smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "josh chasin" <jchasin@nyc.rr.com> |
| Subject | Re: Rolling Stone Top 500 Albums |
| Date | Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:39:17 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (1.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Every time a list like this appears, the debates commence-- probably what
makes them so enduring a concept.
To each his own though; that's the great thing about taste. Personally I
think I would put the Joni, Little Richard, and Band titles before each of
the three you cite. I happen to like Pink Floyd, went ga-ga for the Wall
(and the tour) when it came out, but would still probably say it was the
band's third or fourth-best of the decade. Again though, that's me.
I do think, though, that there are certain genre biases in Rolling Stone:
against prog and power pop, and pro-punk. And as a rule they tend to err on
the side of undue enthusiasm with respect to recent (last 5-7 years, say)
releases. I say this last point because you can track over time how certain
albums pop and then recede-- or disappear entirely-- from these lists over
time.
But again, that's just me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "AssociationWorks" <AssociationWorks@comcast.net>
>>>Finally saw this "expertly compiled" list:
http://www.rollingstone.com/features/coverstory/featuregen.asp?pid=2164
...in honor of Gilbert Godfried I bring you the..
"The What the F*** Moment of 2003"...
Little Richard, The Band, and Joni Mitchell before
Led Zep IV, Back in Black (AC/DC), or The Wall (Pink Floyd)??
What the f***!!!! Of course, this is the same rag that put Jack White
on their list of best guitarists of all time too...so I shouldn't be too
surprised!>>>>>>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.