July 30, 2004

• God, I love how pissed off these lists make me. Tom Waits' The Mule Variations is overrated and indicates that he's out of ideas? What a fucking idiot. That's a superb album, one of the best he ever made. Hell, I'd call it a masterpiece. More on topic, I think just skimming the music blogs for those who share your tastes is a good way to start. Especially those with samples you can listen to, because ultimately I won't buy anything based solely on review. I need to taste it myself.
• Maybe I'm just a humorless poseur, but things like the list in the second link really annoy me. There's a common assumption that anyone who claims to like music that you don't like is either a poseur who's just pretending to like the music (if the music in question is unpopular but critically acclaimed) or a mindless sheep who's been brainwashed by the corporate music industry (if the music in question is fairly popular). Why do so many people find it difficult to believe that others might like music that you dislike? I happen to own, enjoy, and listen to several albums on that list. I listen to them not because I think I'm supposed to like them, but because I actually do like them.
• No, you're right on. I really think people make lists like that just to spark pissed-off discussions and attract a little professional attention (not criticizing, as I don't blame them for it). He does have a point, there is such a thing as art that's become so enshrined that nobody questions whether it's worth the hype, but these lists nearly always wind up delving into grinning snarkiness for its own sake. Sort of like those who are too cool for the Beatles -- the reasoning often seems to be that since even the squares like them, they can't possibly be as good as insertyourobscureindiebandhere.
• Humorless posuer? Maybe. Look, I listen to a handful of albums on that list (like, say, Bitches Brew and Giant Steps) on a pretty regular basis. Was I offended that this guy got it wrong about them? Nope. On the other hand, Trout Mask Replica is one of the most over-rated albums in history (as opposed to Safe as Milk or Strictly Personal. A lot of what is on that list IS crap, and pretending otherwise IS posing. But hey, I'm a music critic, that's what I do. More to the point, people need to have the piss taken out of their unexamined musical choices, because even if they disagree, well, hell, then they've thought about why.
• (As for the Beatles, they ARE over-rated in terms of lasting greatness. For every Norwegian Wood, there's a Rocky Raccoon, and outside of their obviously important context in rock history, they just don't hold up.)
• Beatles... overrated good to hear, thank you
• thpppbt ;)
• Screw new music! For good music, I go to http://www.flashbackradio.com/.
• There is no accounting for taste. Want to argue that some of my musical tastes cover stuff that is derivitative? Fine. That they are technically unintersting? Ditto. But "any good" is nonsense, not least because there isn't much in the way of an objective standard. Evanescence moves and delights me. So do Tom Waits and Phil Ochs. Beethoven, not so much. Oh, and people using QuickTime can swallow my full, thick member until they choke.
• What's this hate on Quicktime thing?
• we're the anti-metafilter. therefore, apple is evil
• I have to respect the list's inclusion of Nirvana and the Beastie Boys. The latter have never struck me as much more than a novelty act; while I guess I appreciate Nirvana, I've rarely been able to stay interested all the way through an album. Sure, they sound a bit like the Pixies, if you sapped out most of the Pixies' humor and cleverness and a good portion of their ass-kicking. Of course, someone kicks MY ass every time I say the slightest word against Kurt. He was a decent songwriter, but nothing worth canonizing. By the way: that's a Cosby Sweater.
• the second link is just dreadful. i agree with the commenter on the page who lost 7 IQ points and wanted to bash his head against a wall... where's all the crappy metal of the last 20 years? i.e. def leppard, whitesnake, guns 'n' roses, etc. the cheezy pop country i.e. that achy breaky fool, shaniah twain, garth brooks, etc. (or his "alter-ego" Chris Gaines)? the adult contemporary dreck like anything from lionel richie, or whitney houston or michael bolton? the self righteous crap of Ani DiFranco or 10000000000000 maniacs or the Indigo Girls? How about Men at Work? Frampton Comes Alive? Anything from the Disco era? Come on, everyone among us has at least a couple from these categories that they hang on to... that being said, about 20 of the choices are valid. the rest the author either doesn't understand, or is just trolling... when is the InterWeb going to tire of utterly meaningless, purely subjective lists of drivel? Soon, please.
• Wow, nobody's said 'your favorite band sucks' yet? ::hides::
• Everyone seems to be forgetting the first link, I'm incredibly surprised loud speaker guy didn't get the crap kicked out of him at Linkin Park, "We've been made fools off!", no shit! And on that second link... my main gripe is with the inclusion of the Flaming Lip's Soft Bulletin, a masterpiece if ever I heard it. Also, surely it's you have *a* bad taste in music?
• Bravo for having Nirvana on there, although most of the list is crap (Led Zeppelin?? Beatles??! Dark Side of the Moon?!?!?!). I woulde also like to point out at this juncture that Tupac was an awful rapper and no one wants to admit it. As the author of the hate on quicktime, it was bceause: a) forgive the stereoype but Mac users do not tend to be the physically buff, captain of the football team type and b) have you ever TRIED to stream quicktime over the net? It is the worst, most annoying interface in the world. That stupid #$%^$$ bar lets you watch about 2 seconds of video at a time, even if you have DSL. (OK Real sucks too)
• I hate to repsond to my own comment but I forgot to say: all these lists tend to be a kind of sweepstakes to prove how "hip" you are by taking down something popular- like that "worst songs list" that included "sounds of silence." if you really truly think that is a bad song, you are not allowed to listen to music anymore. I revoke your right. The beatles are a classic target, you cant throw a rock without hitting a hipster who will tell you how overrated "sgt pepper" is. No. sorry. wrong. try again. then they will give you a 15 minute speech on the genuis of "revolver." It's Ok and all, but I think "help" is better than "revolver."
• Funny, I've always gotten annoyed when someone trots out Revolver as the best Beatles album. It's a phenomenon that goes hand in hand with the totally obscure indie band worship - picking a popular band's lesser-known album and claiming it's the best, because that really shows that you "get it".
• On the other hand, Trout Mask Replica is one of the most over-rated albums in history (as opposed to Safe as Milk or Strictly Personal. A lot of what is on that list IS crap, and pretending otherwise IS posing. Bullshit. That's a great album, far better than the more conventional ones you prefer. I'm sorry your ears are too closed to hear it, but your personal taste does not equal eternal truth.
• all music is rubbish, except for the one true god
• Quicktime hating? While QT doesn't mandate using it's crappy player or the proprietary codecs or the "install a new codec this quarter", almost everything in QT is done with, yes, proprietary codecs that don't run everywhere. It's the fucking INTERnet. A network comprised of networks of diverse computers. Not "a network of computers that are all exactly the same as mine and fuck you if you don't use the same one as me". QuickTime is a STEAMING MOUND and encoding video for delivery on the web to a general audience in QT is about as stupid as using WordPerfect files for presenting text instead of HTML. It's worse than using just using a proprietary format, its usng a proprietary format that's the offspring of a fucking midget; if you're going to pull that shit, you could at least use one of the standard WMP formats. Use MPEG, use Dixv, use something open that anyone can view. *pant, pant*. And es el Queso, pre Use Your Illusion, GnR had the makings of one of the great rock bands, easily the equal of the Stones. It's unfortunate for them that their descent into self-indulgent twaddle happend when Grunge took off, instead of the early/mid-70s, when that sort of shit still sold. Still, Velvet Revolver could be considered evidence for what we've suspected all along: that McKagan and Slash were the important part of that rock outfit.
• "Giant Steps is still a tedious, embarrassing, snoozer of an album." those krazy kids.
• I just scanned the first 20 or so on the list, but it read to me like someone (or someones) primarily annoyed at music they listened to when they were 15, mainly because they aren't 15 anymore - it isn't the music that was bad, it's them who has changed. (I know, because if I listen to NIN, it's because I want to remember a bit of that time - it's like a touchstone. Of course the albulm doesn't mean the same to me, but that is not because it was not good for me then, but I have just changed. Unless it's sung by Johnny Cash, in which case it is brilliant). I was also waiting to see what early Big Band was overrated, or what bluegrass should be thrown out of the collection. You mean Kiri TeKanawa couldn't sing after all? Just being silly, but I couldn't help but notice that the list is all pop/rock, and thinking about the worlds and worlds of music beyond that.
• (sorry - I was looking at the list in the second link, of good, but according to the list makers, overrated albulms. Most of which I did not recognise, because I grew up in a box.)
• I really, really wanted to dislike that second link, with its perpetual lip curl inspiring fifteen months of furious u r teh sukc rebuttal comments, and with its egregiously overanalyzing wrongness on so many levels. But this is a wrongness perpetuated for such a right reason. Once I peeled myself away from the train wreck spectacle of album assassination after assassination and actually read their preamble (a preamble that they killed perfectly good electrons to publish, so I really owed it to them to read it), I admitted to myself: there are horrible things in my own album cache, things that I will never willingly hear again. What is the probability that I'll ever listen to, say, Meat Beat Manifesto again? (A: zero.) Why can I not come clean? (A: original sin.) What force keeps me from throwing them out? If reading a snide dis of a once-acclaimed pop album that I don't really like can give me the strength to purge my life of that album, then this site has done me and the world a service. Never again will that disc breathe my air as I riff through the shoeboxes seeking something that I can stand to hear. And if the site merely looks silly carping about a disc that still holds merit for me, then I get a cheap laugh out of their lack of perspective or appreciation, and move on. Either way, I win.
• Still, Velvet Revolver could be considered evidence for what we've suspected all along: that McKagan and Slash were the important part of that rock outfit. rodgerd, we must meet at some point, preferably at a Velvet Revolver concert at which we can rock out together.
• tracicle: My parents live in Outram. I visit them every year or so, and drive down. I'm sure my wife can be persuaded to forego the pleasures of the McKenzie Basin to go by Christchurch 8).
• May I derail for a moment?

  Still, Velvet Revolver could be considered evidence for what we've suspected all along: that McKagan and Slash were the important part of that rock outfit. rodgerd, we must meet at some point, preferably at a Velvet Revolver concert at which we can rock out together.

  See, I drew the complete opposite opinion from the Velvet Revolver in that I decided that the DeLeo brothers were the important part of STP because, while a pretty big GnR fan, Velvet Revolver was very disappointing. Aside from Slither, I didn't like the album at all.
• I agree that if you're holding on to any albums just because you think that you're supposed to like them, then it's time to get rid of those albums. What bugs me about that list (and, yes, I know that the list is supposed to bug me) is that it's not just a list of albums that they think are overrated -- they're claiming that the only reason anyone would hold on to any of the specific albums on the list is because of hipness, marketing, or nostalgia. As I said before, I actually like and listen to several of those albums. If they want to accuse me of having bad taste, that's fine. But what they seem to be saying is that I couldn't possibly actually like those albums, and I'm just pretending to like them because I'm a poseur. And that's why the list bugs me.
• By the way: that's a Cosby Sweater. A COS-by SWEAT-AH! On the Revolver thing: Revolver was a fan-fucking-tastic album. So was Sgt. Pepper's. So was the White Album, including Rocky Raccoon, which you would have to be deaf not to love. It ain't genius, but it's tons 'o' fun. Also, Violent Femmes rock the free world, and several countries currently grappling with authoritarian governments. They just fucking rock. If you disagree, I hate you, but I will drive you to the airport if you ask nicely. As you were.
• For every Norwegian Wood, there's a Rocky Raccoon. When I parse this I just get: For every really great song, there's a pretty good song. Is that what you are trying to say? ;-)
• I have yet to hear the Velvet Revolver album, and have only heard the current single once or twice. But I always thought Slash and Duff were the soul of GN'R, not that they'd have been the same without Axl's gravelly whine. And that Duff and Slash are still around, and in a suddenly-infamous band, seems to mean something good is going on there. (Original Guns N' Roses lineup with Adler and Stradlin, now, that's when they were good. That Dizzy guy was not all that.)
• No Cure? The first Violent Femmes record? This album that sounded so naughty and cool back when you were 17 now just sounds really embarrassing. Yeesh. If that's true... you're too old.
• you cant throw a rock without hitting a hipster Ouch! But, but, I loathed the Beatles long before it was hip or even halfway hip to do so. I am devastatingly unhip. They seem so much less annoying now than they used to be. Perhaps because half of them are now chillin' with Krishna. Perhaps because a younger generation has long since broken the iron grip that the Boomers once held on musical taste. Perhaps because I'm old and hard of hearing, so it's easier to tune out background Beatles. I actually like and listen to several of those albums Ditto. But do you not thrill to the angry poetry of the comments? They're beautiful. Here's hoping that relisting the site on MoFi inspires a new wave of outrage thereon.
• Musical taste is so varied that I can't in all fairness say that "everyone should know this music is good, and that music is crap". These kinds of lists are very individual, and are more useful for what they reveal to you about the writer and the responders, and of course to incite flaming discussion, than usable as any kind of benchmark or guide, IMHO. Cooler-than-thou smarminess just makes me tired, however, and isn't very interesting.
• That second list is far away the best music list I've come across, though I'd disagree with the inclusion of Heaven Up Here which I like a lot ... but it's premise of critically acclaimed records which are actually shit is spot-on. What's the Story ... is a steaming lump of dogshit - but everyone was so busy sucking Noel Gallagher's cock that at the time that they didn't notice ... And as a huge Clash fan at the time I remember being wildly disappointed with Combat Rock, and as a huge REM fan at the time I remember thinking Out of Time was pants ... so this list works for me! Obviously though this is all subjective and just because I agree with it doesn't mean anyone else has to ...
• Re: the second list - my problem with it is that an awful lot of those albums simply aren't critically acclaimed, or fondly remembered, or overhyped. For example, I was under the impression that everybody knew Out of Time was a useless REM album, and most music critics I've read never miss out on an opportunity to point that out. I've never seen Combat Rock on any "greatest" list. Missundaztood by Pink - what? And so on. Beyond that, it seems to be a combination of dumb swipes at genuine classics for controversy's sake only (Hunky Dory? Oh, come on...), or completely missing the point of the album (What's The Story... isn't a great album, but knocking it for its lyrics is like attacking Jeff Buckley because his beats aren't phat enough). Now that it's 2002, you can safely close the books on The White Stripes without losing your indie cred. Ahahahahaaaaa! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! Nice work there, prescience boy. Also, for a list that purports to go beyond posing to look The Music, it seems to spend most of its time attacking the sort of people who it thinks own the album. How many of those snarks start with "Do you own this album because you think it makes you seem [insert specific hipster tribe here]?" Um, how about I own the album because I like the songs?
• Languagehat- The reason why Trout Mask is overrated? Vliet can't play sax. There are great songs on there (many of them), but the wank factor has the needle in the red, and trotting out some "your ears aren't open enough to hear it" is more pretentious bullshit than just admitting that it's a fuckin' overrated album. It's (yet another) album that would have been perfect as a single LP with an extra LP's worth of absolute crap on there. But to pretend that somehow it's all genius just means that you can't tell the gems from the dross. It's OK. Nearly every double LP in the history of music has been one album's worth of music, one album's worth of wank.
• As for the Beatles- one of the marks of undiscriminating taste is to love everything the Beatles did. C'mon, admit that Blackbird is treacle, and that Yellow Submarine is only decent when you're eight years old. It's Ok. Elenor Rigby is still a great tune, as are Help and Come Together. My disappointments with the second list were that they focused a little too much on the mid-90s crap, and didn't give, say, The Rolling Stones the reaming they deserve. (Or Amon Duul, or late period Can, or Jethro Tull, or most Sabbath albums, or a lot of Sun Ra, or The Cure, or...) But I also don't understand why people are so upset about the list. If you listen to albums on there, just give them another spin, see if you still like them for the music, and be content.
• The problem with the list is the reasons given for why the albums are crap. So many of them are along the lines of "This is a dreat album, but too many people have it...you can hear it from every dorm room window" An album is bad beacause it's so good that it's wildly popular? What kind of logic is that? The author is just another hipster who thinks all successful bands are crap and if you were really cool you'd be listening to [insert band you've never heard of here].
• js wrote: A lot of what is on that list IS crap, and pretending otherwise IS posing. But hey, I'm a music critic, that's what I do. What is "that"? Pretending crap music is otherwise? Or posing?
• RoryK- Both. No, making sweeping pronouncements about music like their diktats from the Czar. Rocket88- Having an album overplayed does tend to indicate a large segment of the population rating it highly, despite (arguably) other, better options existing. Hence, overrating.
• How popular, overplayed, or overhyped an album is doesn't affect my opinion or enjoyment of it. And if there are other, better options existing, I'll buy those too.
• Eh. That's fine. I tend to get sick of albums when they're overplayed, and often have to just take a time-out from them until I can appreciate them as music again. Sometimes, that means that I don't enjoy them as much when I go back to them, and other times it's like running into an old friend. That's usually how I decide which albums are worth keeping permanently.
• I adore music. There's so much good stuff out there that I can't really be bothered to get worked up about stuff I don't like. Except for The Streets. I just don't understand...
• I own most of the albums on that list and I'll be damned if I'm gonna unload any of 'em. (Ok, well, I might, considering they've all been transferred to a hard drive and I don't actually listen to the discs anymore...)
• Pinko-Socialist bastards! Equal time for all bands?!! What is this. The fact that other *arguably* better bands are out there does not matter. You expect the distribution of albums to line up exactly with talent, or with musicality (ok, thats not even a word, but still...)? Some albums get momentum and take off, it happens, and yeah yeah, its the marketing, and the corporations, and probably the Nazi party too somehow, all irrelevant. Also, there is an assumption here of deservedness, just because a band is better does not mean they deserve to be more well known, and you may say its for the listeners own good, that it will enrich their lives. Any improvement in the condition of those potential listeners lives is negated by the name-calling and ridiculing involved in "encouraging" them to listen to those bands. /extended, wandering rant
• What's wrong with wanking?
• I can't believe a music thread just got Godwined.
• The day I let someone tell me what isn't "good" is the day I start walking on all four and saying "baaaa."
• Monkeyfilter: What's wrong with wanking?

• An album is bad beacause it's so good that it's wildly popular? What kind of logic is that? The author is just another hipster who thinks all successful bands are crap and if you were really cool you'd be listening to [insert band you've never heard of here].

  Whee! I've found something where I can uncritically agree with rocket88. *hugs*
• ...people need to have the piss taken out of their unexamined musical choices... NEED?! I laughed so hard when I read this, soda came out of my nose. Seriously, in the spirit of listmaking, go ahead and make a list of what people need: you'll probably find this one coming in at #10,000 or so, right between #9,999 Alien Death Ray Insurance, and #10,001 A good swift kick in the nuts. And if that's what music writers think -- that they're providing something people need -- well, that goes a long way to explain why so many of them are just unreadable these days. So get over yourself. Really. Allowing for a plurality of musical enjoyment, even of things you don't like, is less a "let them eat cake" position than it is admitting that "prejudice apart, the game of push-pin is of equal value with the arts and sciences of music and poetry."
• The title for this thread is so incredibly appropriate. I'm quite happy to slag off music I don't like, but I draw the line at judging someone on their musical tastes. Jeez, I'm taking my son to see the Wiggles next month, who am I to talk?
• You know what? Compared to ninety percent of kids' programming (and as one who works with children, I've had to sit through quite a lot), the Wiggles kick ass. Have any of you tried to sit through an entire episode of Barney? That's pain. Oh, and I'll fight to the death to defend Sgt. Pepper (but if you touch this jacket? It's vintage, and you will PAY).
• And dear God, one episode of Blue's Clues and I was crawling the walls, muttering "It rubs the lotion on its skin, or else it gets the hose again." Oh, and for .kobayashi, I'd rank "swift kick in the nuts" much higher than that, but I otherwise agree with you. Especially about the Alien Death Ray Insurance.
• Hey, Blue's Clues kicks ass! Steve is hawt, Blue is cute, and the hidden homoerotic subtext in the "Mailtime" song is subverting children across the nation. On topic: adjust your Converse, too-cool hipster boy, your insecurity is showing.
• What 'Nika said. It makes me wanna wag my tail. And Steve, bless him, has a reasonably decent album out at the moment. And he looks so good with that shaved head and goatee.
• It's just the song...the song...it gets in my head, and soon I'm humming it with every task I perform. Then I go on a twelve-state killing spree, screaming OOMPAH LOOMPAH DOOP-AH-DEE DOO!
• It was a rebel L...