Best Ever Albums

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:38:59 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 08/10/2018 19:38

Weld by Neil Young And Crazy Horse

This is the first time I've heard this one (I mean, it's a live Neil Young album, so I've basically heard it all quite a bit, just not these particular renditions in this sequence). I listened to it three times.

Not bad. It's Neil Young, so you pretty much know what to expect. If you like him, you like him. If not, not. I enjoy his stuff well enough, but I'm not a huge fan. This one goes on quite long, but for whatever reason it doesn't bother me too much in this case.

All in all it's pretty good.

Score: 59/100

Next up: Rothko Chapel ; Why Patterns? by Morton Feldman

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Tue, 7 Aug 2018 12:52:59 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 08/07/2018 16:52

Laughing Stock by Talk Talk

I've heard this one before. I'm not sure exactly how many times, but at least a few, and probably fewer than ten. I listened to it three more times.

I like Talk Talk, but I don't see why people go so nuts for this album and Spirit of Eden. I think The Colour of Spring is easily their best, and I might even prefer some of their earlier stuff to these last two albums. Maybe. I don't know. I need some more listens. That said, I do like this album, quite a bit. I've listened to Spirit of Eden a lot more than this one, but I'd say they're of about equal quality. I don't know if I prefer one over the other. Again, I guess I need more listens.

I love the comments on this album. Several people say something along the lines of "It's boring, too slow, can't get into it" only to come back later and say "I changed my mind, this is brilliant". Apparently this one is a real grower.

Score: 67/100

Next up: Weld by Neil Young And Crazy Horse

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Mon, 6 Aug 2018 18:34:21 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 08/06/2018 22:34

Cyclops Nuclear Submarine Captain by Dogbowl

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

This is not too shabby. Generally enjoyable. A potential grower, but for now I don't see it as anything particularly special. It's too repetitive in places and yet again--surprise surprise--it's too long. The general silliness mostly loses its charm by the end. The first half is definitely stronger than the second. But yeah, not bad.

Score: 58/100

Next up: Laughing Stock by Talk Talk

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:00:20 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 07/10/2018 19:00

Mental Vortex by Coroner

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

Yay. Another metal album. I am not the target audience for this stuff. Again, I find the sick-sounding vocals (sick as in unwell, not cool) more silly than hardcore or whatever they're going for. Again, the instrumentation doesn't do anything for me. And again, it's too long. I start out enjoying it well enough, or at least not disliking it, but by the back half it has become tedious and I just want it to end. Same old story.

This album does get some bonus points for the Beatles cover at the end, but that doesn't do a whole lot to balance out the other, negative, aspects.

Score: 49/100

Next Up: Cyclops Nuclear Submarine Captain by Dogbowl

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Mon, 9 Jul 2018 19:44:32 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 07/09/2018 23:44

New River Head by The Bevis Frond

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times. To be precise, I listened to the 2xLP version twice, and the CD version once.

This is yet another long album that doesn't grab me the way I'd hope. This guy (the "band" is apparently pretty much just one person--Nick Saloman) seems stuck in the past. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing. Or a good thing for that matter. Just worth mentioning, I thought. For instance, Wild Jack Hammer feels like a Jimi Hendrix ripoff, He'd Be a Diamond could easily be a Byrds song, and Chinese Burn strongly reminds me of Elvis Costello. I actually had to check to see if they were covers. This whole album feels that way--like Saloman is merely fixated on artists of the past, rather than having his own artistic vision to express. That doesn't have to be a bad thing if the music's good, but I just don't feel this one. I'm not saying it's bad though. It's just unremarkable.

And I keep harping on it because it's true, but for Christ's sake, if you're a musical artist releasing an album, please please please cut it down to just your best material. It's okay if it's only half an hour or even shorter. In my eyes, the far better problem to have is to leave your listener wanting more, rather than to make them ache for the thing to finally end. I listened to the two different versions of this album, and I didn't miss any of the songs that were left off the shorter version--and it still felt long. Seriously, cut ruthlessly. That's just my two cents, for what it's worth.

Score: 49/100

Next Up: Mental Vortex by Coroner

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Sun, 1 Jul 2018 16:39:14 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 07/01/2018 20:39

Screamadelica by Primal Scream

I've heard this one before. Three times or so. I listened to it three more times.

This album is quite a mixed bag. Movin' On Up, Damaged, I'm Comin' Down, and Shine Like Stars are enjoyable enough I suppose, but they feel like they're from a completely different album from the songs that surround them, which are just overlong...um...house music? I'm ignorant of the proper labels, but it's tediously repetitive, emotionally empty electronic beats, for dancing and doing drugs or whatever. That's called house music, right?

I am not a fan of that. And it goes on for sooooooo long. Come Together doesn't need to drag on for ten minutes. That's ridiculous, and does nothing but pad the album's stupidly long run time. They should have cut at least twenty minutes of stuff, I'd say. The question is, what would be left? Aside from the few songs I mentioned (themselves too long as well), there's not much here of any substance. (And even those four songs I said I like aren't amazing or anything.)

So.... mixed bag. I'm not sure whether it will grow on me or just get old with repeat listens, but it's hard for me to judge it for sure with just the listens I've given it. For now, I'll just give it a neutral score, with the intention of returning to it at a later date to see if my opinion has changed one way or the other.

Score: 50/100

Next up: New River Head by The Bevis Frond

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:44:07 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 06/30/2018 18:44

I'm gonna pick this up again, finally.

Out Of Time by R.E.M.

I've heard this one before, at least a few times. I listened to it three more times.

This has grown on me more and more with each of the last three listens. At first it was my clear least favorite of R.E.M.'s discography, but now I'm not so sure. Maybe it's because I've been listening to the podcast R U Talkin' R.E.M. RE: ME?. In any case, I agree with what most people seem to think of this album: Radio Song would be better without KRS-One, Losing My Religion is good (though still quite overrated in my opinion), and in general the album is not as consistent as it could be.

But I enjoy it. And I enjoy it more each time I listen.

Score: 61/100

Next up: Screamadelica by Primal Scream

Re: Miscellaneous Musical Meanderings

Rhyner — Fri, 2 Mar 2018 00:58:02 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 03/02/2018 05:58

Use Your Illusion II by Guns N' Roses

I've heard this one before, at least a couple times. I listened to it three more times.

It's okay... I kinda like it, except for all the terrible "eye-ee-eye"-ing and "oh-ooo-oh"-ing in Axl Rose's singing. And how incredibly over-long it is. Why-ee-eye in the world did they decide to release two huge albums at the same time? Why not cut it down to their best material and do just one? Eh, oh well. It is what it is. And what it is is pretty exhausting, with some nice stuff here and there.

Score: 53/100

Next up: Out Of Time by R.E.M.

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Wed, 28 Feb 2018 00:29:18 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/28/2018 05:29

Diamonds And Pearls by Prince & The New Power Generation

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

For the most part, this is enjoyable. It could be shorter, and the rapping is hit and miss (largely miss). Overall it's nothing special, and nowhere near as good as his all-time classics, but it's serviceable.

Score: 57/100

Next up: Use Your Illusion II by Guns N' Roses

Re: Miscellaneous Musical Meanderings

Rhyner — Tue, 27 Feb 2018 23:12:01 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/28/2018 04:12

I added an explanation of my ratings to the original post:

Rhyner wrote:

Here's what my scores mean, if you're curious:
I've worked out my rating system from the starting point of a single principle that I think should be true of any rating system, no matter whose (this assumes ratings from zero to a hundred; adjust accordingly when using other numbers or stars or whatever). Everything that I've built on this principle is disputable, but the principle itself is the rock-solid foundation that I wouldn't dream of changing.

Here it is:
A score of 0 is the worst I can give, a score of 100 is the best I can give, and a score of 50 is neutral.

In the case of music, I like pretty much everything I ever listen to, so almost every music score I give is above 50. How much I like it determines how high above 50 I rate it. Most music falls into the 50s and 60s range, and anything above that is something I have a special connection with. Giving something a 100 means it is my absolute favorite thing ever, something I adore more than anything else. It doesn't mean it's flawless, just that I love it completely. My ratings are totally subjective. I have no interest in trying to rate stuff objectively, whatever that means anyway.

Here's a rough idea of what a given score means (scores below 50 are less worked out because they're much rarer, but they're pretty much a negative mirror of the top half):
100 – Favorite Ever
95 – A Favorite
90 – Essential
85 – Really Great
80 – Great
75 – Really Good
70 – Quite Good
65 – Solid
60 – Enjoyable
55 – All Right
50 – Neutral
40 – Kinda Bad
30 – Quite Bad
20 – Terrible
10 – Trash
0 – Worst Ever

Here's another way to think about it, clumping my scores into bigger categories:
90-100 – Favorites
78-89 – Love
66-77 – Like a Lot
55-65 – Like
46-54 – So-So
35-45 – Dislike
23-34 – Dislike a Lot
11-22 – Hate
0-10 – Most Hated

Here is a series of questions I ask myself to properly determine an album (or whatever)'s score (this is assuming the score is 50 or above; again, negative mirrored versions of these questions apply to negative scores):
1. Do I like it? If this is an easy yes, then whatever I'm rating will get at least a 60, and I move onto question two. If this is a no, I assign a score of at most 50 and ask myself the mirror questions. If the answer is somewhere between yes and no, then I gauge my level of enjoyment and assign an appropriate score between 50 and 60. For instance, if to the question I hesitantly answer, "Sort of...", the score will probably be in the 53-55 range. "For the most part" would get a score in the upper 50s. And so on. This same idea applies to all of the following questions as well.
2. Is it special? If yes, then the score is at least 70—move onto question three. If no, the score is 60. If between, then of course the score is between 60 and 70. What do I mean by special? I don't know, to be perfectly honest. What I'm asking myself here is whether the item in question has a certain... je ne sais quoi... that makes it stand out above the pack. This is entirely subjective, and has a lot to do with the relationship I have with said item. In fact, my scores can largely be interpreted as representations of relationships with what I'm rating—the higher the score, the stronger the relationship. I rarely give a score above 70 within the first several times I listen to an album. That connection has to build up over time.
3. Do I want it in my life regularly? "Yes" gets a score of at least 80 and goes to question four. Anything less than yes gets a lesser score, down to 70 for a no, of course. This question is a bit misleading, because what I'm asking myself here is more complicated, but the way I phrase it above is the best way I can boil it down to a simple one-liner. What I'm really asking is if I think of what I'm rating as part of who I am as a person. Will I think about it on a regular basis? In the case of music, will I sing or hum or whistle it all the time? Will I add it to playlist after playlist and want to keep coming back regardless of how many times I've already listened to it? That's what I'm asking.
4. Do I feel like I can't live without it? Yes: at least 90 and question five. No: 80. In between: in between. Now, I'm not ridiculous enough to think there's any music I truly can't live without. Even if my favorite stuff of all time disappeared completely and I never got to hear it again, I could live a full and complete life, no problem. But that's not what I'm asking here. The key word is "feel". Do I feel like I can't live without it? And there is indeed music for which the answer is yes. Stuff that feels essential to who I am, that I would fight mightily to keep in my life, if it came to that.
5. Is it my favorite ever? If I get this far, then whatever I'm rating is one of my all-time favorite things, and the score I give between 90 and 100 simply shows how it compares to my other all-time favorites. 100 is reserved for the best of the best of the best of the best. 99 is the second best of the best of the best of the best. And so it goes, roughly. If I have too many favorites then some of them will get the same score, but you get the idea.

It has taken me a lot of thought and a lot of time to build this system and feel comfortable with it, and while I'm sure it won't work for everyone, it works for me. Please feel free to ask questions if it's unclear, or criticize it if you think it has problems.

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:38:15 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/19/2018 18:38

The Pod by Ween

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

Meh. I like The Mollusk (for the most part), but I haven't been able to get into anything else Ween has done. This one's no different. For most of the album, it sounds like they're just messing around. A huge portion of this album is uninteresting filler. There are occasional hints of something better, but they're few and far between in this seventy six minute behemoth. I know these guys can write good songs. I wish it happened more often.

Score: 51/100

Next up: Diamonds And Pearls by Prince & The New Power Generation

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Thu, 15 Feb 2018 12:24:18 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/15/2018 17:24

Spiderland by Slint

I've heard this one before, probably two or three times. I listened to it three more times.

I like it. The album as a whole has a good atmosphere, but the spoken word lyrics don't totally work for me, and the weaker tracks (For Dinner... and Don, Aman) drag things down a little. But just a little; this thing is solid. I've been getting more into post-rock over the past year or so, and I could see this one really growing on me with more familiarity.

Favorite tracks: Washer, Nosferatu Man, Good Morning, Captain

Score: 65/100

Next up: The Pod by Ween

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Tue, 13 Feb 2018 22:55:27 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/14/2018 03:55

Cypress Hill by Cypress Hill

I've heard this one before, probably two or three times. I listened to it three more times.

It's all right. Some of the hooks are pretty catchy. However, just like almost every other album I haven't taken a particular shine to, it goes on too long for my taste.

Score: 54/100

Next up: Spiderland by Slint

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Fri, 9 Feb 2018 22:20:17 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/10/2018 03:20

These Days by The Grapes Of Wrath

This is the first time I've heard this one in full, though I had already heard a couple of songs a bunch of times each. I listened to it three times.

Back in the day, my brother used to download lots of music using LimeWire. Most of the time he wasn't looking for anything in particular, but rather would search for random words and download whatever came up. We found Modest Mouse through the song Paper Thin Walls by searching for "paper". "Bowl" introduced us to one of my personal favorite bands, Bright Eyes, through Bowl of Oranges. And I'm pretty sure it was "grapes" that led us to The Grapes of Wrath. Most of the music we found this way had no lasting impact, but I liked The Grapes of Wrath well enough that this one time when I burned a CD consisting solely of Canadian music, The Grapes of Wrath ended up with a full four tracks, where no other artist had more than one.

(Side note: One of the other songs was called The Fool Has Parted, by the band Uisce Beatha. I remember really loving that one. If anyone knows where I can listen to it again, I'd appreciate that information.)

The four Grapes of Wrath songs were: All the Things I Wasn't, What Was Going Through My Head, You May Be Right, and I Am Here. The latter two are from this album. I listened to that Canada music CD all the time, so hearing those songs again after all these years triggered some serious nostalgia. Aside from that, this album's all right. Nothing too special, but pretty good. Sort of a poor man's R.E.M., I suppose.

Favorite tracks: obviously You May Be Right and I Am Here, but other than those two I liked Now the most

Score: 60/100

Next up: Cypress Hill by Cypress Hill

Re: Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Thu, 8 Feb 2018 21:59:44 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/09/2018 02:59

Tilly wrote:

Hmmm... Never even heard of this one! How'd you pick this one, again? Seems pretty left field.

I put every 1991 album I have on my computer on the list, and it was on my computer, so it went on the list. The question then becomes: why was it on my computer? And I wasn't sure of the answer to that, so I did some sleuthing.

The folder containing the mp3 files was created in September of 2015 (the files themselves are from that February), so I've had the album a few years. I see that it's #2 on mostlymor's overall list, and mostlymor himself is ranked 8th on the Top members page. A few years ago I downloaded and consolidated the top 100 users' overall lists into a single excel file in order to generate album recommendations. So I went and found that file, and it turns out it was also created in September 2015. And apparently, back then, mostlymor actually had 24 Years of Hunger as his #1 (and he was only ranked 12th). I now remember that I downloaded the top album in each of those lists. I see several other similarly "left field" albums as some of the other lists' #1s, and I have each one on my computer as well. I really should get around to listening to all of them one of these days.

But anyway, that's the ultimate cause. I picked that album because back in September 2015, mostlymor had it as #1 on his overall list.

Re: Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Thu, 8 Feb 2018 21:33:09 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/09/2018 02:33

Tilly wrote:

ok, I think I'm getting the feeling for your tastes just a bit more. Try this for my second rec...

Don't Get Weird On Me, Babe by Lloyd Cole

It's now on the list. It looks promising, based on your write-up.

Re: Golden Years #1: 1991

Repo — Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:12:22 GMT

Author: Repo

Posted: 02/08/2018 23:12

Rhyner wrote:

24 Years Of Hunger by Eg And Alice

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

I liked this one. Thoroughly pleasant, nice, chill soft rock type stuff. Well, I say "thoroughly pleasant", but the the third track, Mystery Man, has a ringing phone sound. I hate that in music. That and (when I'm driving) police sirens. Other than that, though, quite nice.

It definitely has the potential to grow on me.

Favorite tracks: Rockets, Indian

Score: 64/100

Next up: These Days by The Grapes Of Wrath

Hmmm... Never even heard of this one! How'd you pick this one, again? Seems pretty left field.

Re: Golden Years #1: 1991

Repo — Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:04:57 GMT

Author: Repo

Posted: 02/08/2018 23:04

Rhyner wrote:

III by Sebadoh

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

Sorry Tilly. I didn't spark to this one as much as I had hoped I would. It all blurs together. Not much stands out.

Pavement and Guided by Voices have never quite clicked for me either. My biggest problem with them (and this album) is that they tend to lack a...I don't know, a certain...punch...or something. They sound like you're hearing them through a wall, like they weren't properly recorded. I realize that's the whole lo-fi sound, so maybe this lo-fi stuff just isn't for me.

The other big problem with this album is that it goes on too long. I'm pretty much on board with it until about halfway through, and that's when it all starts to sound the same to me (until the last track, that is, which certainly sounds different but also goes on too long). I'm sure that's just my lack of stamina in effect, but I do think it could have benefited from losing a few of the weakest tracks.

Overall it's all right, but a bit underwhelming in quality and a bit overwhelming in quantity.

Score: 54/100

😢

ok, I think I'm getting the feeling for your tastes just a bit more. Try this for my second rec...

Don't Get Weird On Me, Babe by Lloyd Cole

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Thu, 8 Feb 2018 17:43:55 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/08/2018 22:43

24 Years Of Hunger by Eg And Alice

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

I liked this one. Thoroughly pleasant, nice, chill soft rock type stuff. Well, I say "thoroughly pleasant", but the the third track, Mystery Man, has a ringing phone sound. I hate that in music. That and (when I'm driving) police sirens. Other than that, though, quite nice.

It definitely has the potential to grow on me.

Favorite tracks: Rockets, Indian

Score: 64/100

Next up: These Days by The Grapes Of Wrath

Golden Years #1: 1991

Rhyner — Fri, 2 Feb 2018 16:30:12 GMT

Author: Rhyner

Posted: 02/02/2018 21:30

III by Sebadoh

This is the first time I've heard this one. I listened to it three times.

Sorry Tilly. I didn't spark to this one as much as I had hoped I would. It all blurs together. Not much stands out.

Pavement and Guided by Voices have never quite clicked for me either. My biggest problem with them (and this album) is that they tend to lack a...I don't know, a certain...punch...or something. They sound like you're hearing them through a wall, like they weren't properly recorded. I realize that's the whole lo-fi sound, so maybe this lo-fi stuff just isn't for me.

The other big problem with this album is that it goes on too long. I'm pretty much on board with it until about halfway through, and that's when it all starts to sound the same to me (until the last track, that is, which certainly sounds different but also goes on too long). I'm sure that's just my lack of stamina in effect, but I do think it could have benefited from losing a few of the weakest tracks.

Overall it's all right, but a bit underwhelming in quality and a bit overwhelming in quantity.

Score: 54/100

Next up: 24 Years Of Hunger by Eg And Alice