1001 Albums Summary

OK. A couple of well-worn classics. Not sure that I'd put this album on repeat.

This isn't music.

Fine. Probably important for its time.

A true classic. Part of the fabric by now.

Very good. Clear how it inspired the music of it's time as well as subsequently.

Good. A classic? Solid 3 to 4.

Fine example of early hard rock.

Pretty big for its day. Sure to have made an impact. Music is fine, but I'm not singing along. Adding - it does have Mr. Blue Sky which was huge.

Meh. . .If you like this sort of thing.

It's alright, even approaching really good. Tends to be musical w/o too much showmanship. Def. a 3, maybe a 4.

A true classic. The material from which all subsequent rock was created.

OK. Approaching modern techno. Very repetitive.

Fine example of metal. Not to my current taste, but it is music and represents its genre truthfully. A 3 because it doesn't suck.

WTF. This is laughable.

Very good. May be a "concept album," but everything holds together and the music is relatable while varied. Def. a three, prob. a four.

Simply excellent. Maintains energy without falling into incomprehensibility. Wish I had discovered this album earlier. Five stars.

Part of the background sound of western society. At least a three.

It's fine. Not offensive. Maybe great for it's time, but sounds like every other 80s band.

Fine album. Don't know that it rises to extraordinary in as much as I don't know the genre. A solid 3 for being understandable as music and not offensive.

Not bad. Not great, seminal, or classic, but not bad. A three for a middle-of-the-road album.

Not good. Noisy and not melodic.

It's fine. Talking Heads have always been their own thing - something different, but not so different that people won't listen to them. Solid middle-of-the-road.

Good. Solid album. Prob. a 4.

Unimpressive. Muddy, undistinguished sound. Probably well suited to become elevator music or some other background sound track that no one really cares about. It's not objectionable, but I'd give it a "2" just because it's useless.

Not sure that Judas Priest is objectively better than any other hard rock band, but their style appeals to me more than others. A 4 for personal preference.

Solid. A three.

Not for me.

Wow. Great stuff. Don't know why I haven't heard of them before. Solid 4 for this album.

Good stuff. Solid 3.

Strong 80's sound. They don't move the ball down the field musically, but it's fine for listening. Solid 3.

Unique in its time. A 3.

Typical of the singer and style (or she led the way and it has become typical). Fine for what it is - trite and predictable. A three just because it's not actually bad.

Fine. A three. Feel like some of this has been picked up in the popular media over the last few years???

Unremarkable. Nearly experimental in its manic switching of forms. A two is probably fair.

Meh. A three.

Occasionally good. It did move things forward. A three.

For me, a two.

Moved the needle. Innovative while still being good. Basic, yet complex. A definite 4.

Nice. Very like Florence + The Machine. A three.

Noise. Solid 1 on a scale of 5.

Can't believe that this ever made it out of the garage. One.

Could easily be mistaken for Elvis Costello.

Simply a classic.

Sounds good. Too bad that time has made it part of the background.

Muddy. Not pleasant. His voice is an acquired taste most times, but this is pretty bad.

Still stripped down to the basics like their other stuff. I'm having trouble loving this album, though. Not as good as their other efforts. If I hadn't known it was the White Stripes, I would have turned it off sooner.

Seems fine. Very typical of the genre. Solid middle-of-the-road, trending to pretty good (Girl from Mars).

Probably groundbreaking for it's time. Now it's just fine.

What can you say?? It's U2. At their worst, they're world class.

Impressive. New to me. Not sure how it compares to the rest of its genre, but a solid four from me.

Not to my taste. I'm sure that the artists are very talented, but this doesn't interest me. A 2.

Have been listening to this for more than half my life; therefore, hard to be objective. Regardless, it's five stars from me.

Classic? Sadly, no. Some pieces are OK. Some didn't stand the test of time. Two stars.

Was, initially, put off by other reviews and expected to dislike this album. Was pleasantly surprised that it was very approachable and enjoyable. Their music's not changing the world, but I wouldn't change the station if this cam on the radio. Solid 3- trending to 4- stars.

Blech.

WOW! Amazing complexity and depth. Solid 4.

No thanks.

Nope.

It's hip hop. I rate it accordingly.

The entire genre is not something that I would spin up to listen to for fun, but this recording is somewhat melodic and, undeniably, foundational.

Fine. Middle of the road. Wouldn't turn it off, but might not seek it out.

There's a reason that she's been so successful. Not my jam, but I would leave it on the radio until the next song came on.

Mostly weird and experimental. Some tracks are called music only because an instrument is being played. As someone else commented, the backing tracks can be great. It starts to fall apart when she caterwauls, wails, and croaks the vocals. For all that, it's not as bad as I expected it would be based on her public persona.

Meh. Uninspired and uninteresting. A three just because it's not objectionable.

It's like they crafted every song to annoy the listener. Couldn't finish a single song.

Simple, straightforward. A classic of stripped-down guitar-driven rock.

Mostly mood. Probably has a place, but it's not in the standard rotation of things I'd listen to.

Gained a new appreciation for covers. Usually, it's the rare cover that's better than the original, but, with this album, I'm hearing each covered song in a new way. Some are better and some are just as good but different - lit differently from the original but just as luminous. Impressive.

Wow.

Music's good, but I lost interest every time they started vocalizing.

To each his own, but this is not for me.

For those who live for guitar solos I can see where this would be awesome. It's difficult to separate the album from 50 years of hype, airplay, media embedding, and fanboy-ism. My difficulty with a lot of Hip Hop is mirrored here - the artist(s) inserting themselves into the entertainment through talking, breaking up the flow of the music, and experimental, non-musical, and dissonant pieces ("On the Run" is a great example), OR making the piece of music about something of the moment (e.g. a revenge piece). If this album came out today, I wouldn't buy a copy. I wouldn't listen to it more than once. My rating is a reflection of the fact that it has become embedded in the culture and thereby gains some value.

I've been in that mood where I loved the artist and this album. Wasn't in that mood today. Neat complexity to the music, but the vocals are low, whiny and wispy - almost like he's not committed to singing. Definite talent here, but it's maybe too much a product of it's time?? It misses greatness, but it's no worse than middle of the road.

There may be reasons that he is revered, but I can't suss them out by listening to this album. All is cacophony and chaos. If someone else thinks that it's music, more power to them.

She skipped that day in school when they were teaching how to make good music.

At least it's musical? Sadly, the lack of definition makes the whole thing muddy and fine for blending into the background, but never edgy or clear enough to stand on its own, out front.

I've listened to this album so many times over the last 30 years that I can't look at it objectively.

OMG! As the first chords played, I was transported back in time to the mid 80's. I had just bought an album by an unknown artist and was enraptured by the music. Carried aloft on the chords, anticipating each new twist in the music, the lead singer opened his mouth and brought the whole experience crashing to the ground. WTF?? Change out the lead singer and this albums rates high, if only because it plays to the nostalgia of an old man. With the lead singer, it becomes a bad, unfunny joke about 80's hard rock.

I love electronic music. Tried to love this album, but it just wants to be weird (esp. The Color of the Fire - what's up with that???). I had had enough by the time that I got to Sixtyten and shut it down.

Hard to be objective about something that has become part of the social background. That said, it became part of the background because it has been continuously judged to be worth listening to.

Pleasant.

Very strange. . .not something to listen to on date night (unless your date's a goth, perhaps), but the lyrics are compelling as is his ability to keep the music coherent. There are depths here that aren't obvious on a casual listen.

If I was told that I only had 24 hours to live, I would put this album on repeat for that last day so that it could feel like a longer time.

As many people as possible should buy this album so that the "musicians" can afford music lessons.

I think that it's great that people like jazz; however, I'm done pretending that I understand or enjoy it. Viva la difference - but it's not my thing.

Very much of its time. Not a standout, but neither is it among the worst examples of the period. That said, "5-4=Unity" caused me to stop what I was doing and pay attention. Best, most unique piece on the album.

If you like this kind of music, you'll probably like this album.

As another reviewer so succinctly wrote: "It's music." I concur and rate it the same as that reviewer did.

The appeal of this baffles me. Didn't like his music 40 years ago. Not much has changed.

Straightforward classic.

While still weird, it doesn't feel as experimental as some of their other offerings.

Yep. That's Queen.

It's interesting to me that great talent isn't always recognized. I probably first heard this album in 2023 and, even though I knew two songs, couldn't believe that The Zombies weren't better known and celebrated. Maybe that's just the benefit of hindsight. The universe is a mystery. . .

"Life is hard, and so am I." , that part about the 17 year old pushing a baby carriage, the mind-numbing repetition on "Beautiful Freak" - the lyrics, in places, have the feel of something scribbled in a notebook while the author was in middle school. Still, I listened to it all twice and never skipped a song. Guess it's not all bad.

A standard of American folk rock. Like it or hate it, it's seminal and inescapable.

I won't go for the low hanging fruit and call the album "rubbish;" however, at one point I wondered how far into the album I had gotten since it had been playing for quite some time, only to see that I was not quite done with the second song on the play list. It just got worse from there. . .

I liked it. Live albums can be very hit or miss. This one is mostly hit.

Very of its time. Nothing stands out as worth listening to. Neither is anything so objectionable that you rush to shut off the sound. Forgettable.

Extraordinary.

Vapid.

Have never been a big fan of the Beatles. That said, I wanted to give this album a fair listen. I get some of the hype - Come Together and Here Comes the Sun are solid classics. Sadly, this album also has all of the other songs - any of which would cause me to listen to something else.

Unlike most jazz, it wasn't painful or annoyingly discordant.

WOW. What a load of (c)rap over top of some (at times) pretty good music.

First time that I've listened to a Taylor Swift album. Catchy tunes. Don't need to listen to them again, but I now understand some of the appeal.

About the only rap/hip hop album that I can listen to, but even this strains my patience.

Transported me. Early 80's punk - not radically changing the world (they thought they were by hating on it), but they did leave a mark, allow others to spin out in different ways. This album's not my thing, but the rating is 50% for the nostalgia of the sound and 50% for not sucking.

As others have said - 45 minutes of the same song. Not offensive, just not extraordinary.

Yeah, whatever.

Not my thing.

Had never heard of this band. Solid. Enjoyable. I'll be coming back.

About half of the album are bangers that we've heard for decades. Surprisingly, the other half of the album is very mediocre.

There's one that I don't need to listen to again.

The Cure, for me, has always been an acquired taste. _Disintegration_ and _Standing On A Beach - The Singles_ are part of the soundtrack of my life, but it took years of exposure before they became such. This album might get there, but, sadly, doesn't fall into the category of "pleasant surprise" on the first listen.

Creates an environment with a unique beauty.

Sounds like show tunes. Not a fan.

I like a lot of Rush. This album. . .I don't understand. . .

My issue with sampling in music is the same as with collage in visual art. Give it enough attention and the mind will draw connections - maybe even assign meaning to the whole. Done right, it can be a revelation. . .but it's rarely done right. There are lots of imitators, but few innovators. Music is entertainment. I don't want to work at it and find my own meaning, simply because *it's just not that important*. That will, of course, influence my rating. Students of music will disagree. Like most hip-hop, I have no patience with it. This one was at least not aurally offensive.

Forgettable, but not offensive.

Made it through two minutes before I couldn't take any more. . .

I don't get it. . . There's obvious musical talent here. Someone went to the trouble to write lyrics - only to have the singer slur and mumble through them. Was actually surprised when "The Easy Blues" started playing and I could understand and appreciate the lyrics; however, that changed to a completely different song about 2:16. The lyric execution is so bad, so distracting, that I have no reason to come back to this even though the music is, sometimes, worth listening to in isolation. Just a notch above experimental.

Yeah, whatever.

Yep, that's 90's rock.

Surprisingly good. 3.5.