There’s huge numbers of albums that are critically acclaimed that I can’t understand at all, but that’s not really the same as unlistenable.
*Smile *is not fantastic, sure, but unlistenable? “Astral Weeks” is one of the greatest songs ever, but I don’t listen to the rest of the album. The “Moondance” side of *Moondance *is perhaps the best album side ever, better than the b-side of Abbey Road, but the other side can collect dust for all I care. The White Album has several songs I don’t care for, but at least an album’s worth of true Beatles’ classics. How can it be unlistenable (except for “Revolution 9”. Obviously :))?
*Forever Changes *is a nothingness, but not awful. It’s better than Van Dyke Parks’ Song Cycle, which used to show up on every critic’s list of best 60s albums. I finally broke down and bought it. A bunch of thin, reedy not-quite-tunes. Were all the critics insane? Same for Richard Thompson’s Shoot Out the Lights, which the critics genuflect to. Went through many times trying to figure out what they heard and never got it.
But none of those are unlistenable. Disappointing, maybe. You could reach your hand into a bin of metal or rap albums and I’d find every single one of them more unlistenable. Big difference.
I made it all the way through Nine Inch Nails’ The Downward Spiral (considered to be one of the top rock albums of the 1990s) exactly once in the 10 years I owned it. I tried several times to see if this time I’d “get it”. Eventually I just ripped “Closer” to my computer and sold the CD to the used CD store.
I’m another person who was not impressed with Brian Wilson’s Smile. It took 37 years to finish and the tracks still feel like random snippets that don’t gel. I know it was supposed to be a series of suites, but it was too disjointed and repetitive for me.
I know what you’re saying, Exapno. I think most of us recognize that we are taking liberties with the OP.
For truly unlistenable, in its strictest sense, I can only site the aforementioned Metal Machine Music and Trout Mask Replica. I’ve tried - and failed - to endure both. I am certain that most metal albums would also qualify, were I to try and listen to them.
And by the way, I consider Richard and Linda Thompson’s “Shoot Out the Lights” one of my all-time favorites.
mmm
Me too. I’m a little unsure what people mean by an album being “unlistenable” - annoying or unpleasant I could understand. I could also understand a song or album having unbearable emotional connotations, but I don’t think that’s what is being discussed here.
Example - I despise Dubstep, and would never choose to listen to it, but sitting with someone who’s playing it and explaining what they see in it is in no way unbearable.
But then I’ve been known to listen to Merzbow of my own volition…
I was working in Borders with some hardcore music sachems when *Smile *came out. Of course, they were all ecstatic that this lost masterpiece had finally seen the light of day and played the CD overhead ad infinitum.
Finally, I walked up to our music supervisor (who now owns a successful record store–no small feat in the age of mp3), looked him in the eye, and said:
“Jeff, this is probably the worst pop album I have ever heard.”
To paraphrase Opus, it may not be that bad, but Lord, it’s not good.
I originally found Loveless, by My Bloody Valentine, to be unlistenable because of the guitars going oscillating in and out of tune in many of the songs on that album. The first time I heard it, it was downloaded from Napster, and I thought I just got a bad rip that sounded like it came from a wonky cassette tape that sped up and slowed down. It took me a few listens to get used to the sound and has since become one of my two favorite albums, alongside Pet Sounds.
The band was three sisters who literally couldn’t play their instruments. But for some reason, their father thought they were destined to be musicians, or something.
The music is pretty much completely unlistenable, while at the same time, and endless source of fascination for music critics who are attracted by the idea of “naive” music.
I came in to post this same album. Its revered by so many music critics and hipsters but I just don’t get it.
My other submission is from a well thought of jazz trumpeter whose name I can’t recall at the moment. His schtick is that he had extra valves added to his horn so that he could play half notes or fifths and “all that jazz.” It ends up sounding like Ravi Shankar had unprotected sex with a trumpet. Can anyone remind me of who this is?
I think the opposite - Colin Meloy’s voice can be annoying because it sounds like he has a real speech impediment. It sounds like he has that problem that a lot of children have when they first start speaking - they can’t pronounce ‘R’'s quite right, saying “Thewe” instead of “There”. Most kids outgrow that inability, but some people carry it into adulthood, and that’s what Colin Meloy sounds like. It sounds like he’s struggling to form the words with his mouth and not quite getting it.
That said, once you can look past that he’s actually a very good singer. He’s kind of like Bob Dylan - he speech affectation sounds so strong sometimes that it overwhelms the music, but then he can do a song like ‘Lay Lady Lay’ in which it’s clear that he can actually sing.
Speaking of Bob Dylan… Surely an album or two of his has to make the list.
I’ve heard other people say much the same, but if you make the patience to listen to it, all that “messing around” is incredibly tight. FZ was pretty famous for rehearsing a LOT and requiring musicians in the band to basically be superhuman.
In short, it sounds like drunk guys messing around because there was an absolutely astounding amount of effort put into making it sound that way, and it sounds that way because that’s what Frank wanted it to sound like.
When I listen to Zappa, I hear consummate musicianship from everyone in the band.
