Success! I think. lol. Heard The REAL Tilly humming the choruses to a few songs on the way back home from the beach. And then she fell asleep. lol. Pretty cute.
I ended up going with Head On the Door and their Greatest Hits.
Wow, this was the kind of post that deserved to end with a mic drop, too bad mercurial is already a word, we need to find a new term.
Joking aside, I'm more than happy you added The Cure to the list and Cocteau Twins are another welcome addition, my relationship with them is painfully superficial, so that's a good excuse to give them another chance. The one thing I'm skeptical about is the 6-albums rule, does this mean Heaven or Las Vegas is out (I guess the same problem applies to The Cure as well) ?
Anyway, moving on with the albums, Fables of the Reconstruction shockingly enough ranks easily above Murmur and Reckoning for me. Those two had some glaring differences, but still felt like parts of a natural progression, this was a more decisive expansion - this change not necesseraliy being towards a more ambitious direction, quite the opposite actually, but it's a drastic one for sure and in hidsight it had a lasting impact, it was a sign of what's about to come. It keeps the softness - for lack of a better word- of Murmur but is presented in a much more tangible manner, maybe that's why even some pompous elements that in the hands of U2 would be plain cringeworthy are ok here. Also, I have to add it has been a great soundtrack for road trips, I tend to associate this attribute of it with the country influence you mentioned.
Bad Moon Rising is where Sonic Youth started losing me. Their first albums were uncotrollable beasts, their raw energy was unmatched, this is too sophisticated, too calculated if you will, even if it sounds better it can't capture the same atmosphere.
The same with U2 in a much larger scale (how I draw parallels between the arguably coolest band of all time and the arguably un-coolest band of all time is beyond me, but I really have the impression they follow a similar trajectory), they are past the point of no return by now, too big and too annoying.
The Smiths rollercoaster keeps going, I've grabbed my popcorns and wait for The Queen Is Dead, it should be the moment of truth.
Three Imaginary Boys is unsurprisingly too punk/rock for me - though admittedly far from the most irritating representatives of its kind. They do their best -especially Robert Smith- to add a new twist to it, but they still had a long way to go. Out of the six debuts this could be the most disappointing, not in a direct comparison with the other five, but in terms of how big the gap between this and the band's best moments is - to be fair, one also has to take into account the changes in the line up which affected The Cure much more than the rest of the bunch.
Seventeen Seconds is a big step forward, yet far from an easy listening. They focus on conveying a specific mood and do this by following a rigid, less is more approach, which results in some parts of it sounding too empty and a lack of standout moments. That said, the second half is rewarding you after a patient build up and overall this has their signature written all over it, it is their "proper" debut.
Faith is viewed as another heavily dark album, though I don't think it's as dark as their previous one. It is more direct and more flamboyant, so it gets its point across with greater ease, but in its heart of hearts I think Seventeen Seconds is darker, it portrays a more tempting image of darkness than the obvious point of reference - Joy Division - but in the end is just as hopeless, while Faith's desolation has a euphoric quality - if that makes any sense. The individual tracks here are more distinct, which makes for a less monotonous album, but it's also more lopsided, the first half is significantly stronger than the second. When all is said and done, however, I'm not sure which album I prefer between those two, maybe a re-listen could help me decide.
In Garlands you can tell Cocteau Twins are still in search of an identity, they throw everything at the wall and see what sticks, a mix of primary post-punk / gothic / noisy, but mostly very dreamy - though when you combine their ethereal quality with the above the dream is more of a nightmare. It's not an album that keeps me all the way through, there are parts where instead of hypnotic it becomes sleepy. Still somewhat underrated in comparison to the rest of their discography, it's not that far behind their big albums.
Head Over Heels is a more focused attempt, especially when it comes to songwriting, but one I really don't like. They try to keep some glimpses of the initial darkness, but the dreaminess easily overcomes it and completely loses the balance that defined their debut. This is sandwiched between their past and future selves in the most awkward way.
Treasure is a treasure indeed, that's the stuff of dreams in every sense of the word, easily in their top two.
I'm sure I've forgotten something, but that was tons of info to process, so I guess that's it for now, this post already got bigger than I'd have liked and I wouldn't like hijacking your diary anyway.
Looking forward to part four (I repeat this in every post, so it may seem like empty talk, but I mean it, I'm really enjoying the ride).
MercuryTurn your back on the pay-you-back last callProfile St. Louis
Thank you very much, kokkinos! No worries about stealing the diary. I adore your posts and the longer the better in most cases (this included) and it’s always good to get other viewpoints on these albums.
So much to mention that I won’t mention every point you made except ones that stand out.
Yes it’s a weird ride with the Smiths indeed. I look forward to their most highly regarded non-compilation or essentially compilation album. If I like but don’t love it but then again love the (kinda cheating to include but had to get to 6) Louder Than Bombs then I will have confirmed my hypothesis that I view the smiths as a genius band song-wise but less (much less) to my liking in full album form.
And that’s cool you have some love/liking for REMs Fables. I think it is a grower and I still plan on coming back and seeing if it grows on me a bit more. I mean I already like it a lot. No love is all.
And yeah I get it on the sorta perceived shifting of focus and quality in the 3rd albums by both U2 and SY. I am starting to kinda like/love U2. I hope this doesn’t get me murdered in the forums.
As for the 6 album rule, yes, this will make it so Heaven of Las Vegas is included (because there is an album in 86 I think that is a collaboration and I was planning on skipping that) but this will cut off Disintegration. Every one of these bands outside of The Smiths has some very VERY intriguing early 90s stuff (Cure has Disintegration in 89 which I’ll revisit, and Wish, U2 has a thing baby, REM has a couple famous early 90s albums, SY has a couple great early 90s ones, Cocteau has 1 with HoLV but as that will be included here in the initial 6 album run - idk how that will work - and even with the smiths I will maybe listen to Marr’s work with Electronic and their debut as well as Morissey’s highly touted solo debut Viva Hate. So at the end of this 6 album run, I’ll pick 1 or 2 more to visit from 88-92 from these artists. This will be probably after a long break.)
Okay, that’s all. Again, thank you for the feedback and I’m glad you are enjoying these things. _________________ -Ryan
And yeah I get it on the sorta perceived shifting of focus and quality in the 3rd albums by both U2 and SY. I am starting to kinda like/love U2. I hope this doesn’t get me murdered in the forums.
there's a bit of a rift on the board regarding u2. there are a handful of us u2-lovers though. glad you're giving them a chance and starting at the beginning.
MercuryTurn your back on the pay-you-back last callProfile St. Louis
there's a bit of a rift on the board regarding u2. there are a handful of us u2-lovers though. glad you're giving them a chance and starting at the beginning.
Yeah I’ve seen that. They are a band that for some reasons creates very strong opinions both ways. For the longest time I was neutral. And I still am pretty neutral. But I’ve always considered Joshua tree great and some of their hits great. Now as I listen to more especially older stuff I like em more and more. _________________ -Ryan
Just had a thought, wanted to note it down here and see if anyone has an opinion on it. Also just kinda want to get it out before I forget this (undoubtedly silly and far too broad a) question.
I was just thinking, in general, what is more likely to make for a true all time classic pop/rock/non-classical I guess, ALBUM: one that has a pretty specific style or genre but manages to either set a template of that sound or work brilliantly within a pretty limited genre
Or
An album that is unconstrained by any particular mode or genre (perhaps it has a root or baseline sound or scene or genre but goes away from it a lot) but instead brings in varied and disparate genres and styles while conveying a distinct artistic statement
??
Examples, in my mind of the first class of masterpiece albums/near perfect albums that seem to stick to a particular sound or basically create a specific and somewhat narrow genre would be...
And examples of that second category of classic near perfect albums that perhaps have a root/base genre but mostly just brilliantly create new blends and go off to completely other musical worlds at times but manage to integrate the sound and album completely into a classic would be, in my mind anyway,
The Black Saint And The Sinner Lady by Charles Mingus
(This one may be a bit out of place, but it does have more sounds than kind of blue at least I think it covers more varied genre or subgenre territory in its time than KoB and I wanted a jazz counterpoint to KoB)
And maybe one from metal that mixes other sounds or really one very distinct genre to a brilliant result...
I guess if you go to RYM you’ll see that a lot of classic, top tier examples of a genre are actually often times big mixes of genres and have many tags connected to them. Then sometimes (but seemingly less so) you’ll see the top rated album or most revered album in a sub genre has literally 1 genre attached (such as Slayer’s Reign In Blood).
Anyway, just wanted to mention that. _________________ -Ryan
I hadn't considered this kind of sorting, food for thought definitely. I 've always found most relevant another classification, where it's not a question of a concentrated or expansive approach genre-wise, it's where the album - and the artistic statement it carries - stands in comparison to its contemporaries, which is also closely related to its influence. In that sense, I would divide the classics in three categories:
1) The albums that are ahead of the curve, they introduce a paradigm shift, some kind of innovation - even if glimpses of that idea or style had appeared before, it's through these albums that it matures enough and it's given flesh and bone - that goes beyond the typical developments of its time and sets a new template that becomes the new trend. They tend to appear when a certain scene/movement is at its inception and influence everything that comes after. Examples of that would be
2) The albums that appear during the latter stages of a movement. They take ideas that have already come to the spotlight and express them in a forward thinking manner pushing them to their limits and beyond. They aren't as influential as the first category, because they've already maximised the potential of this style, so there's not much left to be done. Examples of that would be
Nas - Illmatic
The tendency of the era being:
focusing almost exclusively on the skills of the MC, proving you are the best out there -keeping the number of skits/interludes, choruses, guests etc. to the absolute minimum, just relentless spitting - and that's the moment where Nas steals Rakim's throne.
Madvillain - Madvillainy
The tendency of the era being:
Aesop Rock, El-P, Cannibal Ox and of course Madlib himself pushing the boundaries of underground hip hop during late 90's/early 00's and then this shows everyone how it's done.
3) The albums that don't care about all the above, they play by their own rules, they don't sound like anything that came before or after, they are too eccentric to be a part of any scene, genre or movement - and obviously they aren't that influential as well, because it's impossible to imitate them.
Examples of that would be
Ol' Dirty Bastard - Return To The 36 Chambers: The Dirty Version
How could any album possibly stand next to this? Ok, there's his next album as well, but it's arguable if it qualifies as a classic - for me it undoubtedly does, but the consensus seems to be that it doesn't.
I've limited it to hip hop, so that it's clear what goes in which category, no reason to complicate matters, hopefully I've made my point.
MercuryTurn your back on the pay-you-back last callProfile St. Louis
Hmm... That is another great and helpful way of thinking of it. Looking at those classifications, I think the albums I personally adore that I used in my attempt at macro-categorization I'd say of the first category of epochal releases would be Filosofem, Reign In Blood and most obviously KIND OF BLUE. As for the second classification you provided of, basically, albums that took a scene or sound or set of sounds and styles and kinda prefectly mastered that genre or style would be: Blood On The Tracks (came at the end of the huge explosion of confessional emotional singer/songwriter albums and basically was the pinnacle of that style in my opinion), and maybe London Calling but that's a little square peg round hole as they had such a diverse palate of sounds there and I don't know that yet many of the british punks had really started moving in that direction nor ever would - so maybe London Calling is more your third category. And as for that 3rd category of just completely unlike almost anything that could be called a sound or genre or style that came before or after but was just kinda its own thing and maybe only that artist ever made that particular brand of music in that way and most people never even really tried, Black Saint And The Sinner Lady perhaps qualifies, maybe Sign O The Times (I see that as quite like London Calling not fitting it exactly) and ... that's it.
Not sure how Gillian Welch fits in your breakdown. But its a cool way of subdividing and visualizing classic or legendary albums. _________________ -Ryan
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
dihansse
Mercury
Repo
craola
