Inside of you are two wolves. One wolf is a simple creature, who enjoys peaceful, easy-listening love songs. Even if they are cheesy, some music is just meant to feel warm and romantic, with nice musical passages, piano chords, and string arrangements. Not every album has to be incredibly complex - these are simply timelessly smooth songs that have earned their way into wedding playlists for the rest of humanity's days. 5/5. The other wolf absolutely despises this artificial, cheap, saccharine, plastic goddamn waste of half an hour. This is such an explosive assault on the free world that it could be charged with domestic terrorism-related offences in 47 states. I'm surprised this album isn't on the No-Fly list. If I was John Lennon, I would've a) ducked and b) sued the Carpenters directly into the cold, hard ground for destroying "Help!" and turning it into unlistenable, grey slop. This album is whiter than the Mormon Church. 1/5. So we'll compromise and go 3/5.

It's 5/5, but not without its faults. I'm a big Bob Dylan fan, but I never quite *got* Time Out of Mind. It's a lot of people's favourite album of his, and I couldn't understand why. Then it finally clicked - this album demands to be listened to at either dusk or dawn, and no time else. This isn't a 10am listen, or a mid-day 2pm listen, or a late afternoon 5pm listen. This is a 9pm with a cup of whiskey surrounded by wooden cabinetry listen. This is a 5am studying for your final exam in two hours listen - times where ruminations and meditations on one's mortality are inevitable. This album singlehandedly saved Bob Dylan from irrelevant aging Boomer icon to modern Americana gatekeeper. And it's easy to see why. Not Dark Yet is one of his greatest songs ("There's not even room enough to be anywhere...It's not dark yet, but it's getting there"), with Love Sick, Tryin' to Get to Heaven, Standing in the Doorway, and Make You Feel My Love rounding out for a very strong tracklist. The palate cleanser blues numbers can be nice - Cold Irons Bound is good - but you can't tell me Million Miles needs to be 6 minutes long. As I said, it's not without its faults. The blues tracks are simply too long. Speaking of too long, Highlands is like 16 minutes long. And you know what, I don't mind it. It's nowhere near the strength of other Bob Dylan long songs like Desolation Row, but it's kinda dumb fun that he can pull off. Dylan has mentioned he doesn't like the Lanois production on it, but I think it serves the music well and creates a unique listen compared to all of his other records. All in all, that's all to say that it's a 5/5 album. It's either one of the best albums of all-time or an unremarkable slog - completely dependent on how, where, and when you listen.

I didn't think I was even marginally going to like it. It looked like some quirky "shoegaze" thing that only people who want to a) agree with critics or b) lie would like. I thought I was right too, with the opening drumfill of the opening drum track sounding like the band's about to pop off....and results in one of the most disappointing climaxes of my life (I will not expand). As the album wore on, it actually started sounding like actual songs and instrumentation and melody. So I don't know if that's just being psy-oped by the album, or it legitimately just got better as it wore on. But with an introduction to the album that bad, I guess the only way to go is up.

This appears to be a controversial album. I get it, I really do. It's a concept album about domestic violence and heroin addiction ending in suicide with kid crying sound effects and a singer who can't, notably, sing. I get it. HOWEVER, holy what an album. The music and instrumentation/production provides a haunting (the piano work on the opening track & Lady Day is phenomenal) backdrop to tragedy. The strings on the album are also really nice. I'm not incredibly familiar with Lou Reed - his writing (on at least this album) is quite Hemingway-esque, which may turn people off due to its simplicity and conciseness, but it makes the story much more personable and sharp. It's either a love-it or hate-it album. I loved it. It's not one that you can just throw on casually, or re-listen a bunch, but it's truly a great album.

This was actually dogwater. Holy. An astoundingly awful album. This being on a list of Top 1001 Albums You Should Listen To Before You Die is such a trolljob. I refuse to believe anyone actually enjoys this. An unbearable cacophony of noise. A caterwaul of random effects. Nothing is in time, hardly anything is in key. Every instrument and vocal is constantly in conflict with each other. This sucks. It's a goddamn pretentiousness, obnoxious, theatre-kid piece of crap coming from millennials who obviously were never told "no" as children. This is the direct product of gentle parenting. I actually hate this album. Life's too short for this garbage. This is disgusting. Every single musical decision made in this album's runtime is offensive. The fact that a producer/engineer listened to this constant overstimulation of random rhythms, keys, and vocals and OK'd it for public consumption was the day that humans as a species have gone too far.

Never have given the Grateful Dead a fair shake, and I enjoy lengthy jams (Allman Brothers, Neil Young) so I thought this album being my Day 1 generated on this 1001 album run was some type of fate. I don't think I will ever understand the Grateful Dead hype if this is what it sounds like. Long, uneventful slogs of songs with like maybe 5% of their runtime actually being interesting, with the occasional cool line, riff, improvisation. I'd be bored out of my mind if this is what the average Grateful Dead live concert sounded like - no wonder everyone was on acid. It's not offensively bad, or awful. It's just boring.

Solid album - own it as a record (for like $2). Improvement from their first album, and the big songs (Message in a Bottle, Walking on the Moon, Bring On the Night) are some of their best. Nothing exceptional, however, and the style of the album tracks kinda blend in with each other and I forget which one's which. A solid 3. Don't know if it's quite a 4? This is only my second album, so leaving room open for 4s and 5s.

One of the best straight-up classic rock albums. Behind Blue Eyes? Banger. Baba O'Riley? Banger. Won't Get Fooled Again? Banger. Love Ain't For Keeping? Banger. Bargain? Banger. The Who have better albums (namely Tommy and Quadrophenia), but like Who's Next is still very good, and their best non-concept one. Was going to go 4 because it's not their top album, but I maybe I should be less picky and more joyous. So we'll go a 5.

It's kinda hot. Big band swing and all that. Some of it blends in with each other and fades into background music, but that isn't necessarily bad. I do like me some jazz and this had some really nice passages. Very enjoyable album - not the best in the world, but a solid 4.

Very good rap album. Acclaimed for a reason. Let it be known that I was a Kendrick Lamar fan way before the Drake feud and allat, which gives me such a musical superiority complex that simply may never go away. I wouldn't call it a straight 5/5, but a solid 4. The theming throughout, interspersed with narratives and spoken-word passages, is captivating, and never sacrifices the actual music/content. It all flows well. It's not his greatest album, but a quite good one.

Solid country album. We enjoy some classic country. The common issue, however, through most of them is that all the songs kinda sound the same-y. I guess back then, country artists didn't like straying from the formula too much, and lots of the album tracks (including on this one) follow the same structure, the same major chords (in occasional differing order), and the same instrumentation. That being said, I still like country and it's a good album. Just nothing spectacular.

Good '80s albums. For a decade that seemingly wiped their hands of anything remotely resembling sane quality control, Tears for Fears was always solid. Songs From The Big Chair is their best, with big singles (Shout, Everybody Wants to Rule the World, Head Over Heels), and the album tracks are quite good, too. It's nothing life-changing or anything incredibly eye-opening, but for what it's worth, it's one of the better sounding albums of the time.

This appears to be a controversial album. I get it, I really do. It's a concept album about domestic violence and heroin addiction ending in suicide with kid crying sound effects and a singer who can't, notably, sing. I get it. HOWEVER, holy what an album. The music and instrumentation/production provides a haunting (the piano work on the opening track & Lady Day is phenomenal) backdrop to tragedy. The strings on the album are also really nice. I'm not incredibly familiar with Lou Reed - his writing (on at least this album) is quite Hemingway-esque, which may turn people off due to its simplicity and conciseness, but it makes the story much more personable and sharp. It's either a love-it or hate-it album. I loved it. It's not one that you can just throw on casually, or re-listen a bunch, but it's truly a great album.

Decent enough. Like I'm not a huge world music guy, and this album wasn't strong enough to turn me into one. But I can totally see how people dig it. Good vibes music, just kinda carries throughout in the background. If someone was playing this as a soundtrack to a chill, evening backyard summer party, I wouldn't complain. I just wouldn't put it on myself.

If you don't like AC/DC's sound, then you're not gonna like the album. Luckily, I do, so I do. Yes, their songs are all the same. Yadeyadeya. I understand. HOWEVER, I propose to you this: Hell's Bells? Banger. You Shook Me All Night Long? Banger. Back in Black? Banger. Let Me Put My Love into You? Banger. Shoot to Thrill? Banger. Rock n' Roll Ain't Noise Pollution? Banger. You get my point.

I don't get it. The whole post-punk, gothic thing. This album is a blend of like Joy Division and Talking Heads, but is mediocre representations of both. I can see how in the early '80s this may have been the soundtrack to high school gothics, but it doesn't do a lot for me. The production sounds bad. The music isn't very good. I know it's the "post-punk" sound, but to me, it doesn't sound too good. It isn't offensively bad, but I don't see a world where I come back to it. But like, it isn't awful. I can see how people could enjoy it. The whole style just isn't for me.

It's a 5/5 album. Don't know what else to say. Arguably a 6/5. One of the best albums of all-time. If not for Stairway to Heaven, it also has Going to California, and Black Dog, and Rock and Roll, and When the Levee Breaks, and Misty Mountain Hop, and Four Sticks, and Battle for Evermore.... That's the whole tracklist. Elite.

Fine enough album. Didn't do too much for me, but was still decent. There were different styles that kept it mildly interesting, but it wasn't like the fantastic 5/5 pinnacle of British folk that some people give to it. The first half is solid enough. The latter half just kinda peters out. I had high hopes based on this album's reputation, but I just don't see it. Maybe I'll revisit it later, maybe I didn't listen as attentively.

Fine enough swing album. I enjoyed it, but nothing exceptional. Fun for its runtime. Kept the tempo up throughout, and the performance was fun.

Inside of you are two wolves. One wolf is a simple creature, who enjoys peaceful, easy-listening love songs. Even if they are cheesy, some music is just meant to feel warm and romantic, with nice musical passages, piano chords, and string arrangements. Not every album has to be incredibly complex - these are simply timelessly smooth songs that have earned their way into wedding playlists for the rest of humanity's days. 5/5. The other wolf absolutely despises this artificial, cheap, saccharine, plastic goddamn waste of half an hour. This is such an explosive assault on the free world that it could be charged with domestic terrorism-related offences in 47 states. I'm surprised this album isn't on the No-Fly list. If I was John Lennon, I would've a) ducked and b) sued the Carpenters directly into the cold, hard ground for destroying "Help!" and turning it into unlistenable, grey slop. This album is whiter than the Mormon Church. 1/5. So we'll compromise and go 3/5.

Another 3/5 album. Not bad, not great either. Pretty good, pretty solid. Any album with "California Dreamin'" on it can't reasonably be scored any lower. A couple album tracks are nice, too. The Mamas and the Papas are better than your stereotypical '60s folkpop hippie band, so they've got that going for them.

Very good funk album. The opening ten minute song is awesome, and the rest of the song follows suit fairly well. It's acclaimed for a reason, but I just didn't feel it kicked into the highest gear or was positively outstanding. Maybe it's a genre thing. That being said, it was still very good.

I don't get the hype. Lots of other reviews saying this is a 5/5 album. It's kinda basic. Like, it's still decent. I can see it's influence, and it sounds like it belongs in the Cheap Trick power pop era despite being released at the beginning of the decade in 1972. It's just kinda an average classic rock album. The latter half of the record kinda peters off. That being said, the melodies are catchy, the production is good, and some of the ballads are nice.

I've never given Stevie Wonder a fair shake other than Songs in the Key of Life (which is very, very good). This album was still quite good, but highlights both his strengths and weaknesses. Strengths being his funk and R&B grooves, and weaknesses being the schmaltzy gushy balladry. The ballads aren't inherently bad, they're just too sweet and saccharine. But the funk on this album makes up for it. I mean, look, it has Superstition on it. That's all you really need.

I actually didn't mind this. Which I thought I would've, given the other reviews, the idea of "grime", and, most of all, British people. It isn't stand-out or anything, but it's a solid enough album. The performance was good and production was well-done. I don't like annoying or purposefully-obnoxious backing vocals/effects, which some tracks on here have at the start, but once the real song kicks in, it wasn't too bad. I can see myself coming back to it later.

The title track remains an certified swamp rock banger. One of their best songs. After that, things kinda peter off into generic C.C.R territory, which makes sense for album tracks, but still. Nothing bad, just nothing too outstanding. Bad Moon Rising is on here, which is nice if you're a fan of it, but I am not, so it isn't. Bordering on 4 stars just cause Green River and the album tracks aren't bad, but they also mostly aren't anything to write home about, so we'll settle on a 3.

One of the best albums of the '90s. Great production, great sound, great instrumentation. Billy Corgan's voice may turn off some, but his style works great with what he's trying to do here, and if you don't get it, then you just don't get it. Disarm and Mayonnaise are two of the best songs of the decade, and the rest of the tracks are all quite strong. Siamese Dream works great as an album, but the songs are also great if listened to individually, as well.

Just kinda an average album. Nothing too special. It's fine enough. The second half of the album is better, and has some nice melody lines and progressions. Variety of different styles. They're clearly competent musicians, the album just never kicks into another gear, and just kinda stays at the same "yeah this is ok" level throughout.

One of the stronger metal albums out there, ESPECIALLY for the early '80s. Iron Maiden is more melodic, more memorable, more grand, more operatic, and better sounding than most of their peers, which makes for a great album. Not perfect - but still an enjoyable listen. The lyrics are juvenile, but such is most metal music, I feel. It's profoundly life-changing poetry when you discover them in like the first year of high school, then you listen to it again a couple years later and go "this is kinda dumb, I'm too mature for this", then you listen to it again a couple years later and go "this is kinda dumb, I'm not too mature for this". Still, the words and some themes remain clunky and "kinda dumb", and the music and sound retreads most of the same ground over the course of the album. The Children of the Damned intro sounds like The River by Bruce Springsteen, for what it's worth.

It's a vibe. Tom Waits haters gonna hate. Jazz club haters gonna hate. General feeling of enjoyment haters gonna hate. It's honestly bordering on 5 stars. The jazz musicianship backing is incredible, the live audience adds a whole lot fun, and Waits interludes/comedy bits are awesome. Actually in writing this I have now changed it from 4 to 5 stars. It's not an album you can throw on on a Sunday morning before you go to a family brunch. It's a dark, sarcastic, smoke-filled booze-y album that pairs perfectly with a stormy Saturday night's TV Dinner after a terrible week.

This was actually dogwater. Holy. An astoundingly awful album. This being on a list of Top 1001 Albums You Should Listen To Before You Die is such a trolljob. I refuse to believe anyone actually enjoys this. An unbearable cacophony of noise. A caterwaul of random effects. Nothing is in time, hardly anything is in key. Every instrument and vocal is constantly in conflict with each other. This sucks. It's a goddamn pretentiousness, obnoxious, theatre-kid piece of crap coming from millennials who obviously were never told "no" as children. This is the direct product of gentle parenting. I actually hate this album. Life's too short for this garbage. This is disgusting. Every single musical decision made in this album's runtime is offensive. The fact that a producer/engineer listened to this constant overstimulation of random rhythms, keys, and vocals and OK'd it for public consumption was the day that humans as a species have gone too far.

Fine enough album. I don't mind '80s synth pop, which is entirely what this album is. It's nothing revolutionary or ground-breaking, and meshes with what most pop bands were doing around the time. Still, it's a decent enough listen if you don't mind that '80s sound. But there are better '80s bands. And worse ones, too.

Has Respect on it, which makes it at least 3 stars minimum. Elsewhere, the other tracks are nice and pleasant enough - no real other highlights, though. Each song isn't bad or offensive, they just kinda flow in and out without much staying power. But it's nice enough, and for the time period, you can see how it was a major album.

This is a compassionate 2/5. I get how people like it. It's an essential '90s album, and pioneered industrial rock and industrial metal as genres. It's completely valid. I just, personally, don't like it. I'm not a huge fan of albums that cause migraines. It's constantly loud, thrashing, with few moments of reprieve over the hour. The lyrics come off as hackneyed and juvenile. I recognize that this album and Trent Reznor/Nine Inch Nails are massive influences. I just won't listen to the album ever again. Painful, long, and eventually gets on your nerves.

Unfortunately, a banger. I find Morrissey as insufferable as the next person. But this is quite a good album. It's in the signature Morrissey style of delivery and lyrics, with surprisingly nice instrumental backing. Every song has a keen and humourous line or two. "First of the Gang to Die", "I Have Forgiven Jesus", and "How Could Anybody Possibly Know How I Feel" are stand-outs. This album does not reach the highs of any of the Smiths albums, but for what it's worth, this is pretty solid.

I've never been a huge world music guy, and this wasn't the greatest. Mostly forgettable, boring. I've heard other stuff, like Fela Kuti, that was much more pleasant and memorable. This just didn't hit anything notable for me. Not terrible, and again I can see how people like it. But didn't do anything for me.

Under the Bridge is one of the greatest songs of all-time. Let's get that out of the way. I like the Red Hot Chili Peppers, I really do. I like them more than a lot of people. However, do we really need SEVENTY PLUS minutes of this? The whole CD-era is full of bloated, long slogs of albums. Which is a shame, because if you pared this down to a smaller tracklist, it'd be much stronger. Lots of filler that just kinda goes in one ear and out the other. The band has one of the best rhythm sections and Frusciante is terrific. The instrumental backings are always funky and tight. But man, half these songs, Kiedis just spits inane, juvenile, half-baked rhymes. Like why. Still, some songs are quite good (Under the Bridge, Give It Away, Breaking the Girl), and the instrumentation is always good. It's just bloated.

It ain't no Breakfast in America, but it's getting close. Really solid album. "School" and "Bloody Well Right" are amazing to start off, then it kinda peters down a bit. "Asylum" kinda just drags for 6minutes, which interrupts a really nice listening flow. Anyone will recognize "Dreamer", and "Rudy" is a great deep cut. And it finishes strongly with the title track. It's a great album, but it doesn't keep it up throughout. Still, Supertramp remains underrated and deserves more acclaim in the sea of '70s classic rock artists.

You can listen to the first two songs and be able to accurately predict the next hour of the album at the 95% confidence interval. But I digress, I didn't mind it. And I've never really been a fan of reggae. It's good background music, but holds up for more astute listeners with its political/social themes. That being said, ain't no way it's an hour and six minutes long. Guys, we get it. Still, the instrumentation is tight and it has quite a clean, polished sound. I respect it, it's just longggggg.

Quite good - got some grooves. Dug the first half of the album a lot, but felt it kinda petered off in the latter half. Regardless, I've solely associated War with "Low Rider", and I was pleasantly surprised by this album. Now I've got to listen to more War...

I had no clue what to think heading into this album, and I was impressed. It started off strong and tasteful with the first couple tracks (the synth on "Definitive Gaze" was hot), then it just kinda petered down I felt. Didn't hold up on my initial thoughts. All in all, still solid. Just didn't hold up throughout.

Fun Fact! Warren Zevon does not appear on the 1001 albums. John Hiatt? Not a single one. Jackson Browne? Zero albums on this list. Taking up their spots are albums like this. Excruciatingly painful to listen to, every song blends in with each other to the point of sounding like one long annoying song for the entire tracklist. Don't give me the "psychedelic pop" or "experimental pop" crap - the album sounds awful. One of the few albums I've heard that actively hurts your ears. Like it causes pain. How. It takes a special type of album to do that. Would never play it again. It's brutal, the constant keyboard droning, unimaginative lyrics. The only way to enjoy it is if you're on a lethal amount of heroin.

Never heard of Doves, and saw the label of "rock" and "indie" - the same labels given to some of the other 2000s albums on this list which were hot garbage. So I didn't have high expectations. Nonetheless, I was surprised at this album. It simply was very good. Not an all-timer 5/5, but it was closer to it than you think. For a debut album, the production, songwriting, instrumentation, structure, etc. was all superbly done. It's an impressive album. It runs a bit lengthy, approaching an hour, but when the songs are good, the album can be as long as it wants. Some tracks did sometimes feel a bit unnecessarily long, but those moments were few. I thought it was a strong album, and the production/atmosphere throughout was cool and interesting. None of it was painful to listen to - which some of the 2000s albums picks on this list can be.

Some of the up-tempo stuff is good, but most of this is a boring slog. And it's a shame, as most other people have noted, as Adele is one of the greatest vocalists of this century so far. Very talented, very strong. Ain't it a shame that it's wasted on this snoozefest. It's not offensively bad, but it's a melodramatic bore for most of the runtime. It's too safe, simple, and sterile to be noteworthy.

You know what. Not a bad album. Don't get me wrong, it sounds very dated, inane, and doesn't seem like a significant album. But I can vouch for its inclusion. It's nothing special (which completely contradicts the previous statement), but it's also pretty good. Kinda reminds of Procol Harum and Strawberry Alarm Clock - kooky '60s bands that had quick songs with weird titles with sneaky strong structures and instrumentation.

I REALLY want to give this 5 stars. Drive-By Truckers perhaps the most underrated band of this century. "The Dirty South" and "Decoration Day" are (especially "The Dirty South") two of the greatest albums of the 2000s. Unfortunately, this is not "The Dirty South". This is "Southern Rock Opera", a too-long but tightly performed concept album about Southern culture weaved through the career of Lynyrd Skynyrd. It's ambitious, and mostly pulls it off well. Though most of the songs make more sense in its album format, there are some great individual tracks on here: "Angels and Fuselage", "Dead, Drunk and Naked", "Women Without Whiskey". I really do love the production, instrumentation, and style of the Drive-By Truckers. BUT. A) This drags on for a while. No album should be an hour and 30 minutes long. I don't care who you are, or what your ambitions are. B) The whole Lynyrd Skynyrd metanarrative kinda gets a bit ridiculous at times, with spoken word passages that makes you roll your eyes. As such, it has non-insignificant flaws. It's just too damn long. P.S. The Dirty South not being on this list is grounds for a criminal conviction.

Solid enough heavy metal album. They're an incredibly influential band on the genre, and this is one of their trademark albums. However, I just didn't find it particularly exemplary or that memorable. "Breaking the Law" is fun, but it just kinda treads the same predictable heavy metal motions until it's over. Still good, just not great.

I will, with great disappointment, stop myself from simply just commenting Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the World Around the Wo

Very repetitive album. Pretty well just kinda boring throughout. Not terrible, just not memorable in any sense of the word. No interesting melodies or musical decisions.

It's 5/5, but not without its faults. I'm a big Bob Dylan fan, but I never quite *got* Time Out of Mind. It's a lot of people's favourite album of his, and I couldn't understand why. Then it finally clicked - this album demands to be listened to at either dusk or dawn, and no time else. This isn't a 10am listen, or a mid-day 2pm listen, or a late afternoon 5pm listen. This is a 9pm with a cup of whiskey surrounded by wooden cabinetry listen. This is a 5am studying for your final exam in two hours listen - times where ruminations and meditations on one's mortality are inevitable. This album singlehandedly saved Bob Dylan from irrelevant aging Boomer icon to modern Americana gatekeeper. And it's easy to see why. Not Dark Yet is one of his greatest songs ("There's not even room enough to be anywhere...It's not dark yet, but it's getting there"), with Love Sick, Tryin' to Get to Heaven, Standing in the Doorway, and Make You Feel My Love rounding out for a very strong tracklist. The palate cleanser blues numbers can be nice - Cold Irons Bound is good - but you can't tell me Million Miles needs to be 6 minutes long. As I said, it's not without its faults. The blues tracks are simply too long. Speaking of too long, Highlands is like 16 minutes long. And you know what, I don't mind it. It's nowhere near the strength of other Bob Dylan long songs like Desolation Row, but it's kinda dumb fun that he can pull off. Dylan has mentioned he doesn't like the Lanois production on it, but I think it serves the music well and creates a unique listen compared to all of his other records. All in all, that's all to say that it's a 5/5 album. It's either one of the best albums of all-time or an unremarkable slog - completely dependent on how, where, and when you listen.

One of the best debut albums of the decade. "Do It Again", "Dirty Work" and "Reelin' in the Years" are almost overly familiar to anyone who has listened to more than an hour's worth of classic rock radio. Staples for a reason. Very well played, very well produced. I still think Steely Dan's later albums are a bit stronger, as some of the album tracks are a bit weaker and just kinda soft-rock jazzily wander. Though I will point "Brooklyn (Owes the Charmer Under Me)" as a highlight, a track or two before the album peters out disappointingly with "Turn That Heartbeat Over Again".

Fine enough R&B. Some herald this as an incredible, timeless album, and I don't see it. Like, if you're already a fan of the genre, then I can see how this may be a landmark release, but it didn't really do much for me. Parts are catchy, then it gets a bit dumb/ridiculous. The famous tracks - Killing Me Softly, Ready or Not, are great. Asides from a few tracks, most of the album sounds kinda the same with not much interesting standing out throughout the 50 minutes not taken up by Killing Me Softly/Ready or Not.

I don't wanna waste more time on this wretched record. I like a decent chunk of metal. Iron Maiden and Judas Priest have records on this list so far I've done that I've enjoyed. Slipknot brand of metal is so irritating, annoying, stupid, and moronic. No one over the age of 14 should tolerate this crap. Good news for Slipknot though - children will never stop being born, so there are always those without any frontal lobe development. As such, there will always be Slipknot fans.

A little Snoop Doggy Dogg never hurt no one. Great rap album. Funky, catchy, and would 100000000% get cancelled today. '90s "gangsta rap" is known to be fondly remembered for its progressive portrayal of the independent women, after all. It's smooth and carries by easy. Does not feel as long as it does. However, it's just a few points off of a 5/5 - some of it is kinda ridiculous and doesn't hold up over time, and I am also whiter than mashed potatoes, so some of it doesn't quite land as effectively. Still, a good album.

Let's Get It On is a classic for a reason. Other than that, this half-an-hour album just kinda sounds the same smooth, soulful, sensual style. It's good, but to me, nothing much to write home about.

Folklore is much better. Let's get that out of the way. I thought getting this album on a crisp autumn morning was thematic. Too bad it just isn't that good. And I think I've sussed it out. Her voice is too perfect. Like it hits the exact right notes and sustains them for the mathematically precise right time for indie/folky pop. Some chord progressions are interesting, but then the I/IV/iv/V hits in the second or third song and you just think to yourself "nvm it's just over". There's no imperfection or vulnerability in her vocals, most songs are the same tempo, the tracklist is too long, and the songs without features are written fairly weakily. Some people herald Taylor Swift as this generation's Bob Dylan, which is absolutely wild. The music/piano/guitar work is kinda nice throughout though, so it saves it from the lowest score. Come back to me when Swift writes a Desolation Row, Shelter From the Storm, or Mississippi.

I didn't think I was even marginally going to like it. It looked like some quirky "shoegaze" thing that only people who want to a) agree with critics or b) lie would like. I thought I was right too, with the opening drumfill of the opening drum track sounding like the band's about to pop off....and results in one of the most disappointing climaxes of my life (I will not expand). As the album wore on, it actually started sounding like actual songs and instrumentation and melody. So I don't know if that's just being psy-oped by the album, or it legitimately just got better as it wore on. But with an introduction to the album that bad, I guess the only way to go is up.

Fine enough punk music. I enjoy it, but it isn't anything crazy or something I'm gonna put on again anytime soon. The popular tracks (Basket Case, Welcome to Paradise, Longview, When I Come Around) are really the only ones that one needs to know. I'm also not a big punk guy, so while I understand this is a seminal pop-punk record, it isn't for me.

I thought I'd hate it. I didn't, but it also didn't leave any lasting mark. The same drum beat and keyboard droning would go on for what seemed like hours at a time. Occasionally there'd be a cool line or melody, but for the most part it was an uneventful, forgetful listen.

I just didn't enjoy any of this. The guy's voice is offensive to listen to. And I have a Lou Reed, a Tom Waits and a Bob Dylan album rated as 5/5 on here so far. Buddy's vocals on this album is just annoying. I don't know who told him that he should maintain the most obnoxious tremolo throughout the entire runtime, but that person should be fired. The only people who actually like it are pretentious vocal coach experts who praise it as "unique" and "tasteful" because they thrive on being contrarian. Elsewhere, the entire album is just aggressively melodramatic. It's the same pace of piano chording and unnecessarily climactic production for the most boring, yawn-inducing music. The final track sealed its 1 star fate, as "Bird Gerhl" or whatever the hell is one of the most annoying things I've heard.

Inherently, not a BAD album. Like the melodies are predictable but effective, and the production is mechanically well done with sound songwriting. But it's far from memorable. Every song sounds more or less the same, with the same piano style, with overly dramatic mid-tempo pace, and generic, uninspired lyrics. I've never been a fan of Coldplay, especially their recent stuff, but still, "Clocks" is nice.

Not a bad album. Had it in the background while playing Garry's Mod with friends, and I think that's the setting it performs in. Mindless backdrop noise to whatever you're doing that most of your brain is occupied with. The music isn't bad, but it's just so generic and bland and lacking in memorability. Like there's no real reason why your co-worker's bandcamp project should be on this list. But in all fairness, it really isn't that bad. It just kinda carries on the same "meh sure" vibe throughout.

Not bad, not great. I'm not a big hardcore or punk guy. I don't really enjoy punk much at all - but I enjoyed this album decently enough. It was more melodic and pleasuring to listen to than most other hardcore/punk-adjacent albums.

The best solo album by a Crosby, Stills, or a Nash. Neil Young farms them all, but that's besides the point. Anti-Boomerism will dismiss this as some gobbledygook, but it's quite a good album. It's bordering on 5 stars, but the weaker second side removes itself from 5 star contention. Some great stuff packed onto here, with tasteful harmonies and catchy uses of rock, blues, and gospel. "Love the One You're With", "Do for the Others", "Go Back Home", "Sit Yourself Down", and "Black Queen" are definite highlights.

Fine enough blues album. Doesn't really feel that momentous, groundbreaking, or seminal or anything. Like it's good blues - it's B.B. King. Don't you know you're riding with the king and all that. But the blues just didn't hit like it can on this album.

I'm not giving it a 1. And I understand those who think any rating above a 1 is being unrealistically generous. This is a weird album with tracks that are white noise-adjacent. It's kinda pretentious and smarmy. Still, I can somewhat respect it. Like it sucks to listen to, but interestingly?? Y'know, like it doesn't sound good, but it's intentional. So, respect.

Courtney Love, I owe you an apology. I was unfamiliar with your game.

A classic album for a reason. A terrific listen throughout. Yes, the instrumentation sounds kinda same-y as the album trucks along, but it keeps it contained and direct in the story. Arguably the first rock opera, so its influence alone could nail it at 5 stars. But it's also a great album in a vacuum. "Overture" and "Underture" are fantastic, "Christmas" has been one of my favourite The Who songs for a long time, and "Pinball Wizard" is a quintessential classic rock track. The short minute-long story driving songs make the album roll along well and tell a great story, and there's still quality rock songs in between. An ambitious story performed incredibly well.

Some reviews are I think are quite harsh. It's not a bad album. I mean, it's not a particularly strong or notable album - I don't know why it's on the list - but it's not bad. It feels kinda generic, with average songwriting, average instrumentation, and predictable style changes as the album bears on to keep your attention. It's like if your cousin who loved R.E.M started a local band four years ago who have played two shows. This is that album. There's a lot worse influences than R.E.M, and it's listenable to the point of lasting through it without any strong feelings. No negative, no positive. An album.

Incredible live jazz album. He's the Duke. Terrific playing and a great backing band. There's not much else to say. The live audience adds to the record, with the real-time hooting and hollering feeling like you're with the audience, experiencing it for the first time.

Holy what a smooth album. Some terrific soul on here mixed with some nasty funk. The production is great, the musicianship is tight, and Wonder's voice acts like another instrument that pushes the song over the top. There's not much else to say. For an album that's considered one of his weakest of his "classic period", I've enjoyed it far more than others of that era. The lack of a true hit single or timeless Stevie Wonder hit adds to its allure - it's just a strong, steady, funky album through and through.

A haunting, sparse album of the downtrodden. Recorded on a 4-track with just some guitar, harmonica, and the occasional keyboard, it was intended to be a demo tape only to be released as it stood with no other contributions. Bold, and for the most part, it works out. It's certainly a pioneering effort for more lo-fi, bedroom demo folk, which I can enjoy. That being said, the lack of differentiation between tracks is a hindrance, where it's quite same-y. And after listening to The Band's version of "Atlantic City", the original just sounds bad in comparison. I do think this album is mandatory listening - some people will love it, some people will hate it. It's a good listening exercise, anyways. Springsteen is at his best when he has the E Street Band with him, though. Born To Run, Born in the U.S.A, Tunnel of Love, and Darkness On The Edge of Town are some better Springsteen albums.

Landmark electronic album. My inner synth geek and keyboard lover found this album phenomenal. I was familiar with Kraftwerk before (I'm the operator with my pocket calculator.......beep boop bop), and this album has made me respect the group even more. With that said, I don't think it's quite a 5/5 record, I do think there are improvements to be made and don't know if it quite matches up with other timeless indisputable greatest albums of all-time, but it's quite close to a 5/5.

Very solid Boomer album. Elements of jazz, blues, orchestra, rock. It rolls along nicely and most songs are unique and notable. The blues numbers kinda roll on (the closing track does not need to be eleven minutes along), but the musicianship is superb. I can easily support its inclusion on this list - but it isn't a terrific, flawless album. Some numbers are too long, it feels rather disjointed at times between tracks, and it isn't like a groundbreaking album. But it is performed quite well.

We love Neil Young. Great album with great variety but all done in Young's distinct style. When "Heart of Gold" is one of the WEAKER songs on the album, it's a good goddamn album. The one flaw, of course, is the out-of-nowhere "There's a World", which in a vacuum is a fine enough song, but serves as a speedbump you have to slow down and slowly go over on a scenic freeway ride. However, the strength of tracks like "Out on the Weekend" (one of the most Neil Young-y Neil Young songs), "Harvest" (a classic country ballad), "Old Man" (of his all-time best), "The Needle and The Damage Done" (also one of his all-time best), "Heart of Gold" (AM radio immortality), "Alabama" (sparking a great Lynyrd Skynyrd response), "Are You Ready for the Country" (a nice catchy rocker), "A Man Needs a Maid" (which, looking past the title, has grown on me), and "Words (Between the Lines of Age)" (a great album closer) keep the album as a must-hear classic.

Solid enough album. Had some good grooves, but that's about it. Mayfield is rightly regarded fairly high, which I totally get, but this album just kinda felt good, not great, and not fantastic. It's a good 3/5, not a meh 3/5.

Incredibly well-performed jazz album. Some of the best bass playing I've ever heard in any genre. The drumming was impeccable as well. The piano was mostly tasteful. Still, I felt the album didn't go to the highest gear it could've. While it was very solid, it didn't reach the highs it seemed it could, and stayed as very respectable dinner music.

Who knew the sitar could bang so hard? Sitar cover of Jumpin' Jack Flash goes harder than it has any right to, and Light My Fire isn't far behind. The other tracks on the album are quite strong, with very tasteful playing. The sitar just sounds so cool. The only way someone wouldn't think this album is enjoyable is if they don't like the sitar as a sound. Which be a mighty shame, as it is a very cool instrument.

I sit here writing this, trying to gauge whether it's a strong 4 stars or worthy of the full 5/5. I'm going for the full five stars. Such an easy, relaxing, calm album. Classic covers from the Great American Songbook performed perfectly. Fits a rainy day or a snowy night. Fits a Sunday morning drive or a 5pm commute. Truly a great album. Nelson's almost conversational singing brings ease and familiarity. Doesn't try to outshine or impress, but settles into the song with warmth. The instrumentation, everything from the guitar to the orchestra, is really tasteful. A great country album, and rightly regarded as one of the best.