I agree with the kudos for this post, as others have articulated well. I have some responses (as others have). > > 2. The Arcade Fire: Neither transcendent enough to warrant the > effusive gushing that greeted FUNERAL (a very good and at times > genuinely great album, but not the life-changing event so many > claimed) nor bad enough to warrant the hipster backlash that followed, > the Arcade Fire is probably going to go down as one of those bands who > were destroyed by their own hype. As with Springsteen, I think a lot of the hype has to do with their live show. I first saw them in a 250 capacity club and it was transcendent. Earlier this year in front of 3,300, it was also excellent. They put out an amazing energy and vibe. I think the fact that they haven't tried to wring every dollar out of their success may allow them to beat the curse of the hype. > > 6. The B-52's: With the exception of about half of the 1989 comeback > album COSMIC THING (a handful of songs that are the only things the > group ever did that has an emotional core underneath the kitsch), the > B-52's entire legend is contained entirely within the first side of > their first album. Your comment about the emotional core is spot on, though I don't think that's the point with them. Unlike a previous poster, I could fill a full 80 minute CD-R with B-52's tunes I love. Another swell live band. > 8. Nick Drake: I truly believe that if Nick Drake's albums had been > commercially successful in the early '70s -- as they deserved to be -- > then he would be thought of today roughly as people think of, say, > James Taylor. That is, the hipster crowd wouldn't give a crap, > because he would no longer have the whole "poor misunderstood genius" > tag. I'm trying to get my head around this one. I think of the many modern artists that Drake has influenced, for better and for worse. There's a quality to his sound that isn't there with James Taylor (who I think is alright) or most other singer-songwriters of the time. Question -- does this "poor misunderstood genius" apply to Judee Sill as well? > 13. Van Morrison: Will always have a place in my heart for one of the > all-time greatest one-finger-salutes in pop music history, the Bang > Records demos. Otherwise, ASTRAL WEEKS and MOONDANCE are lovely, moody > records that make for great late-night listening, but they're not as > "mystical" and "spiritual" as their acolytes claim. Has been coasting > on legend for decades now, making sloppy, flabby, half-assed records > that turn his most notable characteristics (specifically the > incantation thing) into lazy tics. I must be an optimist when it comes to Van, because I see his half-assed as half full rather than half-empty. I've enjoyed a fair amount of his output since Wavelength, though there's nothing there that I'd say was great or necessary. > 15. Nirvana: Yes, NEVERMIND is a great album, one that I found was > actually better than I remembered it when I went back to listen a few > months ago. But I truly think that if it hadn't been "Smells Like > Teen Spirit," it would have been something else: the musical scene at > the time was just in the mood for a change. Would that apply to Elvis and The Beatles as well? At one level, your final comment is obvious - if a change was inevitable, then of course it had to be somebody. And while I wouldn't put Nirvana up there with the King or the Fabs talentwise, I think that Cobain and Co. synthesized a lot of elements of the indie/underground scene of the '80s in a commercially palatable form. Right band, right place, right time. > 16. Pavement: I was there at the time, and to this day, I'm genuinely > mystified as to why Pavement were chosen as the public face of The New > Indie Underground post-Nirvana, when Superchunk so thoroughly kicked > their asses in just about all respects. Watching Stephen Malkmus play some old Pavement tunes at Pitchfork this year, I was thinking the same thing. I've come to really dig their first two albums, yet I can't understand why they became so big since they were so deliberately offbeat. I don't begrudge them their success, but I wish Superchunk were equally as big. > > 18. The Rolling Stones: I never really believed they were "The World's > Greatest Rock And Roll Band" -- I think the fact that they didn't > release ROCK AND ROLL CIRCUS because the Who's set smoked theirs says > volumes -- but I certainly think that the way they still promote > themselves as such while doing nothing more than proffering lazy > nostalgia to well-heeled baby boomers is just kind of sad, for band > and audience alike. I can't argue with the brilliance of the Stones during the '60s. Yet there are a lot of '60s bands I love much more, both on the pop side (Kinks, Zombies, Easybeats) and the rock side (Sonics, The Who, Jimi Hendrix). That's probably more a matter of their ubiquity. And I even like a lot of their '70s stuff into the early '80s. I just can't love them, I suppose. > > 21. Bruce Springsteen: Maybe I'm just too middle-class. Maybe growing > up in rural communities and college towns in Texas and Colorado didn't > give me the proper Rust Belt archetypes. But hearing Springsteen, > with very few exceptions, just leads me to think "Yeah, I see what > he's doing and all, but...it don't move me." I really dig Springsteen through Tunnel Of Love but it's been diminishing returns since then. Based on what I've heard from the new one, his voice seems pretty close to shot. > > 25. Neil Young: My opinion of Neil Young will probably forever be > colored by the fact that I came of musical age during the '80s, a > period where he came off as a rather pathetic, hacky has-been who had > lost his way. Now, of course, it's more obvious that he's just ornery > and willful, and as much as I admire that about him, I still (with > relatively few exceptions: his Buffalo Springfield songs, ZUMA, that > great Massey Hall solo concert that got released earlier this year, > "Like A Hurricane," etc.) like his music much more in theory than in > practice. I actually like Trans, Everybody's Rocking and Old Ways. Not that they are great albums, but they all have certain charms. I just thought he was having fun at David Geffen's expense. My two cents and then some -- Mike Bennett Blog: http://blog.myspace.com/mrhonorama Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com Find out about Chicago shows: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagopopshowreport/ Blog: http://blog.myspace.com/mrhonorama Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com Find out about Chicago shows: http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagopopshowreport/ _________________________________________________________________ Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista® + Windows Live™. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007