I have a different take on the Stones. I think their peak was Some Girls– which is surrounded by a sea of bad albums forward and backward.
Also, everything John Lennon recorded after John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band. Seriously, Imagine is way overrated.
[QUOTE=Autumn Almanac]
I have a different take on the Stones. I think their peak was Some Girls– which is surrounded by a sea of bad albums forward and backward.
Also, everything John Lennon recorded after John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band. Seriously, Imagine is way overrated.
[/QUOTE]
The most damning thing I can say about “Imagine” is… can you imagine how Lennon would have scoffed at that treacly, crappy song if McCartney had written it?
[QUOTE=cerberus]
…
You want really crappy Stevie Nicks? Avoid, at all costs, the abomination known as Street Angel. In fact, avoid anything after Bella Donna and The Wild Heart.
[/QUOTE]
The problem with this is Stevie Nicks never had an artistic peak. For me her entire body of solo work practically defines formulaic doo doo.
Autumn Almanac Some Girls is my favorite Stones album as well. And I don’t trust the artistic judgement of people who don’t like Springsteen’s Nebraska.
[QUOTE=astorian]
The most damning thing I can say about “Imagine” is… can you imagine how Lennon would have scoffed at that treacly, crappy song if McCartney had written it?
[/QUOTE]
It’s hard to picture that since it’s so quintessentially a John Lennon song. The lyrics express some fairly radical ideas, even if in a childlike, simplistic way. And Lennon wrote and sang a number of soft ballads form the Bealtes’ middle period on. How about “In My Life” and “I’m A Jealous Guy”?
Clapton’s *461 Ocean Boulevard * blows, mostly beause of *I Shot The Sheriff * and Let It Grow. In fact, most every “pop” tune Clapton has ever done has really sucked in my opinion. I’m a big fan of his blues work, but the rest leave me yawning.
And if there were ever a petition to destroy every copy of You Look Wonderful Tonight in existence, I’d sign it. This tune has achieved terminal suckosity.
[Quote=ultrafilter]
I like it. It’s pretty clearly not their best work, and I’m not sure you can really say that they were at their prime when they did it, but I like it.
[/QUOTE]
Ok, you’re right. Talking Heads peaked with Remain In Light, but Speaking In Tongues through Little Creatures was still quite good.
[QUOTE=RealityChuck]
Classic Example: Lou Reed’s Metal Machine Music – he wrote it to kiss off his record company and nearly wrecked his career. It is unlistenable. Reed is quoted as saying “Well, anyone who gets to side four is dumber than I am.”
Similarly, Pink Floyd’s “Obscured by Clouds” was only so-so, but was also a soundtrack.
[/QUOTE]
Of course, MMM was intentionally unlistenable, and, believe it or not, there are those who find it influential. I have a bootleg of Lou Reed playing with a group who actually transcribed all the noises into sheet music and learned to play it live. It’s kind of hypnotic, in a white noise sort of way.
I also happen to quite like Obscured By Clouds. It was better than their work on More and had some pretty catchy tunes (for Pink Floyd).
[QUOTE=DaddyTimesTwo]
I was going to argue against this, now I’m not so sure. Monster was certainly a 180 shift from Automatic but I think they made the album they wanted to make (and I happen tolike it well enough). I guess your point regarding the OP is arguable, I disagree with the “consistently excreble”, as New Adventures in Hi-Fi is one of my favorite REM records and is certainly less different style-wise than Monster.
[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t have had any problems with a big stylistic shift if the songs had been any good. Before it came out, the word was that R.E.M were going to put out something that sounded like their early days in the clubs. Having heard a number of bootlegs worth of fantastic early material that they never put on record (look for the 20th Century Boys bootlegs) I was pretty psyched. Instead they recorded their mid-life crisis. It wasn’t the worst thing they would ever do, but coming after a run of such spectacular albums, it was a huge disappointment. I know I’m just a bitter, deconverted acolyte, but I thought they were the greatest band on the planet, back in the day, and it was like they were actively working to ruin all the good things they ever did. New Adventures was definitley a better record than Monster, but that’s largley for the inclusion of Electrolite (one of their best songs), and Leave, which I think were leftovers from the Automatic era.
Eh, they were about my favorite band in college, but they started pouring on the suck somewhere between *Fables of the Reconstruction * and Life’s Rich Pageant, or when Stipe stopped mumbling. They became a different band, really, after their initial phase. Just my opinion, though; I’m probably in the minority there.
For me, the last great Stones album was Some Girls. The last good (decent) one was Tattoo You. In 1981- sheesh.
[QUOTE=astorian]
The most damning thing I can say about “Imagine” is… can you imagine how Lennon would have scoffed at that treacly, crappy song if McCartney had written it?
[/QUOTE]
Actually I think the song “Imagine” is pretty decent. It’s the startlingly weak material like “It’s So Hard” and lots of middle-of-the-road stuff like “Crippled Inside” and “Oh My Love” that really drag the album down. (“Jealous Guy” is my favorite John Lennon song ever though.)
[QUOTE=Autumn Almanac]
(“Jealous Guy” is my favorite John Lennon song ever though.)
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but Bryan Ferry did the definitive version of it.
[QUOTE=twickster]
Yeah, but Bryan Ferry did the definitive version of it.
[/QUOTE]
Mmmmm…Bryan Ferry. I love him.
It’s hard to believe that Jethro Tull’s A Passion Play was released right in the middle of an approximately ten-year period that was otherwise pretty much full of great stuff. Well, we all need to give our brains a vacation sometimes.
[QUOTE=cerberus]
Tusk was good. It was moody, complicated music in the age of the Late Disco Era. And it did sell remarkably well, multiple platinum during a recession, just not the uniquely high sales of Rumours
[/QUOTE]
And it started out as a Lindsay Buckingmah project as opposed to a proper Fleetwood Mac release. There were a lot of personality conflicts within the band going on at that time.
[QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus]
It’s hard to picture that since it’s so quintessentially a John Lennon song. The lyrics express some fairly radical ideas, even if in a childlike, simplistic way.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that simple, direct approach is a large part of the song’s effectiveness. It’s emotional appeal is much like Billy Graham’s simple “come to Jesus” message that worked so well for him through much of his career. Unfortunately, it’s also just as treacly and manipulative as a Billy Graham sermon. I remember it fondly as part of the zeitgeist of my younger days, much like Scott McKenzie’s “San Francisco,” but that’s because I look back on it through a thick haze of nostalgia. If I heard it for the first time today, I’d probably puke.
[QUOTE=Jean Poutine]
I recently came upon Prince’s Lovesexy at a thrift store on cassette (!) for a dollar, and figured I was getting a fair deal. In reality, I wuz robbed. Granted, 1988 was after he peaked, but hell Sign O’ The Times was only a year or so earlier- didn’t he have any decent tracks left over from that? I mean, when the lead single from your album is Alphabet Street, which wouldn’t be in the Prince top 50, somethings wrong. Actually, there’s not a song on the whole album that would be his personal top 50. Add to it an usually large dose of his idiosyncratic silliness and religous drivel, and you get a thoroughly wretched listening experience.
[/QUOTE]
I have a friend whose cousin has done some production work with Prince. According to him, Prince does this on purpose. Prince could make 5 more albums just like Purple Rain if he wanted, but Prince feels like once he covers a certain style, it’s time to move on and do something else. I do agree with your assessment of LoveSexy, though.
[QUOTE=Victorian Squid]
Of course, MMM was intentionally unlistenable, and, believe it or not, there are those who find it influential. I have a bootleg of Lou Reed playing with a group who actually transcribed all the noises into sheet music and learned to play it live. It’s kind of hypnotic, in a white noise sort of way.
[/quote]
Oh, I know that – but it was a stupid move on Reed’s part, since it lost him all credibility.
[QUOTE=want2know]
Bruce Springsteen–“Nebraska”
[/QUOTE]
My favorite Springsteen album.
I don’t see the hatin’ (to use a term loosely) for Obscured by Clouds either – IMO it has the second best soloes of any Floyd album.
In fact, I debated posting “The Final Cut”, as it’s the other “bumper” to Floyds “Epic” period. But I like the music on that, too.
So my nomination is The Promise Rings Wood/Water. Why, at their hooky emo prime did they decide to do a soft rock album? It did grow on me a bit but still, why Lord why?
Van Halen’s Diver Down was a tepid splat of an album in the middle of a streak of solid greatness.
Eddie discovered synthesizers, at the expense of the guitar, and the few songs that weren’t covers were written to new lows of triteness.
What was wrong with Passion Play?