Having given LCD Soundsystem a 5, I couldn't very well give Talking Heads anything less. Even if this isn't your type of music, you have to appreciate that this was released in 1980. Groundbreaking.
Serious question: How the Hell did anyone survive the 60s? I COMPLETELY understand now why The Beatles were so popular. That said, I'm grateful these songs were mercifully short and leaned slightly more toward unremarkable than grating. Slightly. This is clearly not an album anyone needed to hear before he died.
Metallica's good at what Metallica does - I just don't care for what Metallica does. As an artform, I'm sure it's probably worth a 5, but my personal preference keeps me from giving it anything higher than a 3.
Own it. Love it.
Clearly a classic. I know videos aren't part of the challenge, per se, but because So came out in a time when videos carried weight, this album has even more magic in that context. Plus, Kate Bush is enough to immediately give anything 5 stars.
Having given LCD Soundsystem a 5, I couldn't very well give Talking Heads anything less. Even if this isn't your type of music, you have to appreciate that this was released in 1980. Groundbreaking.
Kinda torn on this one. As far as reggae goes, Bob Marley nails it. Great merger of uplifting music with heavy subjects. However, without much variety from one song to the next, it felt like the album overstayed its welcome. Would have been a better experience in smaller doses.
Uh... What is this? I am loath to hate on anyone's art, but this was positively grating. Salt in the wound: I endured the bonus tracks edition.
Ahh... just the ear bleach I needed after that Fairport Convention nightmare. Seriously though, the first time I heard this album I was much younger, and I didn't get it. But after seeing the movie and letting the music sit with me a while, I've come to appreciate it more.
First two tracks are great, but there's only so much falsetto and horns I can take in one sitting.
¡Ay, caramba!
Before today, I had actually never listened to this album. Sure, I was familiar with the title track, but everything else was new to me. Sitting here in 2024, I can see the importance of this album, insofar as Madonna using her brand to bring electronica into the mainstream, but this confirms what I assumed when I heard the title track back in 1998: she was headed in a direction I was unwilling to follow. In fact, knowing what I know now, I'd say this "ray of darkness" is the very harbinger of the overproduced garbage that has been the Top 40 ever since the turn of the century. In that "light", Madonna is responsible for the destruction of modern music. I jest, of course, but this album DOES kick off what I dislike most about today's music. At any rate, there were a few nice moments on here (i.e. the ones without the clubby drum machines), but I, personally, didn't care much for it. Still, I'll give her credit for being the trailblazing queen she is.
I do love that this challenge is introducing me to music I've never heard before! This was nice. Light. Melodic. Simple. It gives more to its listener than it asks of him. No, it didn't change my world, nor will it make its way into my playlist, but I'm happy to have spent a short and pleasant time with it on this journey called life. Perhaps we'll meet again someday :)
Welp... didn't think we'd be dethroning Fairpoint Convention so quickly, but here we are... Before today, I had never been so relieved by YouTube's intrusive ad practices. I almost quit this one several times, but the challenge IS to listen to these albums before you die... even when they try their categorical best to kill you before you can... Everything from the vocals to the guitars seemed to be pathetically and PAINFULLY whining "boo friggin' hoo". It's as if someone managed to harness the dark acoustic energy of Fran Drescher and channeled it into an album. Unnecessary.
A very Paul Simony album. Peaceful and toe-tapping at times, but largely background music.
SERIOUSLY?! Someone needs to audit the algorithm! I'm fairly sure two Clapton albums within three days is a violation of the Geneva Convention. That said, this one wasn't nearly as terrible as the last (largely due to their comparative lengths), but in the end, trash is still trash.
I know I'm supposed to like Nirvana and all... but I just never have... Some would assert they should be respected, if not merely for their importance in music history... OK, but I'd argue the Huns were pretty important in European history - does that mean they deserve respect for it? Still, I'll give it a 2 since Eric Clapton didn't have anything to do with its production.
A twofer... or possibly threefer... Glad I had the day off! Some hits and misses here. A few tracks would definitely benefit from a radio edit, but overall, I do appreciate the eclectic nature of the album.
On a different day, I might have been more open to this... but today was not that day...
Ah... finally... an album I don't have to set aside half my day to get through... There are some enjoyable nuggets in here (mostly the songs written by Sting), but there are an equal number of tracks that feel kinda throwaway to me...
I could imagine hearing a few of these tracks at The Bronze... and that pleases me... Overall, however, this felt more like mood music than active listening... which would likely be fine if that were your aim, but the repetition does wear a bit if you're fully present. I guess I neither love nor hate it.
Even chicks in tight shorts couldn't save this album... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WADa5ItkV6o It's simply beyond the limits of good taste... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X9x9VqtciA
After recently reviewing a number of extremely long entries, I was relieved to see that this had only 9-tracks of mostly reasonable lengths. Unfortunately, it FELT just as long as those double albums. Seriously. This POS shouldn't even exist, let alone be on ANY requisite listening list.
Classic arrangements. Flawless vocals (obviously). It took me back to riding in the car with my grandparents. Though it's not really my thing, I'm giving it a 5 because, as an artform, it's on point. Plus, several of these tracks were featured on the Golden Girls, so that's pretty much an automatic win.
Beyond the three singles, I was unfamiliar with the other eight songs - so it was nice getting to hear these for the first time. I wouldn't say they're overly strong tracks, with the side A four being noticeably better than the side B four, but I still dug the experience.
I'm really not sure what to make of this... I'm pretty sure I don't like it, but I could be wrong... No, I'm positive I don't like it... But on second thought... Wait, does this mean I hate Love? Ah, the 60s were such a confusing time...
Beck is sorta hit-or-miss with me... He offers flashes of brilliance but then muddles it all up with what can only be described as noise... I can appreciate an artist wanting to mashup genres, but it's always seemed to me that Beck mixes in one part glorious with two parts laborious... I'll give it a 2 because I do enjoy the singles, The New Pollution and Where It's At, but I really must flush the rest of this rackety rot...
Diet Beatles. For when you want to listen to British pop without all of the catchy hooks. Completely neutral to this. Nothing amazing; nothing offensive. Next.
Timeless.
Not enough drugs in the world...
The very definition of "death by a thousand (two-minute or less) cuts". While I didn't find anything of particular value on this MULTI-album, I did pick up vibes here and there of other bands I do like... ones that have a more structured approach to actual song writing. So, in that regard, I'll give it a 2 for having the right ingredients set out on the counter... just wish they had bothered to bake the damn cake.
Phil Spector's extreme creep factor and criminally murderous behavior aside, this was a great Christmas album. Full props to all of the talented performing artists.
Unequivocally awful. Why was this even made? I refuse to believe that anyone would listen to this under their own free will... let alone pay money for the displeasure...
Nice! An actual standard studio album to review! And it's a fairly good one! Despite some unnecessary meanderings and questionable noise (particularly within the title track), I enjoyed most of this. I'm still not willing to venture forth into the swamp of jazz, but I thank Steely Dan for showing me that there are some fringe elements that don't completely suck.
Meh... other than the two singles, I hadn't heard any of these songs before... and based on those two singles, I had always (correctly) assumed I didn't really need to, either... If I were a young girl hearing this for the first time in 1981, it probably would have hit harder... but I'm not, and it isn't, so it doesn't...
Garage rock? More like garbage schlock.
I know this was a critically acclaimed event and got tons of coverage back in the day... but I just don't like live albums... nor Nirvana... That said, compared to the other live albums I've had to endure on this list (and Nirvana's In Utero), this is slightly more tolerable... so I'll be generous and give it a 2...
Wow... This was really quite good... I have the cover of Thirteen by Garbage, but otherwise this was all new to me - which after reading up on the history of the album, I understand why... Too bad... They really could have been Big Stars...
Oof... that voice, tho... seriously... Thankfully, none of these tracks had particularly outrageous runtimes, though they did all seem VERY long...
W. T. F. I guess yesterday's review fell on deaf algorithms... And now I wish I were deaf...
Meh... Other than the two (rather weak) singles, I had never heard any of this, and I don't know how I ever really would have, either... There's certainly nothing even close to radio worthy here... More-or-less, it's just a boring, longer-than-necessary, story-telling experience... But it didn't outright assault my senses, so I'll give it a disappointed 2...
This was a tough review to write... On the one hand, I greatly appreciate experimentation with sounds, and without pioneers in the field, we wouldn't have the greatness we have today. On the other hand, this particular album just isn't landing with me. I listened to it three times just to be sure, but it failed to trigger that internal magic that sparks when you've found something special. While it does have its moments, it ultimately hits more like noise than music. As a contemporary comparison, put this up against Kraftwerk's 1978 Die Mensch-Maschine. One is CLEARLY more polished. I'm still going to give this a 3, though - not quite for what it is, but rather for what it was at the time, and for what it no doubt helped inspire afterwards.
This is of a genre I usually enjoy, but there isn't enough variety here. It felt like one 40-minute song. I listened to this twice, and I think the issue has less to do with the musical arrangements and more with her voice. Ethereal falsetto is nice in small doses - just not for an entire album. The electronic mix was decent, though. I was reminded of The Range at times; so, I'll give it a 3 for evoking some of that energy.
Ugh... College... Not sure I can be impartial about this one given my personal association, but I'll try... I guess, all-in-all, it's not a bad album... The singles are strong, even if they do bring me back to the dorms... The non-singles are also fairly decent, for the most part...
I would have expected "Brothers In Arms" to be on this list (and it probably is), but this was a surprise. OK album, if not somewhat unremarkable.
Genre-ly speaking, this is the kind of stuff I love. Unfortunately, this album misses the mark, and the one thing I can absolutely point to is how most of these tracks ultimately devolve beyond mere refrain into an endless loop that feels downright burdensome. I hated when "Message In A Bottle" did it, and I hate it here, too. Shame - because there are some elements on this album that could have been used for greatness. It hurts me, but I have to fail this.
Another completely new experience for me. There's no arguing that Adele can sing. If I were in a different place in life, I could see these songs hitting pretty hard. Thankfully, I'm not. Though not in relevant resonance with me, it's still a very strong work of art. Maybe a 3.5? Tell you what, I'll do Adele a favor and round down so that she has some new material to lament about on her next album.
I think in 1967 this would have been pretty tight - err groovy. I'm not so sure I have a place for this in my life today, but it's certainly far from offensive. There - I stayed away from any and all prune-related humor.
Full disclosure: I'm unable to be unbiased when it comes to Bowie. Low may not be one of his more commercial ventures, but this is still an excellent atmospheric album that I could listen to on repeat (and have). I don't know what the afterlife is like, but I really hope its soundtrack is written and performed by David Bowie.
I've always sorta hated Sympathy for the Devil... it's too long-winded, and the background woo-woo absolutely grates after the millionth time... My hangups with that particular track aside, I found the rest of the album (save for the rebellious rock classic, Street Fighting Man) to be very... dirty country diner... which I suppose is what they were going for based on the cover art... I guess if I'm being fair and honest, it was a slightly less than middle-of-the-road experience...
So... it seems the algorithm's theme for this week is country diner... at least we're getting these albums done and over with... I guess if I had to identify one positive thing about this experience, it would be that it made me feel better about myself knowing that this album had zero resonance.
Well now - this is distinctly NOT country diner! Thank you, algorithm, for the palate cleanser! Only 7 tracks, but what an array! Title track is a classic and a clear standout. For 1982, Scorpion was totally rad. And then, mixed in between some old skool rap and a gospel ballad, there's Dreamin'... talk about an awkward man crush - but I still can't say I hated it!
I have no idea what's going on, but it's got rhythm - and the honking Muppets! At least, that was the interpretation in my head... And if it's good enough for Rod Stewart to rip off, it's good enough for me! If you want my Muppet and you think it's honking, come on rate this album now!
I bought The Door's greatest hits in high school, and most of this album made the cut, so that's impressive for a debut, I suppose... Or maybe that just means they were never able to fully recapture the same magic? At any rate, there wasn't much to discover here for me, and maybe because I've heard most of this countless times it felt sorta boring... But it IS a classic... and I can respect it for that... So, for what it is, it would be unfair to give it anything less than a 4.
Hmm... not so sure about this one... there are songs I recognize (and like better) that were done by other artists, leaving "A Natural Woman" as the only song of real value... which I can't say I love, either... At the end of the day, I prefer singing to screaming, but there are far worse albums on this list...
The sax on the first track set the early, agonizing pace... and it was all downhill from there... Seriously, trumpets are the Devil... But at least there weren't any drum solo - - - ugh... And unholy Hell were these songs long and rambling... Definite contender for worst album yet...
Meh. I wanted to like it, but it felt like every time I heard something interesting, it led to a dead end. I know there's talent here... and lots of energy... but it just felt like a runny, chunky puddle that didn't set well overnight in the fridge...
Johnny Cash is one of the best there ever was and ever will be. He's a consistent performer and great storyteller who makes you feel. This album delivers the goods.
Outside the two singles, this borders on unlistenable... and even those are brought down by the overall experience...
Ugh... MORE jazz... I'm sure for what this is, it's wonderful... For me, however, it's just discordant background noise...
Whew... I can finally stop worrying that rumba was going to be unfairly underrepresented on this list...
Add another corpse to the pile of recent disappointments...
This exercise is challenging assumptions I've had about myself for a very long time... I thought I enjoyed all types of music... I guess I was wrong... Or maybe I just really hate meandering instrumentals, jazz, blues, bluesy jazz, jazz-infused blues, folk anything, and *gulp* rumba - which, based on the first 60 albums reviewed, makes up about a fifth of this list. Hopefully, this has been just an unfortunate randomization of the algorithm and not a foreboding of what the next 3.6 years will be like.
Sure... kick me when I'm down... Seriously - Rush is terrible, and this album doesn't change that opinion. There's nothing interesting or catchy with the music, and Lee's shrill vocals tear through my very soul. I appreciated that he wasn't screeching on Tears, but that moment of calm was, sadly, not enough to undo the damage on my psyche done by the rest of this rot.
Thank you, algorithm. This is exactly what I needed after last week's debacle. Excellent album that has something to say and makes you feel something.
OK seriously, enough with the jazz already... But I'll give it a 2 because the drummer's name is Donald Bailey.
Thank the sweet baby Jesus algorithm! I hope this is a sign o' the times that we can finally be done with jazz! Prince is right there with David Bowie for me. I know I'm biased, but I can only describe this as brilliant. Like Bowie, Prince does things that no one else has done - good things. I guess I should clarify because I've heard some unique things on this list that were not do good.
This was... odd... Based on other recent entries, I now have a new perspective on what awful truly is, and I can't say that this is that particular shade of bad... But it definitely isn't even close to good, either... In fact, it really is awful... Just in a very inventively odd way... I dunno... I struggle to imagine the target audience this was meant for... It sorta feels like clips of it would appear in a Hallmark movie or something... In the interest of mending my average score from the damage done by jazzapalooza, I'd love to give this a neutral 3 and move on, but it definitely doesn't deserve that... So, I guess the lesson here is that evil just comes in different flavors... Oh, and under no circumstances should Rufus ever be allowed to sing again... His whiny vocals are as deadly as any jazz horn...
Someone take away that man's harmonica this instant! Unless one were drunk and had given up entirely on life, I can't imagine another reason to willfully select this off the shelf when there are SOOO many other things to listen to in this world. But to prove I'm not a monster (or a bot programed to lower the global scores of this challenge), I'll give it a 2 because there are moments of good song writing here - just zero moments of good song performing.
I'm utterly offended by the obscene cover art... That aside, this album is totally groovy. A number of recognizable hits, no 20-minute-long ramblings, full motivation for multiple playthroughs. Everything a good album should be.
Soooo.... I can see my pleas for harmonica extraction have fallen on deaf ears... which mine now are... Is Dylan's M.O. to lead with one well-written (and badly performed) classic, and then fill the rest of the album with rambling garbage? If so, couldn't we have given him just a greatest hits entry and saved some room for other groups (possibly of non-Anglo origin) that absolutely should have appeared on this list but likely don't? Unfortunately for this album, my generosity for Dylan's songwriting was spent on the last rating.
Hmm... There are plenty of songs I enjoy by Morrissey and The Smiths, but I found this particular album somewhat lacking for a reason that I can't quite articulate. I gave it a second and third playthrough hoping that something would click, but I'm not sure that it did. I will say that, like most Morrissey-related works, subsequent listenings did reveal additional layers, so I think there's probably something here if you're willing to work for it - I just ran out of time in the day. So, I guess I'll give it a neutral rating. I'd probably have given it a lower score if not for the recent slew of painfully unlistenable garbage, which I certainly wouldn't lump this into. It's not bad - it's just not the best he has to offer.
Wow! I had never heard of this band before, and I love this album! This, THIS, is the reason we've taken on this challenge! I love finding something new that I love - especially when it's been out for such a long time - a whole new discography to explore!
Now, you know I love Bowie. However, this was just an OK experience for me. It's got Bowie-level production quality, and it's still better than many of these other "must hear" albums, but nothing here felt particularly special. I wish it had been half the length with twice the depth.
Big beat. This subgenre will forever hold a special place in my heart, given my age when it was popular; but as I and the world have evolved, it's just not as tangible as it once was. For one thing, this is dancing music - not casual listening music - and I do much less of the former nowadays... However, given this album's release date and purpose, I think it's fairly good. It's got exceptional mixing, some trancey rhythms, and lots of energy. All the things a good dance-oriented album should have. It's definitely not a casual listening album, though - so if that's the forum (like this challenge), then it can come across as repetitively oppressive at times. Still, for what it is when it was, I can't give it less than a 4. Oh, and a special shoutout to Praise You - that's a classic track.
OooooooooooooooooK... I guess there's a purpose for this, but I'll be damned if I know what it is... The lyrics detract from whatever musical quality this might have otherwise had. It's like barf on a wedding cake.
No.
This is pretty much White Stripes, and like White Stripes, it just doesn't land with me. I have tried REALLY hard to enjoy White Stripes, but their music (like this album) always feels too busy and noisy to me. In some cases, it's the guitar (Jack), in more cases it's the drums (Meg) (or more specifically - the damn cymbals), and in even more cases, it's both. Even without Meg, this still has that busy noisy cymbal thing. Like several White Stripes albums, I've given this a fair shake, and I can only conclude that Jack and I are just not compatible.
Another excellent album by Talking Heads. Though, if they have a bad one, I've never heard it.
Not at all my thing, but I can't say it's an affront, either. A 3 in the truest sense.
Eh... less falsetto, please... I know this is allegedly a classic, but I just really, really hate folk... I was willing to consider giving this a 2, but her voice caused me physical pain at times, and that goes beyond just not liking it for being boring and pointless...
Serious question: How the Hell did anyone survive the 60s? I COMPLETELY understand now why The Beatles were so popular. That said, I'm grateful these songs were mercifully short and leaned slightly more toward unremarkable than grating. Slightly. This is clearly not an album anyone needed to hear before he died.
Swingin' from the gallows, maybe... OK, it's not THAT bad, but I can only take so much big band and ol' blue eyes... Furthermore, this can't possibly be the best Frank has to offer, so I don't know what this album is doing on this list... make room for something better...
It's been a while since we've had something this century. Unfortunately, this isn't very good. Kinda just noisy and boring. I'd probably have given it a 2, but I feel compelled to give it a 1 to offset its undeserved hype.
Not my genre, but I certainly can't knock the guitar work. Seriously, I kinda HAFTA give it a 5. It really is an important album.
Some interesting ideas here, but at times I couldn't help but feel like this was more a demo than a studio album. I think there's probably some treasure here if you've got the time to dig for it among the rubble, but unfortunately, I only had time for two playthroughs today, and that wasn't enough to uncover the goods. Regardless, I think the weak vocals and "misery chick" vibe bring it down; so, it's a 2 for me.
None of these songs break the five-minute mark (most under four), but they all seem to drone on longer than they should. I guess that's not a very good sign. Now, I know very little about the technics of music, but maybe this "lag" is because the songs are written in a strange half-time or something? I mean, I like Robert Palmer's version of "Get It On", but I don't like it as much here. I dunno... All-in-all, it wasn't a painful experience, though - so I'll just slap a 3 on it and move on.
I enjoyed most of this, but the choice to make it a double album keeps it from greatness. There's far too much redundancy and filler here. If you're going to produce a double album, variety is critical; and this definitely doesn't have enough. Had it been a 9-10 track fare, it would have been a 5.
An undeniable classic. These songs have touched your life somehow at some point. Even if you don't like Led Zeppelin (I'm not crazy about them, myself), you've at least enjoyed music that's been influenced by them. Gotta show the respect.
What I kinda was expecting. Title hit, and a bunch of filler. I'm relocating today, so I have neither A. the time nor B. the inclination to give this a another playthrough. Sorry, Sister.
So... let me get this straight...this is a fragmented collection of scaps and debris that wasn't good enough for The Beach Boys, but it's good enough for this oft questionable list of "must hear" misfits? Got it.
Only really half-listed to this... too much going on... but from what I heard, it sounded like it was only worth half-a-listen, to be honest... I'll give it a free star for my lack of effort, but I'm fairly certainly it doesn't deserve any more based on their lack of effort...
You had me at "(featuring Alison Goldfrapp)." By its nature, this isn't something you're going to be able to actively listen to very easily, but as an ambient artform, it delivers. I will say, however, that it runs a bit long (as an album and, at times, as individual tracks). Still, not bad for what it is. I'd probably have given it a 3, but Alison's worth an extra star.
I don't get this at all. It's the most monotonous album I've heard on this list (yet). I couldn't tell one song from another. Vocals are washed out and muddy. Music is repetitive and hookless. This honestly just sucks. A trash album that definitely doesn't deserve a place on this list... or even space on a dusty shelf at FYE.
Metallica's good at what Metallica does - I just don't care for what Metallica does. As an artform, I'm sure it's probably worth a 5, but my personal preference keeps me from giving it anything higher than a 3.
Not a fan. The guitar work is downright terrible. It's that noise pop crap I hated in my youth. It was a struggle to finish this (even with YouTube gratefully blocking 5 of the 12 tracks - which I didn't even bother to subsequently track down). I guess this means I didn't technically hear this album, but I can totally live with that.
This has everything a good pop album should have: catchy hooks, actual music (as opposed to noise), clear, well-executed vocals, variety between songs, reasonable track lengths. I really can't find fault with this - especially in juxtaposition to many of the other albums on this list. In fact, I'd probably have given this a 4, but the other garbage I've had to listen to recently compels me to give this a 5 as a point of comparison.
This one required a lot of work without much payoff... I hated the first listen, but I decided to try again (for some unknown reason) and surprisingly only kinda hated it the second time... I skimmed through it a third time, and the noise got less noisy, but my hate stain remained... There might be something of value here, but I don't want to risk injuring myself any further digging for it, lest I becoming as damaged as the vibe this album gives off... I'd like to give this a 1, but its being released in 1986 is pretty pioneer-y, so that's worth an extra star...
Another case of "this is probably good for what it is, but I hate the genre, so no amount of perfection is going to sway me" kinda thing.
I'm sure Talking Heads having so many entries on this list is going to elicit some eyerolls, but fortunately I love them, so you'll get no complaints from me. This is probably the weakest of their three Brian Eno-produced albums, but that still didn't stop me from listening to it multiple times; and I see no reason to rate this any less than the other two albums considering a Talking Heads low is still way better than an alleged high for many of these other artists.
Excellent album. Beautiful with an aura of sadness. This is an album you should hear (more than once) before you die.