Best Ever Albums

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

RoundTheBend — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 20:11:34 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 01/02/2018 01:11

Tap wrote:

you're going to want to wait a bit. 2017 albums don't get credit on decade and overall charts until those charts are updated in 2018, I believe. I'd say give it at least 3 months tho there will still be more gains for it by the end of 2018, I'd bet.

also I listened to radio in the 90s and kids these days are getting exposed to way more diverse things now. and because of that diversity, it is more difficult to achieve consensus. the past is on equal footing with the present and mort garson - plantasia is blowing up in popularity, even tho it's some fun synth thing from 76. shit is crazy

Tap, you sum things up beautifully.

Also, I 100% agree.

I have a feeling a great reason why the past few years isn't ranking well has more to do with time and diversity.

Time because that's how music works with a lot of people. They hear it the first time or so and like it enough to not change it. Then they hear it 205973497543 more times, and it just becomes a staple to their music vocabulary and we really can only say what's in the vocabulary - long story short, ain't nobody going to put an obscure album on their chart unless they are actively searching for it or it falls in their laps- so furthermore, having a 2014 album beat statistics on something by Radiohead or The Beatles is just not going to happen very soon for all the reasons explained before. It takes time and notoriety - heck the music business sometimes even has a "new release" for 2 or 3 years after it was actually released. Or you'll hear on the radio - and their new hit single blah blah... it was released 2 years ago, but sure, it can be their hit new single (sometimes singles are released after the album and sometimes they just say that cause "new" music means something more to some people).

Diversity... eh, I don't need to say anything that hasn't been said (I didn't really need to for time either... ahahaha).

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

Tap — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 06:54:23 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 01/01/2018 11:54

rkm wrote:

Just wondering, are the 2017 albums overall ranks accurate as of now, or does anything happen going into a new year to calculate/adjust them? (I'm putting a new graph together).

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

bobbyb5 — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 06:25:57 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 01/01/2018 11:25

PurpleHazel wrote:

bobbyb5 wrote:

You can make a broad analogy with politics. When there were far less news outlets, everyone consumed the same news, news that attempted to be balanced. Now with the internet, 1000 cable channels and streaming, too many people just consume media that reinforces what they already believe -- it's become an echo chamber.

I know, right? It seems like the more choices people have, the more they stick to what they already like. We have all the music in the world available at our fingertips at any time, yet most people gravitate to the same music you can hear anywhere. Only a very small percentage of people actually seek out music that's unfamiliar to them.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

PurpleHazel — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 04:15:20 GMT

Author: PurpleHazel

Posted: 01/01/2018 09:15

bobbyb5 wrote:

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 03:41:47 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 01/01/2018 08:41

Just wondering, are the 2017 albums overall ranks accurate as of now, or does anything happen going into a new year to calculate/adjust them? (I'm putting a new graph together).

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

bobbyb5 — Mon, 1 Jan 2018 01:53:09 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 01/01/2018 06:53

sethmadsen wrote:

My guess is more diverse and maybe more mature? I feel like the great music post 2009 or so is missing the pop aesthetic (imo), which allows more people to like it. So you have a bunch of solid artists with less popular music, so you have less people agreeing with what's best... that probably doesn't make any sense but it does to me. Build a bridge.

But I really don't know - just conjecture.

More diverse? I think in the past the general public was exposed to a much more diverse range of music than now. This was because until the 2000s, the main way that the wider public was exposed to music was via the radio. And the radio of the past was much more diverse. The fact that music is more readily accessible today has the reverse effect of exposing people to less variety of music. It's the opposite of what you would expect. There's still a diversity of music today, but masses of people aren't exposed to it like in the past. The only music that gets mass exposure and mass saturation is hip hop, modern country, and today's dance pop, none of which is as good or as varied today as it was back then. From the 60s through the 80s, you never knew what you were going to hear if you listened to the radio. But today you know exactly what you're going to hear.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

PurpleHazel — Sun, 31 Dec 2017 19:44:41 GMT

Author: PurpleHazel

Posted: 01/01/2018 00:44

rkm wrote:

Also, the years from 2013 to the present decline pretty badly. Is music that bad, or is it simply more diverse? There's 2000+ albums in each of those years. The love is spread around more?

There are more albums, but the overall level of quality's lower than in rock's peak decades (60's and 70's). Same issue with film. More films being made than ever -- at least as of the 2000s -- but film's peak artistic period ended in the 80s IMHO.

Quote:

The 50's years only have a couple of hundred albums listed in each year.

There were less albums released in the 50s than in the 70s forward, but another major reason there's less is that this site's rock-oriented, so far less of the members adding albums know 50s pop and R&B as well. Also many lesser-known 50s jazz albums were never rereleased on CD. Some big bands and obscure white jazz artists of the 50s are forgotten today.

I bet that if someone pored through all the record company catalogues from the 50s, they could reach 1000 albums per year.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:45:51 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 12/30/2017 20:45

Album artists rather than singles artists, combined with the fact that people could care less about albums.

I was talking to a new friend a while ago. He's in his late 30's. He said to me, completely seriously, "do people even make albums anymore"?

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

RoundTheBend — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:40:27 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/30/2017 20:40

rkm wrote:

Also, the years from 2013 to the present decline pretty badly. Is music that bad, or is it simply more diverse? There's 2000+ albums in each of those years. The love is spread around more? The 50's years only have a couple of hundred albums listed in each year.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:33:30 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 12/30/2017 20:33

Also, the years from 2013 to the present decline pretty badly. Is music that bad, or is it simply more diverse? There's 2000+ albums in each of those years. The love is spread around more? The 50's years only have a couple of hundred albums listed in each year.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

RoundTheBend — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:27:49 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/30/2017 20:27

rkm wrote:

I still wonder what it all means. I didn't include the 50's because the numbers are so high, it makes the rest of the chart less legible. But were the 50's really that weak, or are they more ignored simply because they were so long ago?

Easily the latter.

Also song for song, perhaps the 50s had less strong albums (minus the more serious Jazz and Classical world), but musical movements in Soul/R&B/Rock, etc. that were imo just as important as anything happening in the 70s or 60s. Maybe they perfected it a bit more in later decades, but the heart and soul of it started in the 50s (well could be argued started with swing/jazz, etc.... I guess define what "it" is...haha).

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 15:17:38 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 12/30/2017 20:17

sethmadsen wrote:

rkm wrote:

You might find this interesting.

I made this chart, which shows two sets of data... #1 Album Overall Rank for each year, and the Top Ten Albums Overall Rank Average for each year (lower numbers are better).

Based on this, the best years are: 1967, 1969, 1971, 1994, 1991, 1968, 1977.
The worst years are: 2015, 2014, 1981, 2013, 1966, 1990, 1965.

I've saved this chart and share it with others anytime the conversation comes up outside of this site. Absolutely fantastic chart. Thanks!

You're welcome. I have a new updated one that I'll post in the new year. It compares top 10 with top 50, and shows some years to be stronger in their depth than their top end.

I still wonder what it all means. I didn't include the 50's because the numbers are so high, it makes the rest of the chart less legible. But were the 50's really that weak, or are they more ignored simply because they were so long ago?

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

PurpleHazel — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 03:40:41 GMT

Author: PurpleHazel

Posted: 12/30/2017 08:40

AAL2014 wrote:

I had to include 1959 in this poll. Although I felt bad for leaving out years previous, I feel as if 1959 was the turning point to a large degree in terms of albums. Of course there was great stuff prior (1957 in particular) but I felt as if 1959 had way too many amazing and influential albums to be left out. It has become one of my favorite years as I've gotten further into jazz. Kind of Blue, Mingus Ah Um, Art Blakey, Shape of Jazz to Come, Jazz In Silhouette in the same 12 months? Come on.

If you'd done a 50's list, a lot less people would've participated, obviously.

It's hard to beat the most popular and critically-acclaimed mainstream jazz album of all time (Kind of Blue), Ornette and Blakey's best albums, and the most accessible of Mingus's best albums.

Quote:

(1957 in particular)

After I completed my 1950s decade list, I sorted them by year, and was surprised that 1957 beat out 1959. A very deep year for jazz.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

RoundTheBend — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 01:48:29 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/30/2017 06:48

Would have voted 1969.

Top 65 Music Albums of 1969 by sethmadsen

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

RoundTheBend — Sat, 30 Dec 2017 01:46:35 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/30/2017 06:46

rkm wrote:

I've saved this chart and share it with others anytime the conversation comes up outside of this site. Absolutely fantastic chart. Thanks!

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

bobbyb5 — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 17:31:43 GMT

Author: bobbyb5

Posted: 12/29/2017 22:31

1969 is closing in on 1967. It's neck-and-neck now. 😎

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

AAL2014 — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:52:06 GMT

Author: AAL2014

Posted: 12/29/2017 21:52

After 46 votes from BEA users, the poll is closed, moving on will be:

1967 with 20 votes

1969 with 15 votes

1966 with 4 votes

Next thread coming up: The 1970's

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

AAL2014 — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:46:40 GMT

Author: AAL2014

Posted: 12/29/2017 21:46

rkm wrote:

However, when you compare Top 50, 1969 is stronger than 1967, and 1968 is on par with 1967.

Wow, that's interesting. Thanks for the graphic.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 05:45:21 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 12/29/2017 10:45

But regardless of the data, at the end of the day, you like what you like.

Re: Best Year For Music- Round 1-Part 1: 1959-1969

rkm — Fri, 29 Dec 2017 05:39:30 GMT

Author: rkm

Posted: 12/29/2017 10:39

This one gives a broader picture. 1959 was the strongest year of the 50's.