Best Ever Albums

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

meccalecca — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:50:22 GMT

Author: meccalecca

Posted: 10/25/2013 16:50

paladisiac wrote:

so is meconium, but i wouldn't call that "artistic". ;)

You may want to familiarize yourself with the fine art of people like Mike Kelly and Paul McCarthy. It may change you mind as to whether or not meconium is art

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

paladisiac — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:46:11 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 10/25/2013 16:46

paladisiac wrote:

i don't know. the youngest of children (babies) are lucky to say "ga ga goo goo". at least the gents of spoon know "ga ga ga ga ga".

so is meconium, but i wouldn't call that "artistic". 😉

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

meccalecca — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:43:54 GMT

Author: meccalecca

Posted: 10/25/2013 16:43

paladisiac wrote:

i don't know. the youngest of children (babies) are lucky to say "ga ga goo goo". at least the gents of spoon know "ga ga ga ga ga".

but when babies do it, it's natural

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

paladisiac — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:39:26 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 10/25/2013 16:39

meccalecca wrote:

I think children are the most genuine artists, so on that basis the best work comes very early on.

Artists overthink what naturally comes to children and "outsiders"

i don't know. the youngest of children (babies) are lucky to say "ga ga goo goo". at least the gents of spoon know "ga ga ga ga ga".

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

meccalecca — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:05:54 GMT

Author: meccalecca

Posted: 10/25/2013 16:05

The Poe wrote:

I feel the most talented and genuine of artists (in what those words means to me personally) tend to improve over time.

I think children are the most genuine artists, so on that basis the best work comes very early on.

Artists overthink what naturally comes to children and "outsiders"

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

edubs — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:27:21 GMT

Author: edubs

Posted: 10/25/2013 13:27

Different bands take different paths - that is part of the fun.
Neither "path" (instant success or growing success) produces better music necessarily.
Some artists make a good/great album or two, then put out worse ones, then bounce back and make good/great ones again.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Anonymous — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 08:08:21 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 10/25/2013 12:08

The Poe wrote:

I feel the most talented and genuine of artists (in what those words means to me personally) tend to improve over time.

"My favourite artists are genuine. Yours are liars and scoundrels. In what those words mean to me personally, obvz."

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

davidhuret — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 04:49:33 GMT

Author: davidhuret

Posted: 10/25/2013 08:49

Growing: that's what it's all about, isn't it?

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

meruizh — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:36:15 GMT

Author: meruizh

Posted: 10/24/2013 22:36

Intresting topic.

It made me think, my favorite bands now a days, have true solid work after either an average-bad debut, or even a really good one.
The bands that have lost my affection completely, are the ones who began with an outstanding debut, and the failled album, after album to achieve a descent work.

Favorite Bands Now

The National; I mean this is the best example of a band that have shown in their last 4 albums what a great band they are. In their first two, although I dont consider them bad albums, they just lack of the escence the latest albums have.

Radiohead; nothing to say about them, they got their page written in history.

Arcade Fire; an exception to the rule. I keep wondering when are they going to deliver a weak album.

Arctic Monkeys; Oh what an amazing band! Incredible debut, really good follow up, a weird defyning new style third album, a forth album continuing the search of their sound, and an amazing fifth album! AM wow!

The Dark Side

The Stokes; after This Is It, everything else was below any expectations.

Interpol; even if you consider Antics as a good album, everything appeared like shit compared to their debut.

Red Hot Chilli Pepper; so many shitty albums I dont even know where to start.

In between Darkness and Light

Coldplay; with high and lows, from Parachutes and A Rush Blood to the Head, to X&Y; and from Vival la Vida to Mylo Xloto, I still have hope they can deliver a solid album

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Jasonconfused — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 17:57:20 GMT

Author: Jasonconfused

Posted: 10/24/2013 21:57

I've never really thought of it as relevant. There are bands like the Beatles that obviously grew and reached peak success in their later albums, but then you have bands like The Doors that I personally think had their best work in their debut, although I love most of their other albums as well. The Stones got better with time, King Crimson peaked with its debut. David Bowie grew, Ozzy's solo career peaked early. The Beach Boys grew, Brian Eno peaked with his early pop (IMO even though I imagine many of you will disagree). I really don't think it matters too much to me.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 17:35:06 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 10/24/2013 21:35

I feel the most talented and genuine of artists (in what those words means to me personally) tend to improve over time.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

HazeyTwilight — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:37:19 GMT

Author: HazeyTwilight

Posted: 10/24/2013 20:37

This topic for me all depends on whatever. I think it all comes to terms with the amount of maturity an artist has. For example: a fresh new band drops their debut album and it receives massive critical and commercial attention - if it's unexpected or not. The problem with this situation is that each subsequent album is going to have less and less appeal and the attention the debut gets slowly elludes their grasp. This is why - in my opinion - bands like The Strokes and Arctic Monkeys has gone in directions far beyond what their fans found so appealing in the first place and has made a completely new sound for their style. If more bands are consistent in their quality and the change of sound is just context, then it can be interesting.

Artists who struggle to get success on the debut but has grown to the top later in their career are far more interesting to me. Bands like the Flaming Lips would've been an obscure one-hit-wonder artist if it weren't for The Soft Bulletin. Now, they're one of the most interesting and endearing bands in the music industry today and with the aforementioned success, they've gotten the budget to express their ideas in the most craziest, zaniest and profound way possible to make a work of art. Plus, they've been going since 1983 and they just got their success in 1999, so there's a history in the making that fans can buy into.

So, I don't know who makes better music, like I said in the beginning, it depends on maturity.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Evandar — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:26:41 GMT

Author: Evandar

Posted: 10/24/2013 20:26

Interesting question. Checking the bands and artists I've been listening to for the past couple of weeks, in every case it's the ones that started out modestly and later went big that I enjoy the most. Except for Arctic Monkeys, who will probably have that first album-success hanging over their heads like the albatross in "Rime of the Ancient Mariner". Personally I think AM is their best album, though. Anyway, time to vote!

EDIT: Though! It could be said (and should be said) that Metallica was a lot better BEFORE they went big (aka Black Album). But they could still count, as they've always been one of my favourites, and they made several albums while slowly growing bigger, then BAM!, Black Album arrives.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

paladisiac — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 16:01:57 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 10/24/2013 20:01

most of the time, my favorite artists are those that have grown over time -- radiohead, prince, nirvana, kanye, genesis. my least-fav artists usually start out hot and burn out from there. I believe the difference lies in the talent and creativing of an artist -- those that don't have much tend to use up all their good ideas right away.

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Behrus58 — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 15:54:49 GMT

Author: Behrus58

Posted: 10/24/2013 19:54

Great Topic.

I think Growing success is more important it is like finding your style slowly but sounding original
yeah .. The biggest example for growing success is easily Radiohead. and as you see they didn't change their style once they did it twice.So How can they do this ? if a band is "really" great , their debut album is NOT their best or at least it is their best with a small advantage (like Arcade fire!Which i think Suburbs even beats Funeral)
But just ..take a look at muse!They lost it.Matt bellamy just had nth to offer after copycatting radiohead and lost it somehow.
Love to see what others say

Re: 'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

paladisiac — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 15:53:45 GMT

Author: paladisiac

Posted: 10/24/2013 19:53

btw, it's sucCess

'Instant Success' or 'Growing Success'?

Anonymous — Thu, 24 Oct 2013 15:49:43 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 10/24/2013 19:49

Which do you find produce the best music? Artists who have their greatest success on their 1st album or Artists who have their greatest success on later albums (maybe even 4th or 5th album).

By 'greatest sucess' I mean what is generally seen as their best album by most. For example, Pearl Jam's would have to be the album 'Ten'. You may think 'Vitalogy' is their best and there is nothing wrong with you considering it their best. Still... can you see where I am coming from? Admittedly, some artists may have 2-3 albums in contention. Just use what makes sense to you.

I hope I have explained it well. 😄