Best Ever Albums

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxxy — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:51:05 GMT

Author: maxxy

Posted: 08/11/2009 21:51

joannajewsom wrote:

You're right; I think they get to much popular praise (liked by everyone I meet for the past 5 years? Come on...) Take my brother. He thinks that coldplay are amazing, but by contrast dislikes better albums such as Funeral by Arcade Fire (which I find really odd), anything by Bob Dylan...IMO he doesn't really pay attention to the music as to the hype.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxperenchio — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:27:02 GMT

Author: maxperenchio

Posted: 08/11/2009 21:27

I think the accessibility-as-virtue issue fits fine into this thread. I wouldn't call it the most valuable of the many musical virtues, but there is certainly an artistry to it. Either way, your comments regarding the nature of successful pop singles are devastatingly restrictive. I find it hilarious when anyone claims that they could write a top 40 single. Dude, if you really can- make a demo, get an entertainment lawyer to shop it to a label, and become a MILLIONARE, for your own sake! (PS, i never said successfull= great)

And even worse, to use the "screaming girl" label to describe every single person that listens to commercial pop music? Yikes. We're talking 21st century art here- to suggest that no one in the music industry or its respective audience has a mental faculty for appreciating irony, the banal, or intentional decadence is a rather large leap. America has an infatuation with getting off on its own degradation, and the state of the industry has quite a bit of music that plays into that. But is there really anything wrong with that? There is an aesthetic to the hyper-slick and over-sexed because it says something about culture. Do we have to start discussing Jeff Koons or Duchamp's readymades? 😄

Regarding the Ol' Captain- I certainly did not mean to suggest that he was completely obscure in his time, especially to the music community. My point was a small one, in that the only reason he's ever been considered overrated was the enormous critical praise he started getting in the late 90's, when Trout Mask would frequently land in any given top 100 of all time- a designation no one would have dreamed of in decades prior. (which in turn sparked up the huge anti-trout sentiment you pointed out earlier)

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

joannajewsom — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:07:06 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 08/11/2009 20:07

maxperenchio wrote:

I think accessibility is a virtue that is unfairly damned by most serious critics. In the case of Coldplay, i give them credit for the fact that they have any critical appreciation at all, considering their commercial juggernaut status. When Chris Martin was on the cover of Rolling Stone, they still called him "wuss rock jesus" or something like that.

I've always been on the side of the critical underdog simply because I know how difficult it is to write a successful pop song. It must be immaculately constructed, sensationally listenable, and equipped with emotional resonance for the everyman. A writer known for difficult, idiosyncratic music might not be able to create what "wuss-rockers" do with ease. (not that they'd really want to... but still)

My definition of an overrated band is one which is culturally irrelevant, but whose importance is improperly inflated by critics as a fashion statement.

In the case of Trout Mask- its such a bizarre, singular example of the overrated/underrated discussion that it rises to a class of its own. I don't think it had much of a cultural or musical influence before its enormous critical resurgence in the 90s. What happened in result was many bands became sensationally influenced by the record, even if the first time they heard it was in a top 100 list! The reason of course is because the music is fascinating. Some people hate it, it happens to be one of my favorites (but not as great as Safe as Milk!) but that's whats great about great art!

Interesting, Max. I don't see accessibility as a virtue. I'm up for a discussion on why, but that would be its on thread and a much bigger discussion. For now, I won't argue against it-- if you would like to talk about it, let me know.

I will, however, disagree that it is difficult to write a successful pop song. Is it difficult to write a great pop song? Yes. A successful one? No. Successful does not = great. Watch an episode of TRL and tell me if you think those successful pop songs are also great songs. It needs to be overproduced, trendy, formulaic, and void of significant artistic merit in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator. But that's just the beginning. Its success is mainly the product of millions of dollars of marketing and selling the song to mainstream audiences. My hat goes off to the suits selling this stuff, not the songwriters.

Speculating on whether real artists could write pop songs that appeal to screaming teenage girls is ridiculous, and it doesn't take away anything from their artistic merit.

Could you give an example of a band that is culturally irrelevant, but whose importance is improperly inflated by critics as a fashion statement? I just don't see that happening. I don't see any critics out there rewriting history to make Slint, for example, seem more culturally relevant. Most critically acclaimed albums that weren't commercially successful are usually praised for their influence on the art form. That could be inflated, sure, but I don't see any critics claiming that Silver Apples or Beefheart were culturally relevant. Usually their relevance in terms of its inlfuence and innovation within the art form is what is praised. I'm not sure I get what you mean. Is there anyone out there inflating the cultural influence of TMR?

As far as its influence on the art form, I don't think that has been inflated. You have to remember that it came out during a kind of renaissance period and there was a ton of experimenting going on and bands feeding off of each other's creativity. Any significant innovation was going to catch the ears of the community of musicians. Beefheart was not obscure amongst musicians. Zappa, who was a big figure during the 60s, was his producer. He was giving interviews in Rolling Stone (not as big as it is now) and getting some press back during the Trout Mask days. His albums charted. People were hearing these records and being influenced by them. There's that famous picture of Lennon hanging out in his home with Safe As Milk posters in the background. The Beatles also wanted to sign him at some point. When the biggest band in the world takes notice of you who you are, you're good as gold.

My parents probably never heard of Beefheart, but musicians undoubtedly heard his music and were influenced by him-- you can hear it in some early records and there are a lot of artists who have been citing him as an influence for decades, it didn't just start in the 90s. Same with a band like the Silver Apples, who also got a big resurgence in the past decade. You just don't make records that innovative back in the late 60s and have it go unnoticed by musicians-- by the general public, yes, but not by musicians. Their music also had a significant influence, although they weren't really culturally significant. Again, because musicians had a nose for innovation, and Silver Apples records got as far as Germany and was an influence on Krautrock.

Beefheart may have be more culturally significant than most people think, though. I've seen a few interviews with him on the David Letterman show back in the 80s. He's not really that obscure.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

telefunker — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:41:51 GMT

Author: telefunker

Posted: 08/11/2009 19:41

precisely

i think it's important to highlight the distinction between personal opinion/taste and objective musical quality

if somebody genuinely enjoys trout mask replica, coldplay or speak the hungarian rapper then that is always their individual perogative.. after all it's just sound, and if that sound can induce an emotional response in the person, then who is anyone else to argue with that?

whereas objective critical analysis, i feel, should consider the the quality of the music from a technical perspective, so as not to cloud judgement with personal bias ..and on those grounds i would certainly attest that 'a rush of blood to the head' is a good album, though i don't care for it much on a personal level

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxperenchio — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:45:43 GMT

Author: maxperenchio

Posted: 08/11/2009 18:45

I think accessibility is a virtue that is unfairly damned by most serious critics. In the case of Coldplay, i give them credit for the fact that they have any critical appreciation at all, considering their commercial juggernaut status. When Chris Martin was on the cover of Rolling Stone, they still called him "wuss rock jesus" or something like that.

I've always been on the side of the critical underdog simply because I know how difficult it is to write a successful pop song. It must be immaculately constructed, sensationally listenable, and equipped with emotional resonance for the everyman. A writer known for difficult, idiosyncratic music might not be able to create what "wuss-rockers" do with ease. (not that they'd really want to... but still)

My definition of an overrated band is one which is culturally irrelevant, but whose importance is improperly inflated by critics as a fashion statement.

In the case of Trout Mask- its such a bizarre, singular example of the overrated/underrated discussion that it rises to a class of its own. I don't think it had much of a cultural or musical influence before its enormous critical resurgence in the 90s. What happened in result was many bands became sensationally influenced by the record, even if the first time they heard it was in a top 100 list! The reason of course is because the music is fascinating. Some people hate it, it happens to be one of my favorites (but not as great as Safe as Milk!) but that's whats great about great art!

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

RFNAPLES — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:09:30 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 08/11/2009 18:09

There is no single general authority on ratings or rankings. That is why it is your perception of what others think of an album compared to your opinion of that album which causes it to be overrated or underrated in your mind. Some would argue that commercial success is an indicator of rating or ranking while other will suggest that is not true since some people buy albums they don't like or no longer do.

Enjoy the music you do and don't worry about its ratings or rankings. With over 2,344,479 editions, does it really matter where in the top 3000 one is ranked or rated? Use the ratings and rankings as a filter to help you discover more music given limited economic and time constraints.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

joannajewsom — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:26:55 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 08/11/2009 17:26

maxxy wrote:

What's RYM? Rate Your Music? And what if you really do enjoy TMR? mmm....
Actually Naples is right this time.

Oh and I don't think Coldplay deserves all that much praise. Enjoyable? Yes. Fantastic? No.

Maxxy, do you think Coldplay gets too much critical praise? I mean, they're commercially successful in the mainstream, but they're not really lauded in the widespread community of critics (professional and non-professional). They may get a good write up in the irrelevant Rolling Stone or some pop culture, mainstream mag like Entertainment Weekly or Blender-- turn the page and you'll see some photos of Cameron Diaz on the beach!-- but the majority of respectable critics aren't going gaga over them, are they?

They're accessible and enjoyable, like you said, and that's all you need to be commercially successful, so I don't really feel they're "overrated" in that sense. I think a band deserves commercial success as their accessibility-- and not their artistic merit-- warrants it.

This site seems to be the only place where I've seen Coldplay "overrated." But the number of people (113 votes, 90 favorites for Rush of Blood to the Head) is such a small sample with an obvious bias that the results are far from depicting the general consensus on the band. It reminds me of that time Kirk from "Gilmore Girls" polled only himself and said that 100% of voters are voting for Jackson.

On the other hand, go to RYM where Rush of Blood has over 5,000 votes-- a much more accurate way to gauge general consensus of music listeners, as opposed to mainstream consumers-- and you'll see that they don't even crack the top 5,000. The album is 47 here, but ranked #179 for the just the year 2002.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

RFNAPLES — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:37:13 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 08/11/2009 16:37

Often some people feel they are right and everybody else is wrong. For instance, you may feel Coldplay is overrated but it may be that your opinion is in the minority and that Coldplay deserved the praise. People have different tastes, desires, and expectations for music and thus assign different ratings.

Personally, I rank Coldplay’s A Rush Of Blood To The Head at #47 and I expect people to disagree. Its BestEverAlbum overall rank is 56. As for Captain Beefheart and His Magic Band's Trout Mask Replica, I rank it at 60 while BestEverAlbum assigns an overall rank of 67. So I would conclude that those albums are fairly rated since there is very little variance in rank.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

telefunker — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:10:48 GMT

Author: telefunker

Posted: 08/11/2009 15:10

i don't really like coldplay or a rush of blood to the head.. but i do think the songs on the album are consistently strong melodically and well constructed/arranged.. so i wouldn't begrudge anyone lauding over it.. personally i find it all a bit wishy-washy and insipid

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

joannajewsom — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:56:19 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 08/11/2009 14:56

Yeah, Rate Your Music. I'm not saying there are people who don't really enjoy it. I really enjoy it. I was saying that at this point I see no incentive to pretend to enjoy it.

Naples just pointed out something devastatingly obvious. We all know what "overrated" or "underrated" means, and that it is relative to one's own opinion on the album. That's beside the point. The point of the thread is to figure out how a band like Coldplay, your example, could gain so much undeserved praise. What forces outside of the music are at work?

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxxy — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:35:11 GMT

Author: maxxy

Posted: 08/11/2009 14:35

What's RYM? Rate Your Music? And what if you really do enjoy TMR? mmm....
Actually Naples is right this time.

Oh and I don't think Coldplay deserves all that much praise. Enjoyable? Yes. Fantastic? No.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

joannajewsom — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:39:59 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 08/11/2009 13:39

Interestingly enough, telefunker, I've noticed that the very polarizing Trout Mask Replica has received so much acclaim that there isn't anything "cool" about it anymore. It isn't OK Computer popular, but it's typical experimental rock canon by now, so that inner-circle of kids in the know isn't exclusive anymore. And the people who hate it vastly outnumber the people who love it, and their hate just keeps growing stronger when its acclaim keeps getting stronger. So for every 2 people who may "overrate" it, there's 10 more people waiting to "underrate" it and knock it back down, making a reactionary statement as dishonest as using TMR as some "fashion statement." Trout Mask Replica will more than likely get you bashed and accused of being a poser at this point, than it will get you applauded. TMR backlash is definitely more noticeable over at RYM, where it doesn't even crack the top 2000.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

telefunker — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:22:45 GMT

Author: telefunker

Posted: 08/11/2009 08:22

sorry, i just realised i forgot to include who i consider to be the most foremost example of how hype and fashion can inflate the public perception of musical quality:

the libertines

now, i'm not into the whole pete doherty thing, but if there were some tunes, some soaring melodies, timeless songs in all of it then i would acknowledge them as having some worth.. but they're just a pure fashion band and it does irritate me seeing them in any 'best of' lists

even the spice girls managed 1 iconic track (albeit for 8-year-old girls), but this guy just ruffles his hair and shoots some heroin.. and it passes off as great?

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

telefunker — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 04:16:00 GMT

Author: telefunker

Posted: 08/11/2009 08:16

if a record doesn't grab my attention and resonate with me in some way, it's never gonna be a favourite of mine.. however, as a semi-enlightened individual and musician myself, i can appreciate the musical quality inherent in something i may not necessarily adore

examples of highly-acclaimed records i do not love, but recognize as being worthy of their praise:

jimi hendrix - are you experienced?
lou reed - transformer
ladyhawke - ladyhawke
coldplay - a rush of blood to the head

examples of highly-acclaimed records i feel are overrated and have become little more than fashion statements:

radiohead - in rainbows
captain beefheart - trout mask replica
bob dylan - desire
hole - live through this

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

RFNAPLES — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 00:18:10 GMT

Author: RFNAPLES

Posted: 08/11/2009 04:18

It is your opinion of an album compared with your perception of what others think of that album which causes it to be overrated or underrated in your mind.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxxy — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:38:39 GMT

Author: maxxy

Posted: 08/11/2009 01:38

maxperenchio wrote:

For me, an album's Rated-ness comes solely from the professional critical realm. I mean could you ever argue that a band like Nickelback is OVERrated? Sure they sell an ocean of records, have millions of loyal fans, but critically they are more or less considered the worst band in the world. Can constant radio play and junk-media saturation allow a band to be "overrated"?

Same thing with underrating- could anyone say an album like Slint's Spiderland is underrated, when its one of the most critically drooled over albums, simply because most people have never heard of it? How do you factor in mainstream adoration with how an album is "rated"?

Its an interesting point. Not sure what to say. "Over-rating" or "under-rating" it a thing of perspective. Overrated by whom? The critics? the radio idiots? popular opinions? Example: everybody seems to like Lil' Wayne, but I don't so I consider him overrated in popular opinion. Nirvana's nevermind is one of the most critically acclaimed albums of all time, and gets much more praise than In Utero and Unplugged in NY, both of which I think are better albums. So therefore I consider Nevermind is overrated by the critics and the other two are underrated by comparison.

I guess. Or Something like that.

Re: The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

joannajewsom — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:54:44 GMT

Author: joannajewsom

Posted: 08/11/2009 00:54

First of all, I almost spit out my fruit punch when you talked about scraping your dick off.

With overrating and underrating, you're right, rated-ness comes from the critical realm (including non-professional "critics" like you and me). We can actually gauge the critical perception of a work's quality through reviews, scores, best of lists, etc. With sales, it's completely different. If a band sells 5 million records, we can't assume 5 million people all love the album. That's highly unlikely. We don't know how they rate it. 1 million may love it, 1 million may think it's just okay, 2 million may think it's overrated and below average, and 1 million may hate it and wish they never bought it. How would we ever know? I would just call that overhyped rather than overrated, if anything. People aren't "rating" it when they buy it. You can't rate something you probably haven't heard yet. It's mostly teenagers buying pop records (ones that would reach in the millions in sales), and those records are sold based on marketing and accessibility. For me, accessibility is not an artistic virtue. Some people see it as a virtue-- I don't see any good reason why they would, but they do.

As far as how certain albums get overrated by critics...a little bit of the Emperor's New Clothes. A 9.4 from Pitchfork and you're an indie superstar. Hell, anything over an 8 and you're good as gold. As far as the classics, once an album has made it into the rock "canon," it's smooth-sailing from there. People grow up "knowing" the Beatles are the greatest. Everybody says it. So most listeners are going to approach with them with an Emperor's New Clothes attitude. Not saying the Beatles are "naked." I like them. But those clothes, in my opinion, ain't as fancy as they get hyped up to be.

I don't think something like Slint is underrated because it isn't mainstream. It has high artistic value but not much mainstream appeal. It's not accessible.; it was never really supposed to sell millions. Now if that record didn't get the critical acclaim it has, then I'd say it was underrated (assuming I would have heard of it if it didn't have the critical acclaim it deserved).

The Ubiquitous Overrated/Underrated Statement

maxperenchio — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:27:32 GMT

Author: maxperenchio

Posted: 08/10/2009 23:27

It's such a painful topic; I personally would rather scrape my dick off than listen to another "who is overrated/underrated" discussion (not really). But I'm fascinated to hear your opinions on WHY/HOW an album becomes overrated or underrated.

For me, an album's Rated-ness comes solely from the professional critical realm. I mean could you ever argue that a band like Nickelback is OVERrated? Sure they sell an ocean of records, have millions of loyal fans, but critically they are more or less considered the worst band in the world. Can constant radio play and junk-media saturation allow a band to be "overrated"?

Same thing with underrating- could anyone say an album like Slint's Spiderland is underrated, when its one of the most critically drooled over albums, simply because most people have never heard of it? How do you factor in mainstream adoration with how an album is "rated"?