tge album “embraced the apathy, pessimism, and disillusionment”, and “explored a darker, more challenging sound”. They also note that the album came out during Sly Stone’s “period of escalated drug use”, and noted intra-band tensions. Sounds like Stone was in a downward spiral, and I can pick that up in the album. There are some good moments, but as I said, it’s all unfocused. Not enough melodies, not enough songs. Between 1967 had 1970, Sly and The Family Stone had 4x Top 10’s. But this album’s “Family Affair” would be their last Top 10. This album just sounds to me like a great band, starting to decline. There’s still hints of what they could do, but too much “Spaced Cowboy” and not enough “Family Affair”. I wonder what this might’ve been if Sly Stone didn’t self-produce it… Anyway, there’s one superb song, a couple of mediocre songs, and a lot of forgettable, but pretty funky grooves. Could’ve / should’ve been so much more. 3/5

Musically, it’s ok, some decent songs. The vocal stylings scream 80s/90s Brit-pop. The lyrics don’t do anything for me. The longer it went, the less I liked it. Whatever: 3/5

This is one of those a,bums that you’re supposed to like. Like vegetables, it’s good for you. And it’s ok. The only song I knew was Lady Day, and I strongly prefer the version from Rock and Roll animal. The record songs really great, especially the bass. But overall, the songs are just OK. And nobody will ever contend that Reed was a great singer. I suppose this is a charming album, a solid 3/5

I’m a little surprised that I don’t know these guys. In 1984 I was pretty heavy into “independent radio”, which this should’ve fit into well. But this is new to me. With a run time of 81 minutes, this is a long album. OTOH, it jams 45 songs into those 81 minutes, for an average song length of 1 min 48 seconds. Only one song exceeds 3 minutes. So if you don’t like a song, it won’t be long till another comes around. And this isn’t 45 songs that all sound the same. There’s some good variations. I enjoyed this one, will need to spend more time with it. 4/5

I’m really enjoying this. Maybe 70’s Neil Young meets Uncle Tupelo? With some Mariachi feel thrown in. Whatever, I dig it. This is the kind of album I came to this project to discover. I’m going to need to take some time to live with this before I can make a final judgement, but it is at least a 4/5

Uh oh. Wikipedia defines this as “an instrumental hip hop work composed almost entirely of samples from vinyl records.” That doesn’t sound good. Well, let’s see. Some of this is OK in a background sort of way. Except for the fact that it is all collages of other people’s creativity. I can see the technical achievement of cutting and pasting bits into a new whole, but I don’t especially enjoy it. There’s a nice range in mood and tone, but I’ve never liked scratching, I don’t really appreciate the completely sampled thing. The various spoken bits don’t add much, with bits like: “And I would like to be able to continue to let what is inside of me, which is…. Which comes from all of the music that I hear, would like to let that come out. And it’s not really me that’s coming… the music’s coming through me” I can see where this was perhaps groundbreaking and influential, and maybe even a landmark for what it is. But I simply don’t appreciate what it is. 3/5

One of the iconic live albums of all time, it is a bit amazing that this was recorded in 1962 (released in 1963). A year and half before the Beatles would appear on the Ed Sullivan show. At a time when the biggest hits on the Billboard charts were “Big Girls Don’t Cry” (Frankie Vali and 4 Seasons) and “He’s So Fine” (Chiffons). Into this safe and comfortable world burst James Brown, in a live setting, saturated with a primal energy that had to frighten the grown-ups. Listen in the context of its time and it is even more impressive. His energy, reflected back by the crown…. Well, it is impressive. I was too young to have caught this when it was fresh, but it’s an album I knew by reputation long before I ever heard it. And I’ve owned this for a long time. This is why Jame Brown is known as the Godfather Of Soul, and The-Hardest-Working-Man-In-Show-Business. The sound quality is better than one should expect for a live album in 1963, but you need to recognize that it isn’t known for its crystal sound quality. This is a testament to a moment. This absolutely belongs on this “must hear” list, a wonderful time capsule of music from an earlier era. It is notable that this album was recorded before the Civil Rights Act, before the Beatles, before JFK’s assassination. A dramatic recording from a dynamic time. 5/5

I remember back in the early 2000’s when (seemingly) everyone was raving about Amy Winehouse, what a great singer she was, how dramatically good her music was…. I didn’t hear anything that really rocked me at the time, and most of what I saw seemed to revel in her addictions and self destructive behavior. She seemed intent on destroying herself, and succeeded after releasing only 2 albums in 8 years. What a waste. So, what about the music? “Frank” is ok, gets credit for being different, for not following in the Beyoncé/Christine Aguilera/Missy Elliott/Jennifer Lopez mold of the day. But this jazz/crooner influence makes me long for the real thing…. I’ll take the real Frank (Sinatra) any day. There’s not any really memorable songs, though it’s all benign. Winehouse’s vocal stylings are nicely different, but the baby-girl overtures don’t really work for me. I think she was certainly a competent singer, but not outstanding. I suspect her popularity may have been based on her ability to stand out, though it seemed to be centered on the Heroin Chic look of the 90’s. Anyway, it’s fine. Points for breaking from the crowd. Most of what I read says that her next album is the brilliant one, which makes me wonder why this one made the list. Anyway, 3/5

First off: Elvis is King. Elvis had 4x number 1 albums (and a #2) before the Beatles recorded their first single (“My Bonnie” with Tony Sheridan singing). Elvis had 149 Top 40 hits (in USA) including 18x #1s. But by 1969, when this album was released, his musical star had faded a bit. He had been more focused on movies, with 15 movies in the previous 5 years. And at 35 years old, the girls who swooned over him in the 50’s, were (probably) Moms. This was his first non-soundtrack in over 2 years, and only second since 1962, and reflected his return to a focus on music. This is a very solid album, the start of Elvis’s later stage. The arrangements are bigger, it is all very polished. You can see the Vegas version of Elvis starting to emerge. There was only 1 single on this album, “In The Ghetto”, which only made #3 in USA, but is a brilliant song. And everything is solid, it is a good listen. The version of the album includes some great bonus tracks recorded at the same sessions, but only released as singles. This includes the hits “Suspicious Minds” and “Kentucky Rain”, which are both brilliant. I’ll come back to this one for sure. I was torn between 4 and 5, leaning towards 4 until I got to the bonus tracks. That sealed the 5.

I didn’t love this album, or even like it. On the other hand I dudn’t hate it, or even dislike it. This was simply boring. Lite Jazz meets drum machine, it seemed like something I’d hear in a tourist bar on some 2nd tier Caribbean island. 2/5

This is an interesting album, maybe even fascinating. Not just another bit of poppy fluff, or whatever was popular when it came out. There’s a weirdness here, a creativity that doesn’t care if you “get it”. Personally, I got it sometimes, but not all times…. The first 2 songs were my favorite, somewhat towards an XTC vibe…. Kinda. “Kings Lead Hat” is a little bit Talking Heads meet the Cars…. Sort of. There’s a good bit of stuff here that’s pretty “ambient”, which I guess it where Eno was trending at the time. That’s not so much to my liking. I may want to revisit some of this, but not all…. 3/5

I was familiar w/ Bob Marley, and own his compilation “Legacy”. Fully 1/2 of this album is on “Legacy”, so I had a high degree of familiarity with those, which comprise some of the best (and best-known) reggae songs from the 70’s. So what of the rest of it? Well, obviously, the best songs made it to Legend, but the rest of it is good. If you wat to own 1 reggae album, "Legend" gets the edge over this. But this is still very solid, easy 4/5

Traffic: I love “John Barleycorn”, a brilliant album I’ve had on vinyl since the 70’s. And the slew of songs that were staples on AOR (Album Orienrd Radio) back in the day. But the only song I knew from this album was “Feelin’ Alright”, which is brilliant, but I’ve always thought of Joe Cocker’s version as being definitive. I did pick up a Traffic hits CD a few years back, which added “You Can All Join In” and “Pearly Queen” from this album. Both are good songs, but more in a Blind Faith feel than what I consider classic Traffic. More of a blues feel. This version of “40,000 Horseman” is excellent, and the exception to the rule of this album. And I guess that’s the thing about this album. I can see where they’re headed, but they weren’t quite there yet. It’s good, but not sure I’d call this one essential. 3/5

This is the kind of music that led me to stop listening to popular music in the late 80’s / early 90’s. I suppose it could be worse, it’s not actually offensive. None of it is especially bad… but I was happy when it finished. 2/5

Nope, nope, nope. This does NOT appeal to me. I’m tired of complaining about the over abundance of UK 80’s and 90’s bands, and detailing why I don’t like them. Theirs is another one, ‘nuff said. 2/5

This is a very powerful album. Deep and rather dark, and oozing with Cash’s “self”. I worried about some of the really iconic covers, but Cash pulls them off. Some better than others, but all OK. Johnny Cash was a great singer, and even at 70 years old, he still could bring emotion and personality. This is not a happy album, but it’s not really maudlin either. But dark, and real. Sparsely recorded, a man reflecting back on his life. 4/5

Heavy sigh... Yet another late 80's, band. Not UK this time, but Australia. I mean, it's not bad. It's just not good. A bit overproduced, a bit overbown.... And ultimately BORING 2/5

Well, at least it’s not another obscure UK band from the late 80’s /90’s. But it seems like interesting albums have been few and far between for a couple of weeks. But, 191 albums in, Hip Hop is my least favorite genre, so…. I’m familiar w/ the cover of “Walk This away”, and that’s something. So how’s it sound? Well, as hip-hop go, it's not angry, more upbeat and fun. Not overloaded with drug and violence references. Nay an N-word. that's pretty refreshing. But it's still hip-hop with shouted, simple rhymes and lots of "scratching". But in the realm of hip-hop, it's better than others I've heard. 3/5

This is a good one. This came out during my college years, and made a big splash in that community. Led by the hit single “Brass In Pocket”, which is an irresistibly catchy song. That, along with the other singles “Kid” and “Stop Your Sobbing” (Kinks cover) are all pleasant poppy singles. But the key to this album are the other cuts: growling energetic songs with a punk/new wave slant. Notably, these are the songs that open the album: ”Precious”, “The Phone Call”, “Up The Neck”, “Tattooed Love Boys”. “The Wait”…. These songs all kick butt. Those are the songs that make this album great, though the softer songs are fine. But it is odd that the album starts off in take-no-prisoners mode, then segues into pop mode. And finally closes out with “Mystery Achievement”, which sort of straddles the two styles. It’s all a little split-personality. Listen to “The Wait” and the “”Brass In Pocket”…. It is like 2 totally different bands. Both good, though. If this had come out 2 years earlier, it would’ve been earth shaking. But by the time we heard this, The Police, The Clash, Elvis Costello and Blondie all had released multiple albums. All were edging towards more radio friendly positions. And the Pretenders fit in with those bands, but compresses the trajectory into a single album. Side one is a solid 5/5. Side two is somewhere between high 3 and low 4. Overall? I’ll round up to 5, but barely. I’m just happy to have an album I know and like after a rash of disappointing servings.

Well, this one is not on Spotify, but it is on YouTube, so I listened there. I reviewed some other album with a similar feel, but don’t remember what. But it all sounds the same. Great background music for a crowded dance floor at a rave. Pounding, incessant rhythms, shouted vocals. Various boops and beeps. You can certainly move to it. But totally unengaging as music. Nothing memorable, nothing meaningful. 2/5

Yet another 80’s/90s British pop band. Sheesh. Overall, this is better than a lot of these bands that dominate the 1001 albums project. The fact that I’m overloaded with these bands, and frankly bored with the genre doesn’t help my ability to enjoy this album. But it’s well done, and not every song is stereotypical Britpop. There real piano and real horns, even. At least sometimes. Solid soul feel. at least sometimes. Then it would swerve back into generic mid 80s pop. I have to admit that I liked this a lot more than I expected. At least sometimes. Of course, my expectations were pretty low. But for me it’s a solid 3, as there’s a good bit of solid music along with the ‘meh”. But too much meh to go higher. The big hit “Holdin Back The Years” (#1 in US, #2 in UK) is a probably the blandest, most soul-less, boring east song on the album. 3/5

The first song isn’t actually a song. Rather, it is an extended (10+ minute) guitar cadenza: free form soloing over a sparse rhythm, with a few quiet chords. It’s pretty interesting, actually, in the sense that Hendrix’s explorations (or Roy Buchanan’s) were. The next couple of songs are more what I was expecting, funk, with a bit of a hard edge. Progressive soul…. Very well done, groovy, in a serious manner. This ain’t top 40, and that’s not a bad thing. The last song is another 10 minute exploration, full of alarm clocks and animal sounds and farts. Kind of like an over the top homage to the Beatles’ “Revolution 9”. But at least it is presented over a funk rhythm, with lots of wild guitar. This doesn’t work for me, and takes up over 1/4th the running time. This is a solid 4 until the last song, which drags it down. But I’ll still round up to 4

I was famiar with Joan Armatrading name, and kind of knew what she sounded like, but I couldn’t place any specific song. So I went into this pretty open. And I really enjoyed this album. The songs are really good, and sound great. It sounded good enough that I had to check who produced it. Glenn Johns, which explains a lot. Anyway, sound is great, songs are very good, singing has a nice personality. Mostly acoustic guitars, backed with full instrumentation, but backed, not overwhelmed by. Has a bit of a Jazzy feel. This is the kind of hidden gem that I came to the 1001albums project to find. That said, it’s not perfect, and has a couple of “less strong” parts in the middle. Solid 4, may evolve to a 5 with more familiarity.

I’m familiar with Todd Rundgren’s hits, of course. And I own his 1997 compilation album that contains 16 songs. Nothing from this album makes either set list. I guess it’s art, but it leaves me cold. Wikipedia notes this album resulted from Rundgen’s “experimentation with psychedelic drugs”. Yeah I can see (or rather hear) that, and it makes me especially happy that I never experimented with psychedelic drugs. Side 2 is a little more musical, but still lacking. The high point of the album is a 10 minute medley of soul songs, which only makes me want to play the originals. In short, I did not enjoy this album at all. I was looking forward to it based on my knowledge of his popular songs…. But what a disappointment. I won’t be listening to this again. 2/5

I'm sorry to be consistently down on these 80's and 90's BritPop bands. But they do nothing to me. Musically it is OK. Vocally, there's nothing captivating about them. Lyrically? Maybe it was less cringeworthy when it was new, if you were in UK. The more I worked through the album, the less I liked it. Whatever, 3/5

Immediately before listening to this, I was listening to Paul Simon’s Diamonds On The Souls Of Her Shoes. This is quite a contrast. Darker indeed. “You Want It Darker” is the last album by Leonard Cohen before he died. He was 82 when recording this album, and he died 17 days after it was released. The sound is sparse, the vocals are more spoken than sung. The pace is languid. The overall feel is reflective. The thoughts of a man who was winding down, and knew it. There’s no illusions of immortality in your 80s. All that sounds horrid, but it works. It’s genuine, it resonates. I’m not sure how much I would’ve liked this when I was 20, but in my 60’s I get it. 4/5

All hope is gone, indeed. I really don’t know which I dislike more: Metal or Hip Hop. I think overall it is a tie. Today it’s metal: growling vocals, mostly unintelligible. Lyrics (if you look them up) about death and anger and how much life sucks. Everything played as fast as possible, especially the drums. Perhaps faster. All wrapped up in “scary” make-up and outfits. Really, it is all exhausting. I just can’t hate life this much. Anyway, this slipknot album isn’t as bad as I expected. But it is close. I made it 2/3 of the way through before I had to give up. 2/5

Yet another 80s/90s Brit Pop album. My 3rd in a week, which seems sadly predictable. But I'm pleasantly surprised. This is rather good. The drums aren't quite over manipulated, the guitars are clean and jangly. It's not overloaded with synthesizers. I'm actually quite enjoying it. Good melodies, good hooks, nice vocals. Great bass sound. Sort of shades of The Zombies' Odyssey and Oracle updated 20+ years... There's a few peaks and valleys, but overall very solid. I'll absolutely listen to this one again 4/5

Yet another British band from the 80s/90s that I had never heard of previous to this 1001albums project. This one is from 1982 and labeled New Wave. I was in University (in USA) at the time, and would’ve described my musical tastes as New Wave. But never heard of these guys. And I don’t really hear anything on this record that is the least bit interesting. Not bad, per se, but nothing special at all. Some shades of Secret Affair from a couple of years earlier, but w/o the catchy songs. Maybe some hints of Duran Duran who would’ve been contemporaries. But only hints. I was going to go for 2, but that’s unfairly penalizing these guys for being part of a recent flood of these types of bands (4 of last 8!). Setting aside thar frustration, I’ll round up to 3. It’s better than some, but not as good as a couple.

A few years ago, my then high-schooler son asked me if I had any Frank Sinatra music. I did not, which prompted his next question: “Why Not?” Why not indeed? Easily rectified, our next stop was the local used record emporium, and I picked up this album. I’ve since picked up a couple of others, but this is my favorite. The operative word in the title is swingin’, and this album does indeed swing. This is not just a crooner record. Yes, Sinatra is a great singer, but the recording sounds great (especially for 1956). Full orchestra (Nelson Riddle), lots of horns. And did I mention it swings? Yes, this recording is older is older than I am, and I’m old. But everybody ought to have at least 1 Sinatra album, and I’ll vote for this one. Easy 5/5

Yet another 80s/90's British band. Post-Punk / New Wave, blah blah blah. At least I've heard of these guys, though I can't think of anything by them. So why is this a "must listen to album"? Per wikipedia, it was "released to mixed reviews.", the follow-up to "the poor reception" of their previous album. Parke Puterbaugh of Rolling Stone rated the album two out of five stars and described it as "too often a monochromatic dirge of banal existential imagery cloaked around the mere skeleton of a musical idea". So it wasn't critically acclaimed. It hit #4 in UK, but only 87 in USA, not exactly a popular juggernaut. It carries a 3.19 rating here, pretty weak. Anyway, upon listening, I find just what I expected (feared?). 2/5

I remember back in 1978, my older brother playing the 45's of "Day-Glo" at peak volume... It was weird, but it was awesome. I only know a couple of songs from these gyts, but they're all weird and wonderful. It will be interesting to see if it'll work across a whole album. This is everything that was great about late 70's punk. A little sloppy, but a lot of energy... played fast. Rapid fire short songs: get in, make your point, and get out. Attitude over aptitude. And unlike anything you heard before. These guys get full marks for originality, and extra credit for style. That said, they're a little bit of a 1-trick-poney, and better suited for singles that a long listen. Stilll, it works, and will get listened to some more. 4/5

As a 2010 release, this has to be one of the newest songs on the list. Should be interesting. Looking at the Wikipedia entry is interesting. There are at least 3 writers for each song, and as many as 5. (With the exception of “Make The Bus”, a collaboration with that song’s writer). So it is very collaborative. That carries over to behind the scenes, with over 1/2 dozen folk in mixing, mastering, production, and 4 credited arrangers. And, oddly, 2 wardrobe people and a costume designer. But again, a very collaborative effort. So how is it? Within the context of “current” pop, it is really good. It is very polished, smooth and shiny. Solid beats throughout. Janelle the more rap sections aren’t my favorites, but that works as a stand alone statement for me. Mona’s gives a solid vocal performance, without much excessive auto tuning. There’s a variety of moods and directions, which is refreshing. The wiki article is full of themes like playful, fun, lively. And that’s fine, especially for “pop”. I kind of liked this, it has some nice moments, and some really nice ones. Only a couple I didn’t care for. I may have to listen again, even though I’ll never love the 2010s soundscape. Very solid 3, not enough to round up.

This is listed as “pop” and “world” at the 1001albums site. Wikipedia calls it “afrobeat”. I dunno…. This seems very Jazzy to me, rather than pop. I rather like the Allmusic review which states the album is “Packed with contagious rhythms born of African, jazz, and funk melodies”. That seems to fit perfectly. I don’t know about labels, but this album is really good. It has GREAT rhythms, great songs. If you don’t groove to this it’s your own fault. All of the songs are 6-10 minutes long, I wouldn’t mind if they were all a hint more concise. But that’s a very minor complaint. This is what I came to this project to find, new and different (and good) music. It will absolutely get listened to again. 5/5

Well, we’ve established that I don’t like hip hop. So it isn’t surprising that I don’t like this. Between the scratches and pops and drum machine rhythms are quick cuts between sections and liberal use of the N-word, which is so offensive in most settings that I cannot even spell it out without risk of being cancelled. And it goes on and on, 70 minutes…. Including 2x songs over 7 minutes and another over 10 minutes. Yikes! And a pet peeve of mine, there are 37 names mentioned in the production credits, including 6x producers, 5x engineers and 17x assistants. Sorry, that’s just crazy. The whole package isn’t so much offensive as is it generally irritating. But it could be worse, there are some semi-melodic moments. I’ll go 2/5

Yet 80s/90s British band. Wikipedia defines the genre for this one as “acid house”, 1001albums calls it techno. I was hoping for something good today. Guess not. On to it: Nope. This is just as bad as I expected. Soulless. Background music for the rave scene, to keep you pulsing along with the drugs. I mean, it serves a purpose, but it is entirely disposable as music. Nothing remotely memorable. No discernible melodies. Looking at reviews, it seems the positive reviews carry a “nostalgia for the aesthetic”. I wasn’t there, so I don’t have that. Certainly nothing I “needed” to hear. 1/5

It has been a while since the 1001albums randomizer has served me a true classic; a record I’ve known and loved for 50+ years. That said, isn’ quite perfect. It has many brilliant moments, but a few misses. Tommy was a bold and ambitious project in 1969, and even a bit audacious. A rock-opera, with overture, interweaving themes around a complex (and sometimes confusing story). The original vinyl included a lyric book, which identified which character was singing each line, which made a world of difference in understanding. Tommy has had significant impact through the years, from the Who’s performance of it at Woodstock, to ballet and opera productions, to the 1975 major motion picture. And a 1991 stage adaptation. Tommy was even analyzed in a book I read in the late 70’s (Wilson Bryan Key’s 1976 “Media Sexploitation”, IIRC. But it might have been 1975’s “Subliminal Seduction”. I read both, I forget which one it was). If I were to pick 10 albums that are “important”, this would be one of them. Not quire perfect but no question it rounds to 5/5.

This is ok, pretty interesting. But kind of reminds me of the band Dada, who were contemporary. I liked the music more than the vocals. High 3, but not enough to round up. 3/5

Well, I expected to hate this, since it is categorized here as electronica. But it's alright. Not great, but solidly alright. Nice enough for background, at least 3/5

CCR is one of the great bands of the late 60’s / early 70’s, the classic-east of classic rock. Back in the day, I owned the 1972 Creedence Gold compilation, and the 1976 Creedence Chronicles double record compilation. Really, those are all you need, hitting all the high points. But I do have their “Live At Royal Albert Hall” record (which was NOT recorded at Albert Hall). So, onto this album: I’m very familiar with 3 of the 7 songs, all of which are very good. "Born On The Bayou" and "Proud Mary" are classics, and "Keep On Chooglin'" is solid. The rest of the album is all good, but not great. Overall, I'd rate it 3.5, which leads to the great rounding question. After much pondering, round up to 4!

Th project has served up a couple of world albums from African artists, and I’ve generally been impressed. This one? Not so much. It’s far from bad, but didn’t really spark my interest. 3/5

My exposure to pop in the late 80’s was limited to MTV, And George Michael (and this album) was certainly a fixture there. But familiarity does not equal fandom. My impression at the time was that he was following in the Madonna mode, pushing the envelope on overt sexuality, being “edgy”. But not straying from a very safe musical style / production. Very polished, but probably spent more time on the videos than the music. So, on to the listen: this is certainly well put together, very hook-y, well produced and performed. I can understand why it was popular. That said, it’s not really my “thing”, late 80’s pop. I don’t own (nor want) anything from this album. In 1987, I was listening to Roseanne Cash, The Desert Rose Band, Linda Ronstadt/Dolly Parton / Emmylou Harris’s Trio, Nanci Griffith, Kathy Mattea, New Grass Revival, Dwight Yoakam. Pop simply wasn’t holding my attention at the time. Not exclusively. I was also listening to REM, The dB’s, Def Leppard. A little Bon Jovi, Bruce Hornsby. Point is, my interests were elsewhere. I certainly heard this (George Michael) music…. It just didn’t appeal to me. It’s still a 3/5 for me. Well done, effective at what it is.

I was never much of a fan of grunge. I do have Nirvana’s “Nevermind”, but don’t love it. It’s good, but…. Yeah. I mostly know Hole through Courtney Love’s reputation, and some clips along the way (that I don’t even remember). Nothing back then inspired me to seek this out. And nothing in the ensuing 30 years. But now I have a reason to check it out. Overall, it is a lot better than I expected. Nice energy, it rocks without being a wall of noise. Loose feel, not overproduced. No synthesizers or electronic drums. On the other hand, the vocals are not good. Some great music has been made with mediocre singers, if they bring a style or personality to their delivery. Not the case here. Love’s singing is absolutely a detraction. And the songs are largely forgettable. “A” for effort, but I can’t round this 3.5 up. So 3 it is.

Yes I owned this album when it was current (the US version). But I was more of a Jam fan than the Clash. But I also liked the Clash more than the Sex Pistols. It isn’t meant as a slam, really. But this album kind of fell by the wayside for me, hadn’t gotten listened to very often through the years. It’s a shame really, because this is a great record, still grabs you 25+ years later. This was certainly an “important” record, a genre defining record. The high points are REALLY high, and everything is solid. Everything is high energy. Quick and punchy, 14 songs in 35 minutes. Joe strummer isn’t my favorite vocalist, that’s really my only gripe. I do prefer the US version, especially the addition of singles Clash City Rockers and (White Man) in Hammersmith Palais. But that’s minor. This certainly belongs on the “albums you need to hear” list. It’s not perfect, but close enough to round up. 5/5

There is a reason that this album is the overall #1 rated album on the 1001albums project. And why it was #1 on the original editions of Rolling Stones list of Top 500 albums of all time. It is probably the most iconic rock album of all time. And that's because it is brilliant. If you don't know it, you should. If you don't like it, you should. One of the truly "important" albums. Actually not my favorite Beatles album, but Top 3. And absolutely a 5/5

Oh well. After back-to-back easy 5's, I guess I was overdue for another 80s/90s English alternative band. Bummer.. All I know of The Verve is “Bitter Sweet Symphony”. That takes a good little hook (13 notes), repeats it for 6 minutes, beating any joy out of it and driving me to distraction. This is the previous album to that, but it pretty much repeats the formula without the hook. At best, boring. At worst, a little irritating. 2/5

Really nice jazz album from the early 60’s. Easy and accessible. Piano, bass and drums. These guys are tight, and in sync. There’s no real “stand out” track, but everything is solid. This is one I’ll revisit. 4/5

Al Green is one of the great soul voices of the 70’s, and Let’s Stay Together is great song. But I hadn’t heard anything else from this album. But I really enjoyed it. There’s a lot of Otis Redding vibe, though Green’s voice is unique. All it all it works, really well. Solid 4/5

Skimming the comments, I saw several bemoaning that this album wasn’t on Spotify. That has been rectified, it is on there today (05/29/2024). Meanwhile: I’m not a hip-hop fan, and nothing I’ve heard through this project has changed that. In clouding “2 Feet High and Rising”. On the plus side, it is not angry, violent and misogynistic. That sets it aside from most other hip-hop I’ve heard, and that’s good. It is also a bit more “hook-y” than most hip-hop. The sound is mostly open, no wall of sound. That said, the scratching / samples are still “not my thing”. I like the open sound, but the production / mixing just feel amateurish. Maybe that was intentional, though. I like the absence of angry, violent, profane lyrics, but these lyrics seem too far the other way, light and insubstantial. The interludes are stupid. I didn’t like it on The Who’s “Sell Out”, I don’t like it here. I’d like to give this a 3 as being the most listenable hip-hop I’ve come across here. But, I really didn’t enjoy it, and can’t imagine listening again. So…. 2/5

Ambient Electronica…75 minutes of it. And it is everything I feared it would be. Completely unengaging, completely unremarkable, completely forgettable. Certainly NOT essential. Background music for those time when you want to know that the music won’t intrude on whatever it is you’re doing. Actually, it didn’t take long to get downright annoying. I started skipping songs part way through, and couldn’t last till the end. 1/5

This album is great, the album that introduced the world to Bossa Nova. It is smooth, it is groovy…. It swings. It makes me smile. This seems like the kind of record I would’ve found in my father’s LP collection, and that’s a good thing. I was casually familiar with this record, but this listen reminds me that I really should own it. Preferably on vinyl, just because that’s how it was in 1964. 5/5

I presume some people must've like this stuff. But I'm not one of them. It's not offensive per se, just has no particular music value. 1/5

Ah, one more in a long, long, LONG line of English bands from the 80s/90's that I've never heard of. Sigh. Some of them have been pretty decent, some have not been. This is the latter, Not good. its all rather irritating. 1/5

This was an iconic album in 1987, and defined late 80's hard rock. I own 3 GnR songs, and all are on this album. However, they haven't really aged all that well. The songs don't really stand up to the insane amount of overplay they've received (at the time or on through today). And it doesn't help that their lead singers is, by all accounts, one of the biggest A-holes in the industry, whose singing voice actually detracts from the music. But this album belongs on this list for sure. It was huge when it came out and made a lasting impression. This, along with Def Lepard's Hysteria, defined 1987 hard rock. That said, neither band has aged especially well. This isn't my favorite, I've never felt the need to dig deeper than the 3 songs I've owned. Today's listen-through of this album supported my previous position, beyond the big hits it is pretty generic. But this still gets a 4/5. because you can't deny its impact, and the big hits are BIG.

This is at least the 3rd Madonna album I been served in 230 days. Not the Beatles, Led Zep, The Who, Rolling Stones, or any number of other great bands. But Madonna. And Nick Cave. These are the acts that we hear over and over and over. Not too mention the constant drip of unknownUK bands from the 80’s and 90’s. On the other hand, at least this Madonna album has several songs I’ve heard. This is pure pop from the late 80’s. Well crafted, well presented. Pretty much inorganic, except for the vocals. Nothing wrong with a little pop music. That said, I never thought Madonna stood out from the crowd in the genre. And the non-singles on this album are exactly what I expect, deep cuts aren’t generally part of pop, just filler. Whatever…. The hits are very solid examples of the time. I’ve never felt the urge to own this, and today’s listen does nothing to change my opinion. 3/5 it delivers exactly what you expect

One of the iconic albums of Progressive rock. If you look on the internet for “best prog albums”, this will be in almost everybody’s top 3. For good reason. It is my #1 prog album, certainly top 10 overall. I’ve had this album (in multiple formats) since the 70’s, it is an old friend. We don’t get together as much as we used to, but it’s always a good time when we do. Stick to the original track list (1st 3 songs), the way it was meant to be presented. You can listen to the bonus material independently, their version of “America” is worthy. This is an easy 5/5.

[explitive deleted], my 2nd Beastie Boys album in a week. Oh my, how clever they are with the “punny” album title. And bough tough and manly with the “daring” 3MTA3 in the middle of the cover. Sheesh. However, I was an actual grown-up when this album was released, and the hit “Fight for Your Right” struck me as an infantile bit of drivel. That had been the only song of theirs I’d (knowingly) heard before being subjected to them a few days ago. So it is with really low expectations that I dive into this.well, this sucks as bad as I expected. It’s all a bit mind-numbing, which dulls the pain, at least. I wish I could give this 0 stars, but 1 is as low as it’ll go.

Early 70’s “guy with a guitar” singing introspective songs. And it’s all fine. In fact, I like it better than the previous album from Nick Drake. But neither of them are essential. The music is solid, the vocals are just ok. This is all pleasant enough, but I’d rather listen to Jane’s Taylor’s “Sweet Baby Names”, Jackson Brown’s debut, John Denver’s “Rocky Mountain High”…. Or even Johnathan Edwards’ debut. Any of these are better. 3/5

I’m familiar with several “classic” Billie Holiday recordings, and I was pretty surprised at how much her voice had deteriorated by the time of these later recordings. But it’s still a really solid recording, even diminished, her voice was solid, and her delivery is captivating. Rounds up to 4, barely.

Ok, another British band from the 80s/90’s that I’ve never heard of. When I eventually quit this project, it will be because one of these albums breaks the camel’s back. Skunk Ansnsie? I guess it’s hard coming up with band names. But Post Orgasmic Chill? WTF, is that supposed to be cute? Or edgy? Or what? Anyway, the music is kind of interesting, props for not sounding like everything else. Unfortunately, the vocals are a bit screechy for my tastes. I dunno, call it a 3.5, but I’m rounding down to 3, cause I can’t see myself listening to this again.

Oh yay [sarc]. A rap album from a despicable guy. One of my least favorite genres. Should I just give it a “1” and some myself the bother? NOPE, I signed up for this, maybe I’ll be surprises. [listening] Gratuitous profanity? Check Gratuitous use of n-word? Check Glorify drug dealers? Check “F#$& the Police“? Check Glorify crime? Check The music is a bit “smoother” that a lot of rap I’ve been subjected to. But that’s makes it a bit less mind numbing. The 1 minute cover of “I’ll Fly Away” deserves props, but it’s just an interlude. I’ll give it 2/5

Pretty interesting. Started of really good, faded a bit. Not a huge fan of the vocalist, but only a little distracting. Interesting that this is not on Spotify. Also wasn’t released in US until 12 years later, on a different label. So this gets high marks on the obscurity meter. At times I was leaning 4, but over the course of the album, I edged down to a solid 3.

Rod the Mod from 1971…. Before he went disc. This is a really solid album, with 4 or 5 great songs, including the masterpiece “Maggie May”. This album has a nice vibe, loose and easy. More acoustic than electric, with mandolins and fiddle sprinkled about. Solid 4.5 out 5, I’ll round it to 5