[goldenratiophi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also Jimi Hendrix scored the only perfect score in any category.

No, the Beatles did too.

 

[Nograyareas]

.

 

[goldenratiophi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm afraid I have to strongly disagree with the sentiment on Rumours. I think its one of the best albums ever made. And I'm not a chick. I don't have any Peter Green era material, but still, Rumours is a classic. To me it represents the ultimate "grower" album. That said, my favorite song is still from the Tusk album. ---------------- I also prefer Wish You Were Here to DSOTM, but I can see how radio-based fans might disagree. I never got too into Animals personally, though. ---------------- To me, there is no way Led Zeppelin II has better sound quality than Steely Dan's Aja.

I agree on Rumours. First experience with Fleetwood Mac, still my favourite.

Also WYWH > Animals > DSOTM IMO. I think Animals is pretty underrated from people I've talked to in RL though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin /img/forum/go_quote.gif They lost me at #16. If they think Abacab is the best Genesis album, then they need to listen some more.

They lost me at #1

 

[Know Talent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm afraid I have to strongly disagree with the sentiment on Rumours. I think its one of the best albums ever made. And I'm not a chick. I don't have any Peter Green era material, but still, Rumours is a classic. To me it represents the ultimate "grower" album. That said, my favorite song is still from the Tusk album. ---------------- I also prefer Wish You Were Here to DSOTM, but I can see how radio-based fans might disagree. I never got too into Animals personally, though. ---------------- To me, there is no way Led Zeppelin II has better sound quality than Steely Dan's Aja.

Do you think the Lindsey Buckingham incarnation belongs in the same category as artists such as Jimi Hendrix, Led Zep, Aerosmith, Humple Pie, Montrose, Bad Company and the Stones? There's nothing wrong with a little chick-rock every now and then, but call it for what it is!
Hell, I'll admit it.....I like the Eagles but I wouldn't categorize them as rockers. The James Gang were a GREAT rock band.

...nothing produced by Led Zep has SQ near Aja

The Who is probably the greatest ROCK band ever... lyrically and sonically they paved the way and their music still outshines the vast ocean of bubblegum efforts that have come since

 

[SR-71Panorama]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Know Talent /img/forum/go_quote.gif Do you think the Lindsey Buckingham incarnation belongs in the same category as artists such as Jimi Hendrix, Led Zep, Aerosmith, Humple Pie, Montrose, Bad Company and the Stones? There's nothing wrong with a little chick-rock every now and then, but call it for what it is!...

Yup. He was one of the first to put fingerstyle guitar into rock music, and have it be successful. Everyone on your list is a great artist/band, it just happens that Fleetwood has a different sound...there are many different sounds in the rock genre. I don't feel that would disqualify them. I guess they are also pop-orientated, but then again, Aerosmith wrote "wont miss a thing"

 

[jsaliga]

This list, as with every other similar list, is completely meaningless. The only thing it really proves is how pompous the people who create these lists truly are.

--Jerome

 

[uraflit]

nothing wrong with a list compiled by some people... its THEIR take on the music after all... just ask any teenager nowadays... they'll tell you how 50 cent and britney spears rocks!

i like to look at these and sample new (actually old to you guys) music that i missed out on when i wasn't born yet =]

 

[jsaliga]

I think you're missing the point. These lists always call attention to the people who created them rather than the music. The ensuing debate is how album "A" compares to album "B," or why certain albums were omitted and others were included on the list. You may find that sort of thing interesting, but for serious music lovers it just doesn't mean anything.

If you are interested in researching music there are far better resources than some list cobbled together by a small collection of self-appointed experts. Sure, they are entitled to their take, and this is my take -- for whatever it's worth.

--Jerome

 

[Davey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif You may find that sort of thing interesting, but for serious music lovers it just doesn't mean anything.

Kind of an odd sentiment for one who includes a list of their music collection as their signature

But I agree that the countless lists published throughout the print and virtual world these days has reduced the usefulness that the best of these lists used to have, and to a large extent has also reduced the usefulness of music reviews in general, but most serious music lovers didn't become serious music lovers on their own. We have always needed help to find that elusive, and sometimes magical serious music, because the best music (for me, and most other serious music lovers) is almost never embraced by the public at large. The constant barrage of similar lists these days does have the effect of shrinking the gene pool though, and I think that is a bad thing. Almost like the revisionist history effect of classic rock FM playlists, the way they ignore 99% of the best music of the classic rock era.

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davey /img/forum/go_quote.gif Kind of an odd sentiment for one who includes a list of their music collection as their signature

Well, it makes no attempt to compare or score them.

Quote:

But I agree that the countless lists published throughout the print and virtual world these days has reduced the usefulness that the best of these lists used to have, and to a large extent has also reduced the usefulness of music reviews in general, but most serious music lovers didn't become serious music lovers on their own. We have always needed help to find that elusive, and sometimes magical serious music, because the best music (for me, and most other serious music lovers) is almost never embraced by the public at large. The constant barrage of similar lists these days does have the effect of shrinking the gene pool though, and I think that is a bad thing. Almost like the revisionist history effect of classic rock FM playlists, the way they ignore 99% of the best music of the classic rock era.

I agree completely. I primarily use AMG and iTunes to research music. I have also plucked some interesting music suggestions from Head-Fi. There are other useful resourses as well. The albums that I really enjoy that won't show up on any ranking or popularity contest type list number in the hundreds. If I did not have the resources I use then I think I would have ended up missing out on a lot of music that has truly enriched my life. I can't imagine being without it.

As far as reviews go, I just don't find them particularly helpful in making music-buying decisions. It has been at least 10 years since I last bought an album based on a review. I always listen first and then buy if it appeals to me. I might find a review somewhat interesting to read after I have bought and given an album a listen, but mainly to see how the reviewer's take might compare to my own.

--Jerome

 

[Sarchi]

That's quite possibly the worst rock list I've ever seen.

 

[TheAnomaly]

bad, bad, selections on that list.

 

[Davey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif As far as reviews go, I just don't find them particularly helpful in making music-buying decisions.

But how do you find out about a great album like Helium's The Magic City (or a ton of others in your impressive music collection) without reviews? You'd have to be pretty connected to the scene to know about some of this stuff without the benefit of trusted music reviewers. Not all reviewers, not even very many, but there are some good ones that I've connected with over the years, and in retrospect owe a big debt. Not that many anymore I would trust to buy without a listen, strictly on their review, but there have been.

The lists that come with nothing else, those are the ones I find worthless. So much of music discussion has been reduced to that these days, as though posting the image of a CD cover somehow constitutes a meaningful discussion. Nothing wrong with a list that explores the author's interaction with the music.

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davey /img/forum/go_quote.gif But how do you find out about a great album like Helium's The Magic City (or a ton of others in your impressive music collection) without reviews? You'd have to be pretty connected to the scene to know about some of this stuff without the benefit of trusted music reviewers. Not all reviewers, not even very many, but there are some good ones that I've connected with over the years, and in retrospect owe a big debt. Not that many anymore I would trust to buy without a listen, strictly on their review, but there have been.

I understand where you're coming from, but your approach would not work at all for me. For starters, in the ten or fifteen minutes I might spend reading an in-depth review, I could have sampled about 3 to 5 albums and decided whether or not the music appealed to me enough to warrant a purchase. I barely can find the time to post on this forum, and I would rather spend my valuable time listening to music rather than reading someone else's opinion of it. But that's just me.

I found about Helium the way I have discovered most music I have bought over the last several years. I was exploring math rock using AMG as a resource and bought Ride the Fader by Chavez. On the Chavez artist page, Helium was listed as a similar artist. So I checked them out. Now, I don't think Helium has much in common with Chavez, but I thought highly enough of Magic City when I sampled some tracks to order it. It was a very good purchase for me. In fact, I can't say that I have been disappointed with a single album I have bought this way over the past several years.

Quote:

The lists that come with nothing else, those are the ones I find worthless. So much of music discussion has been reduced to that these days, as though posting the image of a CD cover somehow constitutes a meaningful discussion. Nothing wrong with a list that explores the author's interaction with the music.

I can appreciate what you're saying. But I think our expectations are different. For example, the "What are You Listening to Right Now" thread is not some place I go looking for a meaningful discussion of music. I only go there to see what other people are listening to. I am less interested in why they are listening to it. If I see a title listed that I don't have or am not familiar with, I will research it myself and sample it. It sounds like a lot of work but it only takes a few moments. If you go though my last several posts in that thread you will see that I have been listening to a lot of hard bop jazz lately. I would welcome a discussion of it but I am not expecting one and don't want to spend a lot of time writing about my music selections that few people might bother to read.

If I want to have an in-depth discussion about an artist, album, or genre/style of music then I will start a thread on it or respond to an open thread of interest.

That is not to knock your methodology to discovering new music. Most of us who have been at this for any length of time find our own approach that works well for each of us. I'm sure my method would not work well for some...but it doesn't have to. It only needs to work well for me.

My big gripe is with lists like this that attempt to score or compare artists or albums. Top 100 lists are just as inane and have no real meaning for anyone other than the list-creator.

--Jerome

 

[Davey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif I understand where you're coming from, but your approach would not work at all for me....

Well stated, and I somewhat agree with your methodology, even though over the years I've grown to trust the opinions of some people that have lived and loved an album for months or years, and that have in turn felt compelled to write about it, or recommend it to me, over my own quick appraisal from some low bitrate mp3 samples, or slimy headphone system at the neighborhood record store. But ... I still contend that you couldn't very easily find those artists to preview, such as Helium (and they were even a bit popular at the time for a indie band, being signed to Matador), without at least resorting to a review site like AMG (or magazine, or knowledgeable friends, or internet buddies), just as you indicated that you do. Some of us read the reviews if we trust the reviewer, while others just scan the similar artists list. Not really that much different. We are still relying on someone else we [hopefully] trust to do a lot of the leg work