1001 Albums Summary

I appreciate some of the Rolling Stones' best-known songs, but I've never been a fan. I tried to approach this album with fresh ears: it seemed moderately stylistically coherent, but unconvincing, the vocals annoying, I fidgeted as it trundled along in background. I concluded it is seven fillers, bookended by two iconic songs. Gimme Shelter and You Can't Always Get What You Want are imperfect but interesting songs, worthy of many a listen - without them, the album would be a 1, with them I give it a 2.

I wanted to appreciate this album (which I'd checked out previously without "getting it") - I gave it a couple of listens, but still felt most of it is too cool to engage me. I far prefer the energy and warmth (together with interesting chords, rhythms etc) of The Royal Scam. The title track is "well made" but doesn't really attract me to play it again. Same for most of the other tracks. One stand-out, I like Peg from start to finish (faster tempo, nice funky riffs and hooks) - chuffed to realise this was the song heavily sampled for Eye Know - interesting guitar solo, slapping bass - I'll listen to that song again, but without the rest of the album. Since each song in isolation is at least moderately interesting - I give the album as a whole a 3 rather than a 2.

I'd not been particularly interested in this album on previous glances, but I paid attention this time, and really enjoyed and appreciated it. There's a lot to attend to, in the music, arrangements, lyrics - it's intriguingly complex, without being deliberately difficult - I have strong impression it will repay repeated listens. There's a pleasing range of styles - one might skip particular tracks depending on mood, but none seem out of place. No-one should be put off by reputation as 'jazzy'. It's a "sit quietly and listen" album - I warmly recommend it in that space.

This was better than I had expected - quite rocky guitar tones, nice playing, particularly good soloing. The approaches to blues structure held my attention for the first few songs. (Lyrics repeating first line of a verse builds expectation for the twist - but then, they didn't deliver any great messages.) But then, the songs were pretty samey - had to wait till track 5 (Hot, Blue and Righteous) for a change of pace and it was a dud. So, why am I listening to this as an album? Then thinking the better test might be, if I walked in on some live band and these songs were their performance. I would have stuck round (more for the five piece band, counting overdubs, than notional three-piece with only single guitar line on top of much less interesting bass) - maybe I would have strolled out at track 9 (Sheik) as that was boring filler. La Grange was the most appealing musically (particularly hot solo) but when I focus on the lyrics it's yuck.

The instrumental components are kinda listenable (though mostly "why bother", verging on tedious/fatuous) but the vocals (lead and backing) are wildly off-putting, and the lyrics (unintelligible from audio, foolishly I looked them up) are shit). Too many songs I had to skip on first listen (couldn't make other people in the room put up with them), and found painfully tedious on second attempt. 1/10 is as low as my scale goes. (I hope the generator doesn't ask me to listen to anything worse than this ... fingers crossed.)

Well-made album I hadn’t heard before, the songs were congruent (recognisably Depeche Mode) but didn't seem repetitive, the patterns all sounded fresh (drums might have been same-y but didn't grate), some interesting harmonic progressions. Mood was rather melancholy but not forced. No particular song hit me as catchy or obvious hit single - intrigued to learn after listening that this was breakout period for the band. I could listen again without complaint - but not compelling. 8/10

Songs I don't recall hearing before but recognisably U2 (the voice, the guitar technique, simple but reasonably effective chord structures). Rich production (keyboards, overdubs, textures) - clearly a studio album. Lyrics seem a bit "oh I need to write some lyrics, they should be a bit catchy and a bit mysterious". 7/10

This is an incredible album: not just a set of individually-satisfying songs ("heart-wrenching melodies" with "over-the-top arrangements" as two critics said), but a concept album, with public history themes, also engaging with Stevens' private history. Prolific/skilful singer-songwriter in full flight, tackling big subjects with engaging and challenging lyrics, looping catchy harmonies, satisfying orchestrations, great though apparently "lo-fi" production (home recording and Pro Tools), passionate songs, extensive dynamic range. Many standout songs. In contrast to what I know of his other albums, this is largely acoustic instrumentation, I have no problem with that. 10 (or more) out of 10 :-)

I didn't know this band. (I had heard Brimful of Asha, music seemed so slight that I was not at all motivated to find out what it was about.) So I read a bit before listening, then found the album more pleasant than I had expected. Some fun glitchy riffs, danceable old school acoustic funk loops, punk style simplicity (reminded me of Happy Mondays), a bit of dub was nice; some of it was just inoffensive background music (ie couldn't hold sustained attention). Feeling generous towards the good vibes, I'll say Good rather than just Okay. My favourite song: Candyman.

I didn't take Duran Duran seriously when this was released. But there's lots to like here - solid rhythm section (bass is often funky), heaps of kybds, band playing as a unit. I/m reminded what a breath of fresh air everything more or less New Romantic was, after punk - you could dance with a smile instead of a scowl. The lyrics of Duran Duran were and are of not much interest - but the music stands up okay. Feeling generous again, I'll rate as Good rather than Okay. My favourite song: My Own Way.

I'd never have thought of putting on a whole album of Soundgarden (less attractive than Nirvana or RATM). Unappealing opening (first 2 tracks too slow and repetitive for my taste) but it got better. Tracks 7-9 (Black Hole Sun, Spoonman, Limo Wreck) make an exciting three-in-a-row. By the end of the album, I was impressed with strength/range of lead vocals (carried the words well) and variety of playing styles, as well as sheer grunge and grunt. But still very same-y. It's on the high side of 'Okay': 6/10. Favourite track: Limo Wreck.

Disco! For a whole album?? I remember dancing to "We Are Family", but never played the whole album. The songs are very repetitive, little content. Hmm, that guitar, is it Nile Rodgers? Why yes it is! But then - reading Wikipedia makes me wonder, should this really be known as a Sister Sledge album, or what?? Wikipedia says "Edwards and Rodgers would only show the songs to Sister Sledge once the sisters were in front of the studio microphones." - eeeeuuuuwwww!!!!! I wonder how the sisters felt about that! Makes the album seem like product just for the sake of $$. I rate it Poor (3/10).

I never listened to Can before. (Negative reputation outpaced listening experience?) Track 1 is great, would be fine as a contemporary recording (I'd be intrigued they didn't turn up volume/distortion) - good drumming, high energy, solid structures, fascinating. So I go read Wikipedia: "... Czukay editing the band's long jams into structured songs"?!?!? The following tracks (on disc 1) are funky and interesting - jazzy, negligible clangers - were they brilliant jammers, or is it all down to brilliant editing? (But he was only editing two-track tapes!) Then, disc 2 was tougher going, but quite listenable (after a break). In fact Aumgn grew on me (over three listens). Familiar curiosity from a groundling - did they have a plan for a given track, or how 'randomly' throw stuff in? Anyway, disc 1 is 8/10, overall 7/10.

I don't mind chamber folk, but found most of this album somewhat tedious. I'm mildly curious how it came to be made (what were those involved thinking, phenomenon of producer changing tracks without involvement from nominal artiste) and why/how did it get more famous over time. Track 3 would be more interesting if no strings/flutes, just guitar organ vox. Track 5 is already more interesting than others - sparse, folk with noise, much better dynamic range. In some other tracks I was somewhat engaged by Larry Fallon's string/flute arrangements - while feeling bit repelled at betrayal of artiste whose album it supposedly was. Overall 3/10.

I knew of Cocteau Twins but hadn't consciously listened to any. I expected more ethereal; I understand this is considered their more poppy/accessible album. It grew on me with repeated listens. (First time through, I listened via ear-buds, but these pieces really don't work that way - it's all about textures, so headphones or other hi-fidelity essential.) Overall it's Good without any knockout attributes, 7/10.

Three deservedly-famous songs, others reasonably catchy on first hearing, others tedious like middle of the road radio, and some with offensive lyrics/production: Jamaica Jerk-Off in particular, I also don't like Dirty Little Girl. Maybe 'Sir' 'Elton John' (and Taupin) are just smug gits who happen to have written some good songs. (At first I used past tense, but he's not dead yet - maybe he'll apologise for these songs before he goes? Taupin apparently told Rolling Stone he couldn't remember writing Jamaica Jerk-Off - did he say "gee it's embarassing, I apologise"? I can't tell because I don't subscribe to Rolling Smugness.) 3/10

Woohoo! Some songs here I already knew, are FIRE: 'Respect' is the stand-out. Some songs I didn't know, turn out to be mighty fine, eg 'Drown In My Own Tears'. Nothing here I don't like. 10/10 :-)

As Trouser Press apparently said, "cornball retro-moronic". If they were teenagers playing this stuff at my local pub, I'd say "okay they can play ... but why are they choosing to play this rubbish? and could the singer not find a better role model?" Will I ever choose to play this album for myself? No, never again. 1/10

Alright! Songs etched in my brain from long ago. The style, structures, guitar/bass/drums are FINE. Some lyrics are cool, some I could do without (eg Beat On The Brat). I was going to say the vocals are the weak point, but they are of course fully Ramones vocals, I'm reminded part of the point was not trying to be eg Ronnie James Dio. Now, what about the replay test? Because I never put this album on for myself. But, I always smile when I hear one of the tunes - and I could imagine putting it on for a road trip. So, it's GOOD. 8/10

Hadn't heard this before, found it very different from things I normally listen to, and very interesting, as well as pleasant/hypnotic. Intriguing trying to work out "what I was hearing", so I read Wikipedia etc. I recommend the review at https://www.theguardian.com/music/2006/jul/14/worldmusic.shopping to help appreciate the album in context. Significant that the album combines traditional aspects and more varied, also that Ali Farka Touré considered it his best. Interesting comments in that article about the lyrics - I had a quick try but no success so far finding lyrics for songs other than Savane. Fortunately the music works for me even when I don't understand the words. Rating was tricky, I decided it's 9/10 Quite Wonderful (regardless that it functions rather differently from other albums I've put at that level).

Kraftwerk! I didn't listen to this when it came out. 1978 seems early for "electro-pop". It's got the repetition and inoffensiveness of pop, but I did not perceive the zing and zip I associate with electro (thinking Street Sounds compilation albums). Is there something bad about this album? No. But will I play it again? No. It's OKAY. 5/10.

Hmm. There are parts I liked a lot, but also extended passages that left me stone cold - so it just doesn't work for me as an album. It might have been fantastic for some people, it's interesting that it came out in 1969, but it just doesn't work for me. 3/10.

Never heard of this band, so I had a quick read - some ppl don't like David Berman's voice? Start listening - I don't mind his voice, I wouldn't say Tom Waits, I think of Lou Reed and maybe Bob Dylan? "I know there's a tune, but I couldn't be arsed singing it" - maybe those singers want to be more like spoken? Anyway the guitar lines are often really nice (thumbs up for that) - and the lyrics are cool (interesting and not just weird). So it's good. Not rushing to hear the rest of discography. 7/10

Never listened to this before. First listen was as background, music is okay, I gather I ought to pay attention to the lyrics. So I go through again trying to do that. I could never have understood these just listening by myself or talking with friends, maybe before internet we needed music journalism to help explain? (Comparisons here with non-obvious lyrical depths of Sufjan Stevens?) First song, the music doesn't attract me, the lyrics subject is ick, unfavourable comparison with Sufjan's John Wayne Gacy, Jr. Second song, Atlantic City, I can't get the lyrics, discussion at SongMeanings.com was more helpful (as non-American I could never have worked out that stuff from just listening to the song). Overall: I'm just not that interested, don't think I'll come back to persevere. It's Okay, not much Bad about it - 6/10. (Silly side note, when the album finishes, my streaming service didn't go on to other Springsteen songs, it jumped to Geese? Which maybe says something about my listening tastes, but for example when I was listening to Ali Farka Touré it went on to his collab with Ry Cooder, not straight to Geese :-) But then today after two Geese songs it went to Elton John, frown - I listened to one of his albums recently, played some songs more than once, doesn't mean he's my new fave!)

Pretty tedious, even bloated. Riffs aren't that good, some of the wordsmithing is a bit interesting but swaggering lothario singing about rock touring lifestyle is not appealing. This might be better than some other stadium rock of the era, that is very faint praise. I knew Walk This Way because of the cross-over, Rick Rubin had good intuition and remarkable ability to deliver, his version punches a lot harder than the original on this album. Could hardly wait for this to be over. (Favourite song: No More No More.) 1/10

Pleasant, though not as polished as the Eagles' songs I know best. Take It Easy is a strong start, no other song matches it. If I knew someone who could pick double-time banjo, and we could sing four-part harmonies, I might like to play something like this. It's Good - 7/10.

A band I'd heard of, and had an impression of what it might sound like, but never sat down and listened to. (I saw '2013' as year of release, and had no idea of chronology - didn't know this was released 20 yrs after their previous album - I've read more since then.) In summary I find the sounds/styles generally not unappealing, but some of the songs are misses, lightweight and/or tedious. Favourite song: "nothing is" (one-chord minimalism actually effective :-). Overall I'd say it's Okay, 6/10.

I knew Sultans of Swing when it came out, catchy but wasn't my type of thing. Pleasantly surprised and kinda impressed by this album: the lead guitar technique and lines are exquisite. (As for the rest of band, they play together neatly, but I find the chord structures, drumming and bass playing to be so-so...) I don't mind the singing but not a fan, I can see the Dylan comparison - lyrics didn't jump out, nothing about the singing attracted me to pay attention to them ... Was interested to learn that in 1978 Dire Straits toured as opening band for Talking Heads?! Anyway, it's good craft, I'll call it Good, 7/10.

Soul music! Looking at the list I see some songs I already know, some I don't. Hit play, quickly pick up on great singing, good playing, good tunes, great arrangements and production (Salaam Remi and Mark Ronson, mmm). Lyrics quite wild! I start reading more widely - oh dear - I knew she had AOD problems, didn't know it was that bad ... That sadness is now hanging over this record for me ... doesn't make the music any worse, but kills my excitement for the "wild vibe" - while leaving the tensions as mesmerising as ever. Went back for extra listens, particularly the songs I found most interesting - some very striking packages of music, lyrics, delivery, eg Tears Dry On Their Own. My appreciation deepens. Some songs are so-so, but overall it's Quite Wonderful, 9/10.

Never listened to a Sinatra album before. Playing this through, I was struck that he could certainly sing, but I didn't find these songs very interesting. So, I read some Wikipedia etc, re the album and Sinatra generally. I had had a strong impression from the Godfather character, I feel after more reading that was not probably not inaccurate take on the guy at level of character, eg unattractive aspects of Italian-American machismo. What about the album? I was interested by a comment that it had a broader emotional palette than was commonly 'acceptable' for mainstream men at the time. So there's points of interest, should I go back and listen to it some more? Well, my mind shies away (it just wants to hear more of the excellent soul album I had the day before). But, I do recognise some quality in this Sinatra album. So it's Okay (Not Good), 4/10.

I have heard these songs quite a few times over the years. Six songs that are very good (I am happy to hear them and feel warmly about them, but I find myself reluctant to call them great); five good songs; one ring-in that is kinda okay musically but rubbish lyrically (Smackwater Jack). Lyrics generally 'work' but not deep poetry. Overall she's a gifted songwriter, good arrangements, nice voice and piano playing :-) 8/10

So, glam rock eh? Jeepster made a big impact on me when I first heard it (as a pre-teen). Later there was Gary Glitter - magnetic/appalling at the same time, then as we learned more about him his music became repugnant, unplayable, and besmirched the simplistic side of glam rock generally. (Was the simplicity just manipulation of teenie purchasing power?) Anyway, this album: T.Rex's 7th?? And it was very popular??? I'll grant that Bolan had a knack of getting down super simple verse/chorus hooks with minimal lyrics, and a lot of self-confidence to keep churning songs out. But Metal Guru and Telegram Sam seem like someone is taking the piss. And there are a few creepy aspects: the backing vocals almost always one octave up, over unison bass and guitar, is a bit psycho; the lyric fetish re cars (Jaguar, Buick, Cadillac) is yuck. (On the other hand, I will credit the two note guitar solo in Baby Boomerang, that was art ahead of its time.) I wondered whether Bolan might turn out to also be certified or probable creep - apparently is nothing on the internet to say he was a predator - but his fortune "variously estimated at between £20 and £30 million" was as of 2022 locked in a trust, not accessible to his son, hmm. I'm pretty sure life is too short for me to ever bother playing through the album again, so I'll say it's Poor, 3/10.

Solidly bossa nova - cool and smooth jazz. Nice clear sound, quite pleasant to listen to. Amazing that this was all recorded in one day - apparently in just three hours - presumably largely improvised solos. Percussion just goes and goes, imperturbably. Would I play it again? Yes - but only as background music. Does any of it rock my world? Not in the slightest. So, it's Okay (not bad) ie 6/10.

I had a tape of Sabbath's second album back in the day, but never heard this one. I was interested when track 1 (title track) came on - impressed that four guys from Birmingham came up with this style, and impressed that the album was recorded in one day just by playing through their live set. But, as has been said by others,, the album gets weaker into the second side - 'Warning' in particular is half-baked and bloated, I think not good enough to be on any record. After a bit more listening and reflection, I concluded this album showed potential (interesting guitar tone, Osbourne may have been a creep but could sing, etc), but is mostly unsatisfying rather than satisfying. It's Pretty Poor, 3/10.

New album for me. (I had a later Jack White solo album, but no White Stripes albums.) Right from the first song I found it exciting. Seems like virtually all are fine songs, a mix of styles and energy levels but dominant impression is a punk tradition. (Reading about the album I see that it's often referred to as "garage rock", okay.) I liked the really nice (but not flashy!) guitar playing, neat use of overdubs (not too much). Songs didn't sound same-y even though using limited sonic palette - effective variety in riffs and feels. I think I will probably replay this over time as a straight through album. I may like it even better as I get to know the songs/lyrics better. As of today, I rate it Very Good, 8/10 :-)

One of my favourite albums! How to describe? Wikipedia hedges with "heavy rock / glam rock"; I can't see this as "glam rock" (because very little musically in common with T.Rex or Gary Glitter), I'd say "heavy rock / camp cabaret", because there's super-high drama across a broad emotional range, including heavy rock and pomp and mawkish close-up sentiment. (Wikipedia also brings me heaps of other info I hadn't come across before, v v interesting to a fan :-) If/when I write a book about this album, there’ll definitely be a chapter about the cover. There’s a lot that could be said about just the front cover image and all its signifiers, but, moving right along: I could rave about each of the songs - almost all 10/10. Each instant knows where it's going, and is arranged and performed for maximum impact - the emotional journey is well managed - a tour de force!! It's Incredibly Wonderful, 10/10 :-)

I'd not heard of this band or album. On first play-through, I couldn't get it: instruments playing busily (but to what purposes?), lyrics delivered strangely, did nothing for me. I went to Wikipedia, and what I read about Arthur Lee put me off, eg "Lee envisioned Forever Changes as a lament to his memory". Somehow got through the album. I came back the next day, in a more positive state of mind, to give it a second listen. I'm now more open to the feel of some of the songs. I still question whether the lyrics are relatively coherent (for a given song), like a reasonably well-constructed poem, or are they in some cases just assemblages of potentially catchy but only weakly-related phrases. (This phenomenon is of course by no means not unique to Love :-) I have noted that Genius annotations don't shed much light on these songs. Overall, I'll now say this album is on the low side of Okay, 4/10.

I knew only two of these songs (the very well-known ones). The riffing is semi-decent (crunchy texture), but there are almost no off-beat rhythms, why is it so square? And I'm soon tired of the vocal style - I am quite open to cathartic music, but this is almost always shouty/angry, boring. So, Nothing Else Matters is great (better dynamic range), some other songs could be okay as one-off workout songs, but I wouldn't play this again as an album. I will keep choosing heavy rock / metal (eg Living Colour, Agriculture) that doesn't have this tedious shouty tone. Feeling generous, I say it's "Good and Bad", 5/10.

Ray Price wasn't on my radar, I didn't know what to expect, but I've always had a soft spot for steel guitars sliding through comfortable chord sequences, and honky tonk chord structures turn out to be deep in my bones, so I liked this album! Singing is good - lyrics are tolerable for their period and varied - I like the lush strings, and also the country solo violin segments. The introduction is unusual, at first I thought it might be hokey, but decided it's not, because it's not pretending to be speaking to listener conversationally, it's very much the band leader speaking to audience at start of a show - ie the album listener should think of it as like a show, but make themselves even more comfortable. Favourite song: Night Life (the chord sequences and slide have a little bit of jazz in them so yum). Overall, it's Good, 7/10.

Dire Straits' fifth studio album. I was recently assigned their first album – found it better than I had expected. This one is what I had been expecting (or even worse). A 'polished' sound (not one but two keyboard players), but astoundingly bland arrangements, apparently aiming for middle of the road inoffensive put you to sleep. Money for Nothing does have a crunchy guitar line, but bass and drums are boring as batshit, and the chorus and video still offend me (lyricist won the music industry lottery, but outraged at idea he doesn't have to work for his money – digs at blue collar workers who happen to be distributing microwaves and TVs – what, lyricist doesn't use those products?). I kept hoping for something I could like. Your Latest Trick is more engaging – until vocals start. Why Worry, I would like if the plodding drums were just left out. One World has a bit of slap bass, which does lift the vibe, but not enough to get this album above Really Poor, 2/10.

Didn't know the album. Always been open to hip hop, but not listened super-widely, so interested to focus on a Wu-Tang album. I like RZA's production style; I'm open to Method Man's rapping. Bring the Pain is interesting, I'm reading the lyrics, then oh dear, what's this at the end of the song? "So fuck the ho, fuck the ho". Major turn-off. (I later look at Genius, that's a mistake - read about Wu-Tang's "torture skit", that's a big nup.) Dutifully (doubtfully?) I keep listening. The track Method Man at least gives me the phrase "southpaw style", as sampled by some dubstep thing long ago, that's mildly nice. Anyway, I have no time for any man that chucks in a "fuck the ho" for the male bonding or whatever it's supposed to be, youse can fuck right off. I will go find some positive hip hop (Koolism for the win). 1/10.

Didn't know what to expect, snuck a look at Wikipedia, okay maybe I know blues rock / "Southern rock". First two tracks were very disappointing, very meh. Track 3 (Stormy Monday) by contrast was very enjoyable and satisfying - slow blues with great jazz feels, rocking guitar solo working well with tight band, soul feel in the vocals, an excellent package. Tracks 4-5 not so memorable. Tracks 6 and 7, the extended jams, were high points, particularly guitar solo work in In Memory of Elizabeth Reed. So there is some great stuff here, that I would play again, but I would not want to have to sit through first two tracks again. So I won't say the album as a whole is Good, I'll say it's Not Bad, 6/10.

Well! I didn't know this existed, but it has easily become my favourite Metallica album! The symphonic arrangements are tastefully done, and lift the complexity and emotional engagement of every track; the mixes are well done, with varied balance/prominence of components.. The original Call of Ktulu, for example, used to be overblown, an okay riff or two (hardly outweighing the irritation of mis-spelt title), but not going anywhere interesting or not quickly enough (just head-banging for longer than I liked). The new version by contrast makes a lot more out of the chord sequences and overall development of the song. So I am much happier with these versions of the songs I already knew, and happy to listen to new songs. It's Pretty Wonderful, 9/10!!

I know of this band (guitarist) but never listened to more than one song in a row. So off for a bit of a Wikipedia read. David Lee Roth rewarded roadies $25 for every woman who came to him wearing a pass with the relevant roadie's initials on it? Charming. Runnin' With the Devil: hey boys and girls, I'm naughty!! My id has free rein, fair warning!! "all I've got I had to steal", o Rly? "I'm not some rich brat, don't worry about my dad the opthalmologist! Yeah I saw a psychiatrist and went to a horse ranch for troubled teens, didn't every spoilt LA brat??" Eruption: I hear you like icing on your cake? How about a big steaming bowl of frosting with no cake, dig in Yankee fatso. Tweedle weedle going nowhere. You Really Got Me: not sure about this. Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love: aww, apparently this song sounds like we just want to dominate women, so I guess we didn't mean it? I'm the One: well I could listen to this okay, it has some oomph, and does un hommage to doo-wop, this is my fave track so far. Jamie's Cryin': oh, a date rape song, lovely :-) Feel Your Love Tonight: another rape song ("I'm sorry, honey, if I took you just a little too far"), don't worry, I told the guys in the bar you are hot (and I am one of the Big Boys now). Little Dreamer: actually a decent riff and harmony vox. Intriguingly, zero interps volunteered as yet on Genius - I won't be the first. Ice Cream Man: not as good as Roth seems to think. On Fire: "Turn your radios on / I'll appear right there .... Lay your bodies down / I'm in your beds" - or next best thing is queue up at stage door, plse. Anyway, it's clearly Good and (very) Bad - 5/10. (Is that too generous for these schmucks? I do recognise that the guitar tone and tech were way influential. I'd just rather listen to music by grown-ups who have got over any testosterone high.)

Country rock is a thing, this album may have been influential, but it is is not appealing to me as a 'country rock album'. It sounds more like a collection of demos - band members knew the songs, including structures, but hadn't fully settled on who was playing what when. So the pedal steel for example has some striking lines, but they don't gel with what the rest of band is doing. A musically-knowledgeable friend was keen on Gram Parsons when I was 19 but I can't work out what record we listened to. I read a bit about his life: trust fund and drugs, not a happy tale. Had a look at the lyrics of "Hippie Boy", that is a painful embarassment. Overall it's Pretty Poor (3/10).

The music industry in '70s USA must have been quite something. So much wealth flowing through the economy, so many people buying records, the big record companies could fund singer-songwriters like Schmilsson to release multiple records, even ones with cry-for-help cover pics like this one. Who is he again? Oh yeah, he's the "Without You" one. (Not "Everything I Own", that was Bread, completely different!). The first two songs I Liked (ie enough to play again) were Without You, and Let the Good Times Roll, ie the first two songs written by others. (Coconut was kinda interesting, but I'm gonna need a ten foot pole to engage with anything sung in a "Caribbean accent" by a North American etc.) But then Jump Into The Fire was pretty interesting! So what do I say overall? The album is not uninteresting - the multi-tracking vocals is decent and apparently was kinda path-breaking. So I'll say Not Bad, 6/10.

Backing tracks are definitely interesting, singing is nice, but the rap lyrics are mostly shallow, tedious, witless - so not my scene. Overall it's Okay - 5/10.

I had heard of X, but somehow never listened to any. Really really liking this album - every song appeals to me on first listen or is at least very interesting: good riffs, structures, variety; very good singing (great tone/energy), lyrics not offputting! Mildly wondering how to describe it: definitely some punk vibe "but the guitarist can play" (and energy without aggression); I can hear a little rockabilly, but not too much; a bit reminiscent of no wave. "Punk rock" always seemed like a label used by people who weren't into it, but I get that it may be the best label here. It's Quite Wonderful, 9/10.

I am not worthy to review this record, but today, that is my task. I am not a Beatles fanatic, but I was excited to see this cover pop up. In listening through, I was struck more than I'd expected – because of the amount of 60's music I've listened to since starting the project. Songs I already thought were amazing, stand out more than ever, as incredible achievements for their time. I felt like reading more – Wikipedia article is interesting but sad – life is short and the project's clock is ticking. Come Together: stupendous. (Evokes Lennon's later solo work.) Something: incredible. Yearning, reaching, not quite getting there? Maxwell's Silver Hammer: troublesome, I don't like 3:27 of disjunct between oom-pah nonchalance and story of violence. (Lyrics/music don't develop after the reveal in first chorus.) Oh! Darling: in isolation, seemed inconsequential, but in context, it works. Octopus's Garden: I always thought was light relief, but felt great in context. I Want You (She's So Heavy): stupendous. Audacious but it gets there. (Me in 1969: “what is that behind the band, how did they make that noise?”) Here Comes The Sun: okay. Because: in isolation, seemed like cod psychedelia, but in context it's bold and authentic. “The Long One”. You Never Give Me Your Money: this band could definitely play. Sun King: never heard it before, but style is familiar, must have been influential. (Tame Impala??) Mean Mr Mustard: somewhat know the music, no idea what it's about, wowed by fudgey bass line, time signature trick, suddenly it's over? Polythene Pam: didn't realise how creative this mix. (Queen?!) She Came In Through The Bathroom Window: well put together, lyrics intriguing. Golden Slumbers: gutsy singing, great orchestration. Carry That Weight: I always thought was part of one song with Golden Slumbers, maybe it's inseparable. The End: drum solo? Rhythm guitar that rocks out. Lead solo(s) – which I didn't realise were traded – Hendrix had already arrived in London, so work cut out for guitarists – recorded live in one take?!? Famous closing phrase – sounds like Yes? Her Majesty: what? They can spin out joke ditties, cutting off in the middle of a bar is striking, but I don't get it as a closer. Overall: a lot to think about. Other bands I am reminded of: Genesis? Geese?? Clearly incredibly influential. Worthy of many a listen. Not perfect, but 10/10.

Never listened to much Kinks, maybe they're significant, let's see. Check Wikipedia: concept album, okay. Track 1, Victoria: I know this! Covered by Jesus Jones on their WONDERFUL album Doubt :-) Songs roll on, they're actually pretty catchy! Vocals are not high in the mix, so lyrics are not impinging on my mind, so be it. Wait, there is a song called 'Australia'? Read the lyrics - it's actually not a bad take on the image of Australia promoted in the UK (from Victorian era until time of the album, when the Davies' brother-in-law Arthur actually came to Australia as a "ten pound Pom"). Overall, I'd say it's well-made and entertaining, not compelling to listen again but if someone (miraculously) suggested putting it on I wouldn't mind at all, so I'll (generously) call it Good, 7/10.

Ooh, stadium rock - before they hit the stadiums? We had a U2 "early big hits" compilation at our house but I don't know this album. I look at Wikipedia, not least so I can see what genre to put in my personal spreadsheet: the album page calls it "post-punk"?!? Let's give it a listen. Sunday Bloody Sunday, big tick. Then something unmemorable. (I go back next day and listen closely - it's got production values, but IMNSHO embarrassingly shallow/trite content.) Then New Year's Day - one of my very favourite U2 songs :-) Then "Like a Song...", I hadn't heard before, okay this could be called post-punk (and it's not totally bad - a 'good' voice with shitty lyrics oh well :-) Some other songs I listen to while I'm cooking, could hardly be bothered to play again. But I do, the next day - my body is keeping time - the musical pieces are passable but the lyrics let the music down? "40", I'm interested enough first time through to check the lyrics, but wow, mystic opacity, no thanks. In summary, it's two great songs, and some others that chug along. It's Not Bad, 6/10.

Never heard of them! Quick read of Wikipedia, I'm not optimistic. Start listening - actually, this sounds okay. (And yes, I do recognise Golden Skans.) Hey - it's actually good! In fact: I dig it!! Well-played, toe-tapping. Not sure about the overall concept-album aspect: the 'theme' is something to think about while listening, like "program notes", but nothing of the theme came through for me from just listening or looking at lyrics. Anyway, in summary it is indeed Good - 7/10.

Excellent, an album recently recommended to me in r/1001AlbumsGenerator. Weird that I've listened to Rumours so many times (playing through from start to finish) but never touched Tusk - weird but consistent with my whole "one album is enough to focus on" phenomenon. Quick look at Wikipedia - can I really credit that this album was influenced by post-punk, when it was released in 1979?? I would have said new wave was still in full swing at that time, I would have thought some way before post-punk. But TIL Gang of Four's Entertainment! was released in September 1979 - it's my listening taste that lagged a little. Wikipedia article says Lindsay Buckingham was "infatuated with bands such as Talking Heads"?? Anyway, back to Fleetwood Mac. Track 1 is nice. But production quickly goes sparse, and then musical inspiration and judgement go AWOL. By the second half of side 2, it's dragging ... (Some of the tracks are not unpleasant ....) In summary, it's a Mix of Good and Bad, 5/10.

Seen the cover graphic, never listened to the album: if I wanted EDM, I wasn't looking to Madonna for it. Look at the song list, I don't know any. ("Top 5 hits" or not - I wasn't following pop/sales charts.) What is the album like? "Just like EDM, only poppy!!" I have slight anticipatory prejudice against the degree of polish - but the production and arrangements really are all well done, credit to William Orbit's skills I assume. So in what sense is it a Madonna album, should it be called a Madonna/Orbit album? (He seems to get writing credit on every track - along with at least Madonna, and up to four other writers per song ...) 'Presumably' Madonna was involved in sound design choices ... She 'presumably' had a lot to do with lyrics? She doubtless did the singing - voice is of course not injected raw into the mix, it was maybe strengthened by training for Evita, it was certainly produced into as much depth and body as money could buy... Any songs stand out? Shanti/Ashtangi is interesting but yoga-ish lyrics unintelligible to 'average' listener, simply connote exoticism, eurk. (Personally I like yoga, but IMHO any 'magic' is in the practice, not recital of the words.) 'Frozen' is entertaining (eye candy video). How to rate overall? Orbit's work is neat, but overall still pretty meh. Feeling generous after some re-listen with headphones, I'll say it's "Good", 7/10.

Never heard of them, looks grim, glance at Wikipedia, hit play. Summertime Blues I know, but what is this version?? Not a good start. (As per some other groups' tracks, if they were teenagers rather than lank-haired 20-somethings, I would feel more indulgent ...) Rock Me Baby: now that is blues I can get around. Doctor Please: actually quite heavy - live feel. (Rhythm section hold the pulse while lead guitar rocks out quite personally.) The style and elements are reminiscent of many other artists - contemporaries who probably had shared tastes (like Janis Joplin vocals) or later groups who were perhaps influenced by this (early UFO live). Parchment Farm: yuck lyrics. "I've been sitting over here on Parchment Farm - Ain't ever done nobody no wrong - Oh Lord, I believe I'll be here for the rest of my life - All I did was shoot my wife - She was no good". Apparently it's a cover of a blues song, that's no excuse, fuck off with that, in the bin. It's Bad (and not in an LL Cool J way), 1/10.

I got a cassette of this soon after it was released, and listened to it many, many times. I have always been in awe at the precision and elegance of the arrangements - exquisite lead guitar work, lots of lovely keyboard work, everything fitting near-perfectly together. (The sound now makes me think of Steely Dan - in a good way :-) Amazing to me that Clover (uncredited backing band) apparently worked their parts out in just a few rehearsal sessions with Costello [McManus]. Song after song are so musically bright, lyrically charged. My favourite song used to be Mystery Dance (ultimate punk sexual tension song), these days I just love them all to bits!! It's Incredibly Wonderful, 10/10.

HOLY FUCK!! Who knew two guys "in recovery" (while still behaving quite naughtily) could put together such an album!! It's Quite Wonderful, 9/10. (Why do I like it? Energy - tunes - arrangements. Punk, without threat/aura of violence.) (Why didn't I give it 10/10? Doesn't quite reach all the places like eg Sufjan Stevens does - I'm a bit of a hard marker, got to keep something in reserve.)

I can kinda relate to this - if I can get into a Happy Mondays kinda vibe. (And suspend critical faculties: song '5/4' starts with a 5/4 guitar riff, but then puts 4/4 drums against that?) Small bonus point though for use of a melodica on a "dub-ish" album, yay! (Ersatz dub for pop people?) I find instrumental arrangements/production is often quite engaging, but the singing is generally a let-down. (Particularly when the singer tries to be serious, oh dear...) Overall, I'll say it's Good and Bad, 5/10. Also, I want to say, even though it doesn't exactly pertain to the original album: the idea that there is a "20th Anniversary super deluxe vinyl boxset" containing EIGHT different LPs is quite shocking to me. One cheeky, casual party album, gets turned into a bloated cash cow stretched over EIGHT discs? Emblematic that we can't have nice things / can't have a natural world any more / fall of Western civilisation - right there.

I do not know "the Buck Owens story" (if any, lol) - I am coming at this "totally uninformed" ("blank slate baby, Descartes me as you will"). "Tiger by the Tail - clean mix, harmony singing, kewl. Is there a double entendre here? Second half lyrics say the tiger drags him into the light, rather than into the dark, meh. Musically, second half of song adds almost squit nothing to the first half - just a quick flourish at the very end. Is this album going to be indescribably tedious? (Spoiler alert: yes.) La la la. 'Memphis' is exciting (from a low base) for the appearance of the 5/6/7 boogie. Is it going anywhere? No, plse die now. Overall, the mix is clear (grats to engineers); nice slide guitar, tick. The lyrics and musical arrangements, however, are consumately shallow, repetitive, tedious, like a nightmare of endlessness. The drums are twee to a painful degree. May I give (cue French accent) zero points?? No, minimum one star. Okay, it's BAD, 1/10.

Wow! This is pretty stellar!! Wikipedia notes are very interesting/useful, the music is super interesting. I don't know much about these styles, but I am up for the sounds, ready to dance :-) I enjoy my listen through (and some re-listen, it's Quite Wonderful, 9/10. That paragraph above is my main comment, this is my side whinge. Trigger alert: this paragraph might bring you down. My rage at Gorillaz' first 'album' and Damon Albarn in general can only deepen, when I read about what Ibrahim Ferrer did, and wrote, for this Buena Vista Social Club album. Then Albarn and co-conspirators just "plug him in" to their shitty "London dance music"? Goddam white boys from the "first world", oh wait, I guess I'm one too.

Where have you been all my life? I'd heard the name but not bothered listening because I was ‘busy‘?! It's got the energy, got the groove, it’s helter-skelter but no-one falling off, I haven’t spotted any bad vibes yet so SHAKE IT!!! It's Quite Wonderful - 9/10.

For me, the experience of listening to this album invited focus on the differences between "significant to music history so you should understand it" and "likely/worthy to be replayed". I also thought a lot about the opportunities for and expectations of a vocalist - who may be given almost complete imprimatur to express or perform the desired vibe - while "rhythm section" has to keep the pulse for the dancers. In some periods, the bass and drums might have to keep riff and pulse, while vox, gtr and other instruments can freak out with more or less regard for any other band members. This album by contrast sounds like gtr was obliged to stick with bass/drums, while vox had to show the wild child - and "electric jug" conveyed that we're not in Kansas any more. (I listened without pre-reading, so pretty intrigued/perturbed by electric jug, but feel no great desire to go there again.) Sections of the album palled (I felt grumpy that I was going to make myself listen to the whole thing) - but some later sections were reasonably entertaining. Didn’t relish going back to pick a favourite song, but not hard to pick “Thru the Rhythm” for its soul vibe. Overall, for me it’s Mix of Good and Bad, 5/10.

Amy Winehouse again! The singing is wow, and the backing is moderately engaging (while sounding a little bit like a professional jazz band got asked to do backing for songs they didn't care about). But the lyrics are (I would say unintentionally) depressing and off-putting. I'd FAR rather listen to Back to Black again. It's Pretty Poor, 3/10.

I don't know it, read top review. "mafioso rap"? Put in bin now to save time? No, I will listen, it might have music I like. (I don't automatically hate all gangsta rap - I can listen to eg drill when the music is good enough.) What I get hear seems like a lot of yelling in my face, without much music. This album is very, very rap oriented - I like my hip hop when music is a central part of the action (then lyrics I might like are a plus) - in this case I don't get much at all from the music, and the lyrics on this album are not remotely attractive to me. If you like Raekwon, you might like this, but for me it's Bad, 1/10.

Time is short, I'll just say that album is gripping, in a good way. Big band jazz funk - Afrobeat seems a decent label (though v broad). It's Very Good, 8/10.

Amazing sounds. A time capsule, yes - I can believe (with awe) that this is what was played and sung at a performance in 1962. I can believe that MC5 and many, many others were consciously inspired by it. What strikes me most strongly is that these sounds and this performance would work so well today! It is far more contemporary than many much later recordings - hardly dated at all, in key elements. The songs themselves are somewhat overshadowed by the performances of them - they may not be my favourite songs ever. But the album as a whole I'm saying is Very Good, 8/10.

Not sure about this. Supposed to be one of their better albums. I have very positive memories of Faith (1981?) but haven’t played it for a long time. This one had some nice moody bits but didn’t grab me. I felt a bit worried for Robert Smith - singing style great for a song or two, but building a career around it? Anyway, I’ll say it’s Not Bad, 6/10.

I knew of John Lee Hooker (of course) but had never focused on any particular album. Not sure what to make of this. I'm not allergic to albums made up of a range of collaborations, but it's weird that this is the one of his albums to make the 1001 list - it may have been his best-seller, but surely isn't the album that best represents his oeuvre and influence. The guest artists are ones I've heard of, but don't know that well, I still thought the guitar work was all pretty cool. I slide through untouched - I'm not as invested in "proper blues" as some other reviewers have been. I'll just say it's Not Bad, 6/10.

Hmm. I have zero investment in the Byrds' history prior to this album, so I'm not offended by all the country rock, just slightly wondering why. (Why this and not the Eagles?) Along trundles the album, strumming and crooning in my ears while I do some work. Oh, what's that, "Life in Prison" you say? "With trembling hands I killed my darling wife / Because I loved her more than life / My love for her will last a long, long time". All this over a jaunty, cheerful instrumentation. Narrator sounds a bit sad at the idea of not having received death penalty ie having to live with what he's done. Well fuck off Merle Haggard, Jelly Sanders, Gram Parsons, Byrds. It's Bad, 1/10.

I did not know much about Beck before checking out this album. I thought of him as strangely popular, in some left field way, but I didn't know what he was about or how to "get it". I knew the opener of this album (Devil's Haircut) because it was on a triple j hottest 100 CD. I read some of the reviews here, and that gave me hints. The album took me a couple of listens to get into (headphones good), now I'm liking a lot of the tracks, a lot. I dug around a bit more (wondering which riffs were originals that became famous, and which might be samples dropped in from where). If you (dear reader) would like to hear (read) Beck interviewed about his music back in 2005, may I recommend this: https://www.thebeliever.net/an-interview-with-beck/. The album? I think I'll rate it as Quite Wonderful, 9/10. (Rating might go up with more listens :-)

This is an album I used to listen to quite a bit. I count it amongst Rick Rubin's good works. It contains some songs I used to be really keen on (Power of Equality, Under the Bridge, My Lovely Man), one I always skipped over (Sir Psycho-sexy), and some I thought were energetic, iffy but maybe okay (eg Suck My Kiss). More recently I have learned that Kiedis has (by his own admission, in his book) done sexual exploitation that was not only illegal but (in my opinion, not his) very seriously wrong, and he has recounted such conduct without repentance. So, I do not want any actions of mine to enrich him, and I can't “simply enjoy” any part of his work in the way that I used to. There are versions of this album on YouTube that omit Kiedis' vocals – one even uses the cover graphic and whites out Kiedis' face. That is somewhat attractive to me. I wouldn't miss Kiedis' vocals, the bass/guitar/drums interplay was always the good stuff. (I could ask, "what if there is bad conduct by any/all of Flea, Frusciante, Smith" - I guess one distinctly bad thing about each of them, that I have to confront, is the extent to which they have kept playing with Kiedis, even after they knew or should know what he has done and how he writes about it...) This album was always at best A Mix of Good and Bad (5/10), now I think (with some sadness) it is well into Unlistenable. So I'm rating it Bad, 1/10.

I had no investment in this band, but it turned out I was familiar with a number of the songs. Unfortunately I didn't get particularly warm feelings from hearing them again. Some of those I hadn't heard before seemed like weak filler. I am no fan of this type of screeching vocals. One thing I found interesting was how distorted the lead guitar is, compared to how undistorted the rhythm guitar - feels like the lead belonged with a different band style - but this was not enough of a phenomenon to sustain my interest. I was also interested to wonder whether this album might be considered historically significant in terms of white American musicians playing blues pop, how were they influenced by black American musicians playing blues, and what else. I wouldn't really know about that. A third thing I found interesting was even more outside the album. I knew the song 'Proud Mary', had not known it was written by John Fogerty. I read a bit about how other versions of the song came about (Creedence to Solomon Burke, to Ike and Tina Turner), changes in style and changes in understood meanings, that was quite interesting. Signature, a barbershop quartet, won the 2019 international quartet championship of the Barbershop Harmony Society with songs 'including the Ike & Tina Turner classic “Proud Mary”, so there you go.) This album Bayou Country? Not a good name, not a good album, it's Pretty Poor, 3/10.

Soft Boys, where have you been all my life?? I had never heard of this band or album, but it/they are intriguing, inspiring, entertaining. Wikipedia highlights a 2025 quote that "it’s hard to understand how the lightly psychedelic pop-rock of the Soft Boys was ever considered anything close to punk" - I would just call this new wave, and we're done. I have no difficulty recognising the clanging tone and strident playing of the guitars as new wave, very much of the era of punk. The quote also mentions Elvis Costello, there's definitely Syd Barrett (Emily Plays era), a little bit of Lou Reed in the lyrics and the manner. The vocal harmonies are a bit Beach Boys ('Positive Vibrations' couldn't be more obvious as hommage), but also quite post-punk (again the stridency, eg in 'Tonight'). Some call the whole album post-punk, I could see that from some angles, eg 'Old Pervert'. In summary, the palette is delightfully varied, and all of these songs have unexpected but very engaging hooks, lines and/or vibes. It's not immaculately perfect - I was going to cite 'I Got the Hots', for core riff too long and not strong enough to hold up the whole song, but then on a re-listen it's better than I thought - so, I think I'm actually going to celebrate it as Incredibly Wonderful, 10/10!

Well, I listened to the album (lots of songs I knew) and then I read some more about Janis Joplin (because I was curious to turn my vague impressions into some sort of knowledge - possibly a kind of mistake from perspective of "listening pleasure"). So now I see this record as a curious artifact (I'm particularly curious about sexual politics of the era) and a sad one. I'm most interested in Joplin's singing - mildly interested in the arrangements generally - I guess Full Tilt Boogie Band is decent on this record (I'm interested in the organ playing). Move Over - I knew the song well from the album Slayed? (released 20 months after Pearl came out), I didn't know till now that Janis wrote it. Singing is very intense. Cry Baby - I knew well. Not written by Joplin. Encouraging the guy to cry, over loss of the other woman, is interesting to me. Half Moon - seems v familiar (and funky!) and I can't work out where I know it from. Me and Bobby McGee - not my favourite, but I get why it's popular :-) RIP Ms Joplin ... The album? It’s Good, 7/10.

Polished, to a fault. Maybe the 'best' backing band and production that money could buy - and someone told them to play/make banal radio-friendly filler. Supposedly Mr Michael had a good voice - did no-one suggest he should not just whisper it away, or he didn't take their advice? The vocal production is infatuated with his voice - beyond all reason. Maybe he did something right - he secured good chart positions. But, it all sounds fairly tedious to me. ('Monkey' is a little bit funky, but the lyrics are uninteresting, for a whole 5 minutes yawn.) If I was listening to this with someone else - I'd be twitchy, looking round for what's next. This album is Pretty Poor, 3/10.

I haven't heard this for a long time. I was introduced to it in the 80s, by a feminist of my acquaintance - I remember sitting quietly and istening attentively. I associate this album (and others) with my personal move out of punk/new-wave aggression/catharsis, into a world of music with a broader emotional palette, more subtlety, more delicacy. The album still sounds wonderful to me now. Armatrading has a beautiful voice; songs and arrangements are very well-crafted; plenty of soul, bit of funk, decent poetry. I get that particular rush of hearing songs I liked long ago and discover I still like now (a warmth at validation of previous experience?), at the same time as familiar feeling that the musical contents are more readily comprehensible than they used to be - since my ears are that many years more experienced at music listening, or something. Some songs I like a very lot, a couple not so much. Taken as a whole, for me the album is Quite Wonderful, 9/10.

Hadn't heard of this. Read Wikipedia and some reviews, listened to the album. It's interesting enough, reasonably pleasant to listen to, I don't mind the low but multi-tracked voice - but I don't get the hype. I listen again, try looking at some lyrics, ho hum. Start trying to pick my favourite song on the album - discover there's only three songs I'm sufficiently interested in to sling them a Like. I do like Ballad of Big Nothing (very balanced) and Cupid's Trick (a bit of rock thunder is refreshing, after so much down beat). The album overall - is Okay (Not Good) - 4/10.

Oh! This seems very accessible! Compared to Tago Mago, it's like they could have been aiming for increased sales - I hope they did well with any such ambition :-) Just four songs across just 40 minutes - but they're good songs. (Compare to the leisurely digital sprawl of Hayley Williams clocking in at 100 minutes for one 'album' - oh well.) "Future Days" is (at least) Very Good, 8/10.

Really nice album. The jazz context is very clear, the proto-Afrobeat harder for me to pick out. This is certainly not "trad jazz" of any type that puts me off. (Well there was a drum solo that slightly outstayed its welcome.) Mostly it was very nicely composed, very cool listening. I feel even more positive about it after a little pause, I've come back to say it's Very Good, 8/10.

EWF! A long-lived institution, coming soon to my town. Deciding whether to get a ticket, I read up on their many achievements, and recent concerts. I respect the endurance, the arranging, the hits. This album is still the first I'd ever listened to start to finish. There's a lot to like - it's generally "a lot" - the tracks are crowded. Interesting that reviews when it came out were not uniformly positive. I was curious about lyrics but better not to bother, they really are platitudinous. But the funk seems good :-) I'm fond of Shining Star - I may replay a couple of other tracks - but the album as a whole left me a little cool - I will say it's Good, 7/10.

I've listened to these songs so many times, I could almost review this from memory, but not quite. Impactful enough that I’ll comment song by song. (Done partly to help me reach/explain a rating.) Black Dog: offensive lyrics right up front. “Ah-ah child, way you shake that thing, gonna make you burn, gonna make you sting”. WTAF? Is he addressing a teenager at stage door, or addressing a grown woman as ‘child’? His best come-on pitch is not-so-veiled sadism? Mega-eurrk factor way outweighs any interest value in eg guitar riffs. Rock and Roll: at least gets some instruments playing before stupid lyrics start, not so flat-out offensive but still stupid - I’m lonely lonely lonely, my wife doesn’t understand me, how about a root. The Battle of Evermore: still musically interesting. Lyrics are not great literature, it’s pretty explicit Tolkien-homage (I just realised for 1st time that in amongst the wailing they directly refer to ring-wraiths), but who am I to judge. Stairway to Heaven: yes, it’s epic. Great use of recorders. Guitar lines and solo that ‘anyone’ can now play in their lounge-room, but he/they did it first. I’ll overlook the cod-mystic lyrics and sappy singing. It is truly a classic, also one we can joke about, so be it. (Mind you, actually listening to it, it is dragging quite a bit by the time the fanfare finally announces the wee solo …) Misty Mountain Hop: bangs. I always thought of this as being about a protest of some sort? But maybe that was wishful thinking, maybe it was just a Haight-Ashbury smoke-in? Four Sticks: has less plays than the other tracks on Spotify, but for me this was always a stand-out (musically). But, I never read the lyrics before. If it’s just druggy 70s guy saying “babe I’ve got to split because I can’t handle responsibilities” then colour me sad but not surprised. But I still like the multi-guitars from around 3 minute mark :-) Going to California: “Spent my days with a woman unkind”. Diddums, widdums. "Someone told me there's a girl out there with love in her eyes and flowers in her hair": girls in the UK not submissive enough? "Tryin' to find a woman who's never, never, never been born": look out ladies, this is one picky wanker. When the Levee Breaks: actually a good song. Probably helps that they didn't write the riff or the lyrics. Overall, it's Mix of Good and Bad, 5/10. And that's being generous!

On a blind listen, it sounds like it might have been significant when released, but not of much interst in the present. Simple pop rock with a bit of 'different' production may have been "far out" in the day but now sounds a bit surf rock, a bit pop jazz - a little bit what Cramps did well. Reading Wikipedia, I'm much more sympathetic - the band had two hits and found themselves making a record where nine songs were written by professional songwriters. "Luvin'", the only new original (apart from the singles name-checked on front cover), is catchy musically, but the lyrics are juvenile. The singing generally is often too "yelling young man" for my taste. Overall I'll say it's Pretty Poor, 3/10.

I remember being very excited upon first hearing this (when it came out). But I haven't played it since. (Even being reminded of her part in 'LiveAid', I wasn't motivated to go and listen again.) And, while the album is 'worthy', it doesn't rock my world now. Lyrics are interesting in parts, but lots of repetition rather than development. Arrangements ditto. I’ll say it’s Good, 7/10.

Ho, hum. I am not overly invested in CSNY (more interested in Neil Young's work than the others). I am iffy on the lyrics: "'cause she's a girl and you're a boy" tells me the singer is only singing to other males and both persons are reducible to sexual identity, eurrk. On the other hand,, if I don't focus on lyrics, there are soul and funk vibes in some of this, that I like. Wikipedia article is mildly interesting - not for the social scene from which the album sprung - but for the stuff about Hendrix, fact he played on "Old Times, Good Times" was a good reason to listen to that song twice, trying to pick his parts. Overall I think it's Mix of Good and Bad, 5/10.