Music: Ranking the Best Albums of All Time

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,433
451
Mexico
Ranking the Best Albums of All Time
http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/gall...s-BBztgs2?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout#image=1

#106
$


A link for you guys to chew on and probably disagree with. :)
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
Ahh, I don't know... It's generic, but it doesn't look that terrible. Usually these lists contain numerous albums that make it look like they're just listing culturally impactful albums that I think kind of sucks (like Nevermind, for example), but not too many jumped out at me.

Happy that they picked the first Clash album ahead of London Calling.
 

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,484
14,691
Montreal, QC
I'm not too big on albums - not very well-versed in music in general - but I'm glad to see Unknown Pleasures, Closer and Marquee Moon on the list. Love Joy Division and Television.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
If you are going to rank albums, you can't allow compilation albums on there. That defeats the purpose.
I would go in the opposite direction with this and say that compilations are completely fair game to include, but if you're experiencing albums properly, they're rarely ever better listening experiences than the real thing. No greatest hits compilations are comparable to the greatest studio albums of all time, IMO. Even when they're packed with great songs, they usually come out in a disjointed and mechanical way.

That's more the reason why I get annoyed when they pop up in these lists.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
Yeah, but who cares? I just don't see the need for such rigid and nitpicky classification. Live albums and Bootlegs aren't studio albums/official LPs either but I'll include them in my favorite albums lists all day, provided that they're comparable to the best studio albums.

Compilations only defeat the purpose because they rarely give you that kind of special cohesive experience and are inferior to studio/live albums, IMO. If an EP or Single or Compilation legitimately does match that level, I say go nuts.
 

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,484
14,691
Montreal, QC
Yeah, but who cares? I just don't see the need for such rigid and nitpicky classification. Live albums and Bootlegs aren't studio albums/official LPs either but I'll include them in my favorite albums lists all day, provided that they're comparable to the best studio albums.

Compilations only defeat the purpose because they rarely give you that kind of special cohesive experience and are inferior to studio/live albums, IMO. If an EP or Single or Compilation legitimately does match that level, I say go nuts.

Live albums and Bootlegs are still original works in a sense, though. That's the nuance for me. They're a specific rendition of a song so it makes sense that they be included in such a list. A compilation album is just that. A compilation of studio album versions of songs.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
Live albums and Bootlegs are still original works in a sense, though. That's the nuance for me. They're a specific rendition of a song so it makes sense that they be included in such a list. A compilation album is just that. A compilation of studio album versions of songs.

The arrangement of songs is a big part of what makes something good, though, and can be considered an original work by itself. You could re-sequence a movie and release it as a Final Cut, and it's still a movie. You could compile original material that was never officially released, and you could take tracks that you've used before in one studio release and include it in another one. What matters isn't that all the material is original, what matters is whether or not it works as a cohesive and interesting piece in isolation, IMO.

What makes compilations undeserving of being on these lists, for me, is that they're usually just thoughtlessly thrown together and never sound like a cohesive experience. For instances when they do, though, I see no reason to get caught up in the semantics and labels. If it works, it works.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
I see it like this:

Imagine a hypothetical band who writes good songs and for whatever reason, just never puts any effort into the mixing and sequencing of their albums... then at the end of their career, they decide to finally take a serious stab at it and pools together a compilation that carefully selects tracks that fit together well, transitions and flows in sequence from one track to the next perfectly, and feels like tight, well punctuated, inspired, and well considered experience. Say they manage to do this without messing with the original recordings.

To me, that's an original work deserving of being listed on a greatest album list. Granted, it pretty much never works out that way in real life, but that doesn't indicate that they fail the requirements-- just that the way they're made tends to result in poor albums.

That's how I see it anyways.
 

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,484
14,691
Montreal, QC
The arrangement of songs is a big part of what makes something good, though, and can be considered an original work by itself. You could re-sequence a movie and release it as a Final Cut, and it's still a movie. You could compile original material that was never officially released, and you could take tracks that you've used before in one studio release and include it in another one. What matters isn't that all the material is original, what matters is whether or not it works as a cohesive and interesting piece in isolation, IMO.

What makes compilations undeserving of being on these lists, for me, is that they're usually just thoughtlessly thrown together and never sound like a cohesive experience. For instances when they do, though, I see no reason to get caught up in the semantics and labels. If it works, it works.

That's where my lack of appreciation/knowledge of albums appears. I just don't listen to complete albums for me to have noticed this. Also to me, original material that was never officially released isn't part of a compilation album (wouldn't that be a bootleg?).
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
That's where my lack of appreciation/knowledge of albums appears. I just don't listen to complete albums for me to have noticed this. Also to me, original material that was never officially released isn't part of a compilation album (wouldn't that be a bootleg?).
If it's arbitrarily collected unreleased/unrelated material that only used to be available in bootlegs and finally gets an official release, I've always assumed that that was still considered a compilation. Maybe I'm wrong.
 

Acoustic

Registered User
Sep 29, 2014
2,161
13
Without a doubt compilation albums should not be on a best of all time list, in my opinion.
 

zombie kopitar

custom title
Jul 3, 2009
6,098
1,004
Wow is all I have to say. Complete garbage though I did like 'Graceland' and 'The Modern Lovers' being higher ranked.... but the list was just a train wreck, subjective as it is.

I mean if they're going to be ranking essentially hipster albums with alltime classics and best sellers at least get in 'Funeral' or something haha.

'Willy and the Poor Boys' needs more recognition, Creedence is often forgotten amongst so much 60's/70's music but they have an amazing blend of rock grooves, pop melodies and aware lyrics that should get more respect.
 
Last edited:

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,037
3,784
Vancouver, BC
Wow is all I have to say. Complete garbage though I did like 'Graceland' and 'The Modern Lovers' being higher ranked.... but the list was just a train wreck, subjective as it is.

I mean if they're going to be ranking essentially hipster albums with alltime classics and best sellers at least get in 'Funeral' or something haha.

'Willy and the Poor Boys' needs more recognition, Creedence is often forgotten amongst so much 60's/70's music but they have an amazing blend of rock grooves, pop melodies and aware lyrics that should get more respect.
Weren't they all pretty much all all-time classics/dad rock cannon stuff? What was included that could be considered hipster? If anything, it was guilty of being too generic, dull, and cliched.
 

Ouroboros

There is no armour against Fate
Feb 3, 2008
15,090
10,387
You reckon that the guy from Nox Arcana compiled the list and tried to slip his own band in there unnoticed or something? Who the **** is that?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad