 |
|
|
|
| What makes an album great? |
|
6/6/2001 3:58:10 PM
Todd |
Ever since I watched VH1's special on the 100 greatest albums of rock, I've pondered this question and have decided that a great album is one that defies the random play feature on a CD player. Albums that take the idea of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts to an extreme. Examples of good albums that fall short of greatness by this criteria are anything by Madonna, Springsteen, or the Cure. You can pop six titles from any of them into the 'ol CD changer and hit random play and they all still sound fine and dandy. Zeppelin has this effect as well when you listen to their box set. But, try popping titles by the Mothers of Invention, Pink Floyd, Tool, NIN, or Radiohead into the changer and hitting random. What you get is masterpieces reduced to rubble.
Some of my favorite albums are: Play by Moby; We're Only in It for the Money by the Mothers of Invention; Psalm 69 by Ministry; Dark Side of the Moon by Pink Floyd; Hello Nasty by the Beastie Boys; and the Chronic by Dr. Dre.
Funny thing though, listening to One by the Beatles made me realize how great the Beatles really were. Every song sounds great when pulled out of context and yet every song made me long to hear the whole original album again.
Thoughts?
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Album Greatness |
6/7/2001 1:00:48 AM
syndicatemike |
| You postind led me some soul searching, Todd. To start with, this "shuffle play" cd setting screws everything up. I have 2 stories frim WAY BACK WHEN that apply. First of all. I'm old enough to remember where there was an arm on old (record) turntables so albums would drop down and play one after another. No one wever had it set to do that, because you'd be having an album drop down on another already spinning one. But if you set the arm correctly, the one side of an album, would repeat over and over. Which I can recall several records that were played that way...but that's another story. Dylan's "Blood On The Tracks" was one. Next, I recall when I was in college, everyone I knew had bunches of albums that I was dying to hear, and down at my grocery store they sold these blank tapes with no boxes or anything three for a buck. So whenever I went shopping I'd buy a pack, and borrow albums to tape. Several classic albums I got to know this way. Hendrix's "Electric Ladyland" and Bob Marley's "Burnin'" on one side and "Catch A Fire" on the back. That reminds me of one other thing. they were 90 minute tapes that you could almost always fit an album on each side, but sometimes one would be long and you'd miss some, and sometimes you had extra tape to fill up. Anyway, Since these tapes had no boxes, I didn't have any song listings, and I wouldn't ever wind them to the end, so whereever it was on whichever side it was on was where I'd play it. Music was on constantly for me then, so over time they just seeped into my consciousness! I'll put some more thought into this tomorrow. The albums you think are great change over time, though. mike |
| Springsteen albums |
6/7/2001 1:12:53 AM
syndicatemike |
| I forgot one thing. I totally disagree with including Springsteen in your list of artists who you could segment their work get the right effect. Could "Rosalita" bear fruit in any context outside "E Street Shuffle". The songs on "Nebraska"? The quantum leap of guitar heroics between "Born To Run" and "Darkness"? But I agree with the basic point. There are even some artists like Tom Petty who have made some great albums that hold real well together, but hits collections carry the weight. |
| Albums can fall flat |
6/7/2001 7:44:25 AM
Reverb |
I would have to agree with Todd! Now that we have the ability to put CD's on random (unlike the old days of cassettes), I tend to notice album "weaknesses". The new Tool for example has some very great material on it, but their are songs on it that I would choose not to listen to if it came up randomly.
One of my favorite albums of all time can completely defy the random button. Everyone owns this album because it had heavy MTV play in the late 80's, but the true test of the album is the songs that nobody talks about. Songs like "Mr. Brownstone" and "Rocket Queen". When Guns 'n Roses unleashed "Appetite for Destruction" on the masses, it completely changed the way hair metal of the 80's was perceived. The album production was raw, the music was loose and the attitude was in your face. It was more punk than punk (especially punk now but that is a different topic).
The low profile songs on this album and any album actually prove how solid an album is. Anyone can write a great song but are you a great songwriter? No, you just wrote a great song. But now I am just rambling! |
| eruption |
6/7/2001 9:38:59 AM
Todd |
I had an experience with this random play destruction phenomena last weekend. I selected six CDs from my high school days including Van Halen I. One of the first tracks to pop up was Eruption. I'm listening to it and getting all ready to sing You Really Got Me when, suddenly, I'm listening to Whole Lotta Love. There was something very annoying about that moment. Something almost sacrilegious. I'd always thought of Eruption/You Really... as being one song.
I hope I didn't mislead anyone into thinking I feel that an album is great simply because it crumbles when played randomly. A lot of bad albums do this as well. But I think the random play concept is important for making the distinction between great albums and great songs.
Mike and Mike, you both made very good points with Springsteen and Guns 'n Roses. Any well programmed album that you listen to enough for it to enter your bloodstream will stop sounding like a collection of individual songs and start sounding like songs that were born to be together in this precise order. And, if you are anything like me, it is the little known songs that you grow to love the most. They are to the hits as Derek Fisher is to Kobe Bryant and Shaq. They hold them together. |
| Ah, yes!!!! |
6/8/2001 11:49:34 AM
Reverb |
Todd says:
| They are to the hits as Derek Fisher is to Kobe Bryant and Shaq. They hold them together. |
Amen to that! It's like song "teamwork". |
| They'rrrrrrrrre Great! |
7/9/2001 3:13:58 PM
twoheadedfreap |
| A great albumn is one that when you first get it, you listen to it at least twice a day. It may even become the "background music" for the whole week. Then, you hear other things that really turn your crank and you don't play the "Great Albumn" for a month or so. When you do play it again you have to play it over while you reflect upon that week long love affair. The romance you feel for that piece of artistry should not take much rekindling. Or is it just me? |
| Creeping Greatness |
7/13/2001 8:51:59 AM
Saddletramp |
As usual, I'm behind in getting things done. But in discussing album greatness, there is one facet that has always intrigued me. I've purchased music (usually not mainstream) over the years, and when I've listened to it the first time, I berate myself for being foolish enough to part with my hard-earned cash for some weak attempt. I am suprised the number of "weak" attempts that have clawed their way to the top of my listen list.
One other aspect of this discussion is the era in which the music was recorded. It appears that albums were initially a grouping of songs performed by an artist, or similar artists, without any concept of continuity. Those albums were a compilation of songs, and sometimes the music gods sprinkled a bit of magic on those compilations and made them good. As time passed, the concept album appeared, and just as randomly, the music gods could damn what should have been a good effort.
But, the participants in this forum are on track. There are some good albums that will withstand the random button. I will date myself, but before random buttons there was an evil called "The Greatest Hits" which did much of the same thing - placed songs out of sequence, and left the listener with a "huh" on his ears. |
| greatness |
7/17/2001 10:37:00 AM
miles9x |
| One album (not vinyl) that I feel is the greatest of all time is: Zakk Wylde's Book of Shadows. It has amazing acoustic guitar and vocals. It has some very powerful undertones. It has an overall depressing feeling to it, so many people find it very difficult to listen to for any duration, but if you give it a chance, you may really enjoy it. I know one other person who does. |
| Zakk Wylde! |
7/22/2001 10:01:00 PM
Reverb |
| Actually I am a big fan of all of Zakk's stuff. Have you heard Sonic Brew by Zakk's Black Label Society. The album just shreds from beginning to end and has a great rough feel to it! |
| Zakk |
8/1/2001 10:54:34 AM
miles9x |
| yeah, I have Sonic Brew., BLS also has "Alcohol fueled brewtality" which also kicks., it's pretty heavy., |
| Just burn it. |
12/11/2001 8:39:23 PM
Spartacus_AD |
But, the participants in this forum are on track. There are some
good albums that will withstand the random button. I will date
myself, but before random buttons there was an evil called "The
Greatest Hits" which did much of the same thing - placed songs
out of sequence, and left the listener with a "huh" on his ears.
And then we now have cd recorders and random buttons can be used again. |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
