proof that new music sucks?

[telefunker]

or just proof nme magazine sucks? here are their top 10 albums of the decade..

1. The Strokes - Is This It
2. The Libertines - Up The Bracket
3. Primal Scream - XTRMNTR
4. Arctic Monkeys - Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not
5. Yeah Yeah Yeahs - Fever To Tell
6. PJ Harvey - Stories From The City, Stories From The Sea
7. Arcade Fire - Funeral
8. Interpol - Turn On The Bright Lights
9. The Streets - Original Pirate Material
10. Radiohead - In Rainbows
_________________
no fat chicks

[Gooserocker]

It's just you only appreciating chart fodder

[cartoken]

I agree with NME for 2 things:

1. Is This It, is the best album of the decade .... i think NO one is arguing with that !!!

2. Fever to tell is also one of the best 10 or at least one the top 15.

[joannajewsom]

Proof that NME sucks. And yes, cartoken, many people are arguing with that. I think you're actually the first person on this site I've seen say it's the best of the decade.

[Kiki]

On the nme site they say the readers voted on this

Anyway, I can't wait to hear what the 2010's have in store for us!

[cartoken]

[quote="joannajewsom"]Proof that NME sucks. And yes, cartoken, many people are arguing with that. I think you're actually the first person on this site I've seen say it's the best of the decade.[/quote]

According to member's votes, "Is this it", is the 4th of the decade in this site JJ. so you can undestand at least that for one member it's not the 4th but the 1st.

And for your information NME is not the only one to put ITI 1st, in The 50 Best Albums of the 2000s of Sounds (germany), ITI is also 1st of the decade and it's apearing in all the best album charts at least among the 10 best ! may be this means something......

[joannajewsom]

I'm not saying there aren't people/publications who say it's number 1 or number 4 or number 9, but I've seen many more people/publications say it's not number 1. Surely, it's not unanimous, like you suggested.

[badfaith]

I was astonished also... but read that music execs and some bands were among those who voted- including Radiohead and the Arctic Monkeys.

But hey, just look at the grave miscalculations these execs have made in the past decade that have left the music industry in the state it now is, now ask yourself if you trust their judgement!

It's a fan's world... musicians may make their choices from a technical point of view, perhaps appreciating the work from an artistic angle, while the execs may think of them in terms of either what sells, or what they think will make them look cool and on the button, niether of these things make an album good in itself... it's folks like us that that will decide that, and so I'd say that sites such as this one will be a more valid barometer of goodness.

[Mr. Shankly]

To my mind, it's been a somewhat lacklustre musical decade, so in that sense although I'm not writing off the 2000-2009 period entirely, I'm kind of with Telefunker on this one. Should the Strokes be at #1? I'm not sure about that. I do think Is This IT belongs in the top 20 or even 10 though. I mean it was a really good record. The problem with The Strokes though is that they weren't offering anything new (Then again, not many artists did this decade); they were anachronistic and derivative. That being said, they were derivative of all the right influences. What was Yankee Hotel Foxtrot ranked? That probably should have been in the top 10, now that I think about it.

What was Pitchfork's #1? Kid A, right?. That one also makes sense, I suppose for different reasons.

[Norman Bates]

Proof that NME sucks, definitely (and tell us something new ! They actually liked Oasis !). Strokes are not bad (although nowhere near #1 to me), but Libertines at #2 is a really bad joke. The only albums I feel relevant to a 00s top 10 are In Rainbows and Original Pirate Material. They're not necessarily in mine (maybe The Streets), but I can understand. Arcade Fire sounds logical too, in a way.