The biggest omission, by far, is the near complete ignorance of so many of the most creative albums of Jazz history, or at least relegating several of them to much lower status than they deserve. On one hand I dig the fact that black artists were given way more due than usual -- roughly 1/2 of the top 100 (even if it seems a bit contrived, maybe even conspicuous, maybe even partially politically motivated and/or due to current trends/media cycle etc?). Still most of the albums are at least very good so regardless of motivations or not, those are some great hip hop albums and so on. However, it would be nice if they realized that Jazz was THE music vanguard of the 50s and 60s until 65/66 when Rock began equaling it; Jazz with the far superior technical/compositional skills and then the advent of free/avant garde jazz. And that these were extremely fruitful and totally revolutionary artistic pursuits (the original "OGs", the original "Punk"...) that were by far the most courageous representation of black artists being taken more seriously and intellectually (like classical composers), musical representations of liberation, the civil rights movement, independance, and so on. Although Im a fan of Kanye and Lamar and Notorious BIG and so on, I think at least 3/4 of the higher ranked black artists should belong to the likes of Mingus, Coltrane, Miles, Monk, Coleman, Taylor, Sun Ra, etc, and to rank (especially Drake, Beyonce...wut?), and even many others not as outlandish, above so many jazz masterpieces, looks seems pretty ignorant imo. But maybe not so much to the current trend of pop-timism and hip hop dominating music? I just think thats a mere trend influencing the selections and shouldnt completely dominate the qualitative thinking of a whole list.
I'm glad to see Definitely Maybe, Parklife, and Different Class get added, but I'm still pissed off that American publications continue to ignore Suede's first 3 albums.
It feels like Rolling Stone is just trying to stay trendy without actually knowing what they're doing. Until now, you sort of knew what you were gonna get with their lists, and for what they were, they weren't terrible (hot take, but yeah). I expected a lot of classic rock, pop, soul etc. and I got it. The last one wasn't a good top 500 best albums of all time list, but it was a Rolling Stone list. Now it's just all over the place for no reason at all. This is the best selection of 500 albums they've done, true, but it's the worst order yet. And for something as subjective as "500 Best Albums Ever", they managed to fuck up quite a lot.
AfterHours remarks about jazz are spot on too, there's no way you can have 11 hip hop album in the top 50 (which is far too much, even if I like all of them), and only Kind of Blue representing jazz. And I'm arguably as big of a hip hop fan as I'm a jazz fan.
I like this comment:
Quote:
Such an odd mixture of incomparable musical categories that really, it's a fools errand to even try to make a coherent list. That said, even within well defined groups that are comparable, the rankings are puzzling and seemingly arbitrary. A more interesting list would include a short statement as to why an album rose or fell 30 places from the last list in relation to another album that was also on the last list.
RS reached out to a wider variety of music professionals for this list than the last two. It turned out messy and random, but it also turned out more eclectic, which I can appreciate. This list is nowhere as good as our BEA list but it's a step in a better direction. I think it was about time RS recognized more people listen to music than white boomer-aged rock listeners. Those previous two lists had some great albums, but overall they sucked because they were so narrow-focused. This isn't to say the new one doesn't have some glaring omissions. AfterHours pointed out the lack of jazz. And I can't help but notice '80s and '90s alternative are still under-represented, and many of those albums that appear on the list appear lower than they should imo. For example, The Cure, The Smiths, Stone Roses, Smashing Pumpkins, Pixies, Weezer, and Depeche Mode don't have an album in the Top 100. All of them are represented farther down the list, but not one in the Top 100. And by the way, Sigur Ros isn't even on the Top 500. Still, this RS list is better than the last two versions. I didn't realize until LordMark pointed out that Britpop was barely represented in the older versions. I'm guessing What's the Story was on the older lists, but that's all, whereas this new list welcomed Definitely Maybe, Different Class, and Parklife.
RS reached out to a wider variety of music professionals for this list than the last two. It turned out messy and random, but it also turned out more eclectic, which I can appreciate. This list is nowhere as good as our BEA list but it's a step in a better direction. I think it was about time RS recognized more people listen to music than white boomer-aged rock listeners. Those previous two lists had some great albums, but overall they sucked because they were so narrow-focused. This isn't to say the new one doesn't have some glaring omissions. AfterHours pointed out the lack of jazz. And I can't help but notice '80s and '90s alternative are still under-represented, and many of those albums that appear on the list appear lower than they should imo. For example, The Cure, The Smiths, Stone Roses, Smashing Pumpkins, Pixies, Weezer, and Depeche Mode don't have an album in the Top 100. All of them are represented farther down the list, but not one in the Top 100. And by the way, Sigur Ros isn't even on the Top 500. Still, this RS list is better than the last two versions. I didn't realize until LordMark pointed out that Britpop was barely represented in the older versions. I'm guessing What's the Story was on the older lists, but that's all, whereas this new list welcomed Definitely Maybe, Different Class, and Parklife.
I guess you're right, it is a step in right direction. And non-American music was barely represented on the last few lists, I'm not sure it's much better now. Or is it? I haven't examined the list closely enough. _________________ Overall chart Fake overall chart
I guess you're right, it is a step in right direction. And non-American music was barely represented on the last few lists, I'm not sure it's much better now. Or is it? I haven't examined the list closely enough.
Depends if you think Brazil, Japan, Cuba, Norway, Poland, Mali, Russia or India have ever released music worth consideration. 🤣
Canada did okay I suppose.
As for Sigur Ros, Godspeed You, etc... Rolling Stone aren't too big into post-rock. _________________ Doubles & Conch
SpyglassResident MetalheadProfile The red dot on the map
Depends if you think Brazil, Japan, Cuba, Norway, Poland, Mali, Russia or India have ever released music worth consideration. :lol:
I haven't heard anything from Mali yet, but, these other countries had Buena Vista Social Club, Galneryus, Immortal, Riverside, Regina Spektor and Ravi Shankar. So yes, Rolling Stone needs to do what they should be doing. _________________ Do it yourself and let me play my music: https://www.besteveralbums.com/thechart.php?c=61802
Here's 10 of my favs, if you're looking for somewhere to start. Other albums by those artists are great too. Tamikrest, Tinariwen, and Songhoy Blues are all worth putting in the queue as well. _________________ Doubles & Conch
It seems it's mostly the stuff they see on other list. Like, does half of the OutKast catalog need to be included? Why include compilations, i.e. The Immaculate Collection while they had Madonna's self-titled debut on their 1980s top 100 at #50? Rolling Stones still loves Mary J. Blige who doesn't often appear but The Emancipation of Mimi over Butterfly?
And they are "making a statement" with The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill at #10 but still only 7 solo female albums in the top 10. Nice to see Purple Rain that high but why only the usual 4 Prince albums instead of adding Around The World In A Day or Parade?
DommeDamianImperfect, sensitive Aspie with a melody addictionProfile Spire City
Fuuuuuuuck this list. Cash-grabbing, not generosity. All hype, no substance. All for the trend, not for the lasting.
There is like, too many duds that is imo wrong with this list to count on two hands and feet, but some of the most memorable to me were;
Illmatic is better than any rap record (or any record) above it.... and held as the best rap album of all time by thousands of musiclovers: it is too low,
Billie Eilish is above Lorde (if Billie being added wasn't enough of a headscratcher),
Suicide - a definitively head-of-the-curve electronic classic - is too low
Six Kanye West albums
Pink Floyd... whe-.... where's Pink Floyd?
TPAB being too high
Kid A being too high - and above the so-much-goddamn-better OK Computer
Thriller not being in the top 10
Miseducation of Lauryn Hill - a 20% rap-album, 80% funk-soul album - being crowned as the best rap album, when nobody has said it's the best for at least a decade.
and (FUCKING) Drake being higher than Eminem's incomparable masterpiece. _________________ My Top 100 :
www.besteveralbums.com/thechart.php?c=4...amp;page=1
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Hayden
LedZep
CA Dreamin
Spyglass
DommeDamian
