I’ve re-listened to the album and stand by my statement, though I think “filler” might have been not the best word. I think some other songs are quite nice, but fall short of greatness. It’s a nice album.
London Calling? Martyr, our brains are wired differently. You probably wouldn’t like a lot of things I like.
Prince and the Revolution - Purple Rain
OK, so this is the kind of thing I was thinking of. I had heard of the album, but have never heard one track from it. I have never seen the movie that goes with it, either.
This is a tough one for me. I know Prince is a musical genius, a prodigy perhaps? He is massively prolific and hugely popular in concert. I respect the hell out of him for his talent. I’ve seen clips of him playing guitar and he is incredible. Up to now, the only song I was aware of is “Party like it’s 1999” because…well, 1999 actually came and I heard it everywhere.
Now the album.
Review: It’s quite good, but I think it is of its time, at least some of the songs are. There weren’t any tracks that particularly blew me away. However, I would list “I would die for you” as the highlight of the album for me. I am playing it again in the background right now and loving it.
Oddly enough, many of the tracks don’t seem to catch my interest. I think if I saw Prince live and he played the album, I’d like it more. It’s not bad or entirely dull, I just can’t get too in to it.
I am listening to the song “purple rain” again right now(yes, it takes me awhile to put my thoughts down) and loving it as well, actually. The guitar/instrumental section is amazing. I really admire Prince, assuming he wrote all the songs.
I’d give it pretty high marks, but I think some of the tracks are not all that great.
Thriller would have been next, but I actually did hear Thriller growing up. I know almost all the songs. Michael Jackson managed to permeate our household somehow. I’ll have to figure out what is next soon.
Not to hijack or anything, but Velvet Underground and Nico did nothing for me.
I read about it here a few years back and on the Rolling Stone top 500 album list (number 13) and was really anticipating something mind-blowing when I bought it a year and a half ago. Meh.
I understand it may have been pioneering and influential, but as far as music goes I found it quite boring and uninteresting.
Speaking of Thriller, I actually listened to the album for the first time about a month ago, and was underwhelmed.
I had, of course, heard the majority of its songs before, on the radio, MTV, etc.—some of them often enough that they’re permanently loaded on the iPod in my mind. But I never, at the height of the album’s popularity or since, had any strong urge to buy or borrow the album, because I figured it wasn’t “my kind of music”; it didn’t give me the sense of “I like what this artist is doing and want to hear more of it” that has motivated many album purchases. (And, part of Michael Jackson’s talent was as a live performer/dancer/showman, which was irrelevant to my decision to acquire an audio recording of his work.)
But, a while back, Amazon had a big sale where I got the MP3 album for cheap, and I decided to give it a listen and… yeah, I was right not to have sought it out. There’s undeniable greatness there, but it’s not really my cup of tea—isn’t now, and wouldn’t have been 30 years ago—and the tracks I hadn’t already heard before didn’t really do anything for me.
But that’s the thing: no matter who you are, or what your tastes in music are, there are going to be albums, even great or popular or influential or widely loved albums, that don’t really do anything for you. Sometimes it’s because you haven’t given them enough of a chance; sometimes it’s because you don’t have the right background to really appreciate them; sometimes it’s because their strengths or appeals don’t line up with what you really want from music; and sometimes, who knows? Tastes just differ. I figure there’s so much music out there that anyone with sufficiently eclectic tastes only has time to really listen to a fraction of the good stuff anyway, why waste too much time on stuff that doesn’t appeal to you?
Mahaloth, can I ask how much time you’re spending listening to each of these? I think we may have different opinions on how long it takes to really get into an album and figure out what the artist is trying to do.
I have been driving a lot and been at home quite a bit, so I have been able to listen pretty adequately and without interruption. I’ve been listening to the albums straight through and then hopping back to re-listen to what is most interesting. For Prince, it was “Die For You” and “Purple Rain”.
I would say I have been “immersed” in each album, but have not done a repeat playthrough of any before writing them up. I re-listened to Joshua Tree, though, and have heard Ride the Lightning a few times.
I’ll let anyone know if anything grows on me.
I am currently listening to Talking Heads “Remain in the Light” album.
And I just saw on Reddit that some dude in a band called Periphery responded to someone who didn’t like his music with a pretty good thought. He said:
“Hey no worries dude, no one says you HAVE to like us even you enjoy the music of our peers! It’s just music and its all so wonderfully subjective, so at the end of the day you should just like what you like!”
Oh hell yes; seven tracks, six masterpieces. The OP might be familiar with “Sultans of Swing” from the eponymous debut (all over classic rock radio), or “Money for Nothing” from 1985’s Brothers in Arms (ubiquitous due to MTV video-play).
Talking Heads - Remain in Light
**
I don’t have a lot to say about this one, though I did enter with eager ears as always. It didn’t do much for me either way and I’m surprised it got three or so recommendations. I’d group it right now with London Calling. Just a bunch of songs with no real power or anything. I wasn’t impressed, though perhaps I would have been in 1980?
I can’t pick even one track that was very memorable.
I would think Speaking in Tongues would be a better album to start with for someone who knows nothing about Talking Heads.
OT, but Stop Making Sense, directed by Jonathon Demme and filmed during the tour for Speaking in Tongues, is one of the best concert films you’ll ever see.
I think this is a great idea for a thread, so I don’t want to sound critical when you’re posting initial impressions. But my feeling is that when I’m checking out new music - especially if I’m listening to a bunch of new things at once, like you’re doing - is that I need more than one listen to really get into it. I can love or hate something from the first listen, but even if I really like it, it takes more time for the nuances of most albums to reveal themselves or for me to get a sense of the character of the individual songs. So I’d encourage you to keep listening to a lot of these albums and share your responses.
Heck I’ll jump in. I like the Wilco suggestion, but I always recommend people start with Sky Blue Sky instead of Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. I think it’s more accessible.
I don’t think I saw any Santana albums mentioned either, would recommend both of the first 2.
When it comes to listening to new music, some is instantly accessable (eg, Dire Straits for me). Other stuff less so, eg my wife bought me a Detroit Cobras album, and upon first listening I shelved it. Lately I put it in my car CD player, and there are 4 tracks I hate, and about 8 I like, and I guess that leaves about 6 ‘meh’.
I’m also less of a snob about ‘best of’ albums than i used to be.
Oh, and since you appreciate Prince (and of course you should! ;)) I strongly recommend Sign 'O the Times. His White Album in terms of variety. When you get to I Can Never Take the Place of Your Man, you will call me and thank me immediately, even though we don’t know each other and you don’t have my phone number. It’s just that good ;).