It is, but not enough to compel him to one of the top 3 “colossuses” (however you define it) of rock n roll. I’d say that in order for me to say he fits in, you’d have to expand it to the Top 15, because being influential should count for some but not all of an act’s colossusnessitude, but you could argue Top 10 and I wouldn’t chime in to disagree.
But Steely Dan, without the intellectual/smart caveat, would have a hard time making the Top 50, even though they’re probably in my personal Top 10 classic rock bands.
Steely Dan consistently cranked out great songs from their first album until 1980’s Gaucho.
Here’s their output for the period:
1972 Can't Buy a Thrill
1973 Countdown to Ecstasy
1974 Pretzel Logic
1975 Katy Lied
1976 The Royal Scam
1977 Aja
1980 Gaucho
Note that pretty much every album has at least 2 songs that were a fixture on radio for many years, even their first album (with Do It Again and Reelin’ In The Years).
You really can’t go wrong with any of the albums listed above.
Dylan? Joni Mitchell? Steely Dan? Colossuses of rock and roll? :eek: Methinks the short list of those who think they are colossuses are you and your friend. (No offense intended.)
None taken. Top three lists are very tough, long enough to include major figures but way too short to include all of them by almost anybody’s standards, so they’re a prelude to fighting words.
If I ask you to name your top-three second-basemen, or three favorite colors, we’d very soon be engaged in outraged discussions starting “How could you possibly include Morgan, Hornsby and Lajoie while excluding [Alomar, Gehringer etc.]” or “Orange? ORANGE? While leaving out Blue? I’m amazed…”
I read this thread last night just before bed and now at work Aja just comes on the internet radio station I listen to. Are the hamsters selling information? Is the station owner/presenter a doper? Did dopers request it?
I absolutely love Aja - the only song on it that I don’t like is Deacon Blue (weird, huh?). Whenever I put the record on, I’m totally immersed in it. It’s a masterpiece. Probably helps that Chuck Rainey lays down incredibly tasty bass lines throughout the record, oozing the essence of groove and taste, with lots of space between just the right flurries of notes.
I would basically agree with this. When I immerse myself in their music with a good, solid listen, it feels like its a Steely Dan universe - their music just all fits together and creates it’s own alternate pop reality where you might expect all commercial hits to be that sophisticated. But no, they are not a “colossus”…
Which forces me to drop the name of The Nightfly, the first solo album by Donald Fagen after the breakup of the Dan. From what I’ve read, it’s a sorta concept album set in a world where rock music emerged from jazz rather than r&b. The Nightfly is the late night dj who is presenting the tunes. It’s exactly its own self-contained world and a satire on the 50s that could have been.
The songs are as good as the best songs on the Dan albums with a distinct feel of their own. The standout is “I.G.Y. (What a Beautiful World),” which should be on any list of wonderful.
Well, I didn’t say so, a friend did, and I thought his choice was crazy. But also worth listening to SD if he thought they were great. I’m doing so as I type.
Oh yeah, I get it. It’s like folks who love Big Star, Television’s Marquee Moon, etc. Folks have their “best thing ever” that they obsess about and want to share - and it is often really, really great - like SD, Big Star and Marquee Moon - but there is a bit of fanboy in the gushing, too
This isn’t exactly criticism, but their stuff has a very distinctive sound to it–not sure if this is good or bad, but having listened to only a few cuts, I remembered having heard SD many, many times in my life (not those specific songs), those voices, that complex instrumentation, and it all seemed to me like one big song. There’s a sameness to their stuff which I suppose is what a musician wants: a distinct style, a certain mood that no one else has. If you like it, that’s great. Not sure I like it.
Sounds like you may not - and, as someone who focuses on writing - of course you accept that having a distinct style is a main objective of many/most artists across all media. The real trick is either -
Can you take a narrow style deep and keep it fresh?
Or
Can you expand the definition of “what sounds like your style”?
I find the music to be interesting and varied, but always clean and well-executed, with lush professional arrangements and Fagan’s distinctive, arch, nasal voice - and nice use of guitar ;). And I can understand if some folks aren’t into that.
The things I focus on that make me a gigantic Zappa fan–the “distinctive, arch, nasal voice- and nice use of guitar” may work on me here, but maybe there’s more (or less) to Zappa that I’m not noting. The wit, maybe? I don’t get a sense of lyrical wit in here yet, but I’ve just listened to it a few times. I can’t quite make out the lyrics most of the time–maybe I should take a look to see what he’s singing about.
Fagan certainly aspires to a level of wit - in his own arch way. Listen to Hey Nineteen for the wry humor of a middle-aged guy wrapping his brain around hooking up with a hottie. Or My Old School about his feelings about…well, his old school (Bard up in Annandale on Hudson…)…
