Kevin's Watch

100 Greatest Emoticons:P

1.
2.
3.
4. etc....

See you need 100 Greatest programs first to make a show about them...

Matrixman wrote:My pick for Madonna's greatest album would be True Blue.

Agreed. As for Pink Floyd...I have confess with some embarrassment...they bore me. I stole my dad's copy of The Division Bell, and it's just...restaurant music

That's the problem with C4's polling method; it focuses almost entirely the 16-24 age group.

Canvas that cohort for their favourite records and you'll have a list containing their favourite records from their own collection (nearly all from 1996 to present day) with records that are either undisputed classics or records people think they should be voting for coming out near the top. Post that list on a board who don't like any music that was made after 1984 and you've got some offended sensibilities.

Aside from OK Computer (which is a phenomenal album, just not the best ever) I think the list is pretty good up to about 35, at which point the contemporary artists really begin to punch above their weight.

I mean the White Stripes make highly inventive music, but Elephant is not the 39th best record of all time. I have little time for the Libertines as all of their strife and posturing merely serves the cover for a sound that has absolutely nothing unique about it. Other recent bands such as Franz Ferdinand, Kasabian, Razorlight (hell, even Marron 5) have a distinctive sound of their own whereas Doherty and co sound like any one of a number of raw-edged Indie bands. 50th? Whilst Primal Scream and Massive Attack languish in the lower reaches? Pah.

Robbie Williams and the Streets can kiss my arse too.

Robbie Williams and the Streets can kiss my arse too.

agreed

Ditto

CovenantJr wrote:

Matrixman wrote:My pick for Madonna's greatest album would be True Blue.

Agreed. As for Pink Floyd...I have confess with some embarrassment...they bore me. I stole my dad's copy of The Division Bell, and it's just...restaurant music

Well, the Division Bell is rather dull, when stacked up against their 70s material. It's certainly not introductory material, to be sure. Have you listened to their standards, such as Dark Side, Wish You Were Here, the Wall?

Lord Foul wrote:

CovenantJr wrote:As for Pink Floyd...I have confess with some embarrassment...they bore me. I stole my dad's copy of The Division Bell, and it's just...restaurant music

Well, the Division Bell is rather dull, when stacked up against their 70s material. It's certainly not introductory material, to be sure. Have you listened to their standards, such as Dark Side, Wish You Were Here, the Wall?

Definitely, The Division Bell is NOT a good starting point for Pink Floyd - You should listen to the material that was released before Roger Waters left the band - such as listed by Covenant Jr above. If you can, listen to the new SACD multichannel of Dark Side of the Moon, as good as the original album was, this multichannel version is so much better !!!

Matrixman wrote:Sgt. Pepper: I'm sorry, but I just don't see the greatness that many people see in this album. I think it's a weak Beatles effort, filled with some of the lamest songs they've ever written. (For a truly hypnotic and musically superior psychedelic trip I'll put on Pink Floyd's The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn, thanks.)

Really, a weak effort? I think the record deserves most of its acclaim. What people seem to forget amidst the hoopla is that the songs mostly just expand and consolidate earlier innovations that were played out on Revolver. There’s some filler, to be sure, but you’ve also got showcases of complex orchestration (“A Day in the Life”), abrasive, slice-of-life rocks (“Good Morning, Good Morning”), giddy 60s anthems (“It’s Getting Better”), bizarre studio experiments (Mr. Kite), George’s Indian-influenced pearls of wisdom (“Within You, Without You”), and especially the lush psychedelia that John had mastered (“Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds”).

Further, while it’s not true that there are no love songs in Pepper (“Lovely Rita” and “Getting Better” both have romantic aspects), it’s lyrically far-removed from the boy-girl topics that dominated the Beatles output through Revolver. And Revolver’s experimentalism produces consistently musical results here--in my book a major advance.

There’s other innovations too, such as it being the first Beatles album actually conceived as an album, not just a bunch of songs (their first released identically in the US and the UK), and the first rock album where songs blend into each other with no breaks (not true for the whole thing, but they did it).

Who can deny that Floyd and all the other bands during 67 were riding the waves the Beatles made? Yeah, Piper is consistently entertaining and imaginative, but all of it seems like a rushed, amateurish effort to ape the Beatles’ more experimental 66-67 work on tracks like “Tomorrow Never Knows”.

Lord Foul wrote:Who can deny that Floyd and all the other bands during 67 were riding the waves the Beatles made?

Pink Floyd riding the Beatles wave ? I sincerely don't think so - they are very different forms of music. I love the both Beatles and Pink Floyd, but for very different reasons.

Vector wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:Who can deny that Floyd and all the other bands during 67 were riding the waves the Beatles made?

Pink Floyd riding the Beatles wave ? I sincerely don't think so - they are very different forms of music. I love the both Beatles and Pink Floyd, but for very different reasons.

I said "Floyd and all the other bands during 67"; I wasn't comparing their careers as a whole. Just listen to Pepper, then listen to Piper. Hell, look at the album covers. I'm not saying Piper was a bad effort--just a second-rate imitation.

Lord Foul wrote:

Vector wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:Who can deny that Floyd and all the other bands during 67 were riding the waves the Beatles made?

Pink Floyd riding the Beatles wave ? I sincerely don't think so - they are very different forms of music. I love the both Beatles and Pink Floyd, but for very different reasons.

I said "Floyd and all the other bands during 67"; I wasn't comparing their careers as a whole. Just listen to Pepper, then listen to Piper. Hell, look at the album covers. I'm not saying Piper was a bad effort--just a second-rate imitation.

Admittedly, I overlooked your emphasis on during 67 - I will reserve judgement for now

Lord Foul wrote:Have you listened to their standards, such as Dark Side, Wish You Were Here, the Wall?

Vector wrote:"If you can, listen to the new SACD multichannel of Dark Side of the Moon

I have heard Dark Side of the Moon - my ex had it - but I recall absolutely nothing about it. If I hear something and it makes no impression at all, I immediately file it mentally in the drawer marked "Radiohead and other blandness"

"Radiohead and other blandness"

Take that back!

Let that one go, Warmark. Some of them are hopeless.

Bah, Radiohead is good, but it's not that good. It's just surprising they get the level of recognition they do without Thom Yorke killing himself. Seriously, it's Nirvana Syndrome. We feel some need to make lists, and we feel an equal need to make one band into more than they are in order to justify the first need, saying "this band is #1" and wrapping it in so much hype and hyperbole as to make that opinion seem unassailable.

And I see where Alan is coming from. You'd have to pay me a decent amount of money to make me sit and listen to every Radiohead album (mainly because of the shock-inducing jar from OK Computer to Kid A).

Well, I've only ever listened to The Bends and OK Computer, because I haven't really liked any of the singles I've heard from their later albums. OK Computer is good - but you're right, it's not the best.

Eh, I like all of Radiohead's albums (except Pablo Honey). Mind you, I don't love every track; I skip some songs, repeat others like crazy. I personally think they're the best band currently making it. I appreciate the fact that they're even popular, in a pop music landscape that rewards crass consumerism over originality. Plus, I think they really nail that whole "disconnected, aloof" feeling through their music, which appeals to my mindset. All without morphing into emos! Fantastic!

That said, they're still not in my top 5 (which would be something like The Beatles, King Crimson, Procol Harum, Pink Floyd, and Brian Eno).

CovenantJr wrote:

Matrixman wrote:My pick for Madonna's greatest album would be True Blue.

Agreed. As for Pink Floyd...I have confess with some embarrassment...they bore me. I stole my dad's copy of The Division Bell, and it's just...restaurant music

What's this, have I truly found another brave Madonna supporter in amongst the prog-rockers?

And about The Division Bell: bravely said!

Lord Foul wrote:

Matrixman wrote: Sgt. Pepper: I'm sorry, but I just don't see the greatness that many people see in this album. I think it's a weak Beatles effort, filled with some of the lamest songs they've ever written. (For a truly hypnotic and musically superior psychedelic trip I'll put on Pink Floyd's The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn, thanks.)

Really, a weak effort? I think the record deserves most of its acclaim. What people seem to forget amidst the hoopla is that the songs mostly just expand and consolidate earlier innovations that were played out on Revolver...

Further...it’s lyrically far-removed from the boy-girl topics that dominated the Beatles output through Revolver.

There’s other innovations too, such as it being the first Beatles album actually conceived as an album, not just a bunch of songs (their first released identically in the US and the UK), and the first rock album where songs blend into each other with no breaks (not true for the whole thing, but they did it).

Who can deny that Floyd and all the other bands during 67 were riding the waves the Beatles made?

No, I don't deny that plenty of folks were riding the Beatles' wave. But in a comparison between Piper and Sgt. Pepper (purely for convenience), Piper simply sounds more musically satisfying to me. I can't help that. I don't question Sgt. Pepper's influential status; it just comes across to me as tired rather than inspired music. And I'll take the "bunch of songs" on Revolver--or Rubber Soul for that matter--any day over Sgt. Pepper.

Good defense of Sgt. Pepper on your part, though, LF. Hey, it's not like I set out wanting to dislike Sgt. Pepper: I was expecting greatness from such a legendary album, but it failed to excite me. What is your treasure is my trash, and vice versa.

One grievance I have about this Greatest 100 list is the absence of Big Country and Simple Minds. It's a shame that these two great Scottish bands are getting so little recognition: in my view, they have been putting out consistently good albums since the 1980's, some of which I would easily rank among the top 100.

Agreed MM. Big Country is one of those overlooked jewels. The Seer is one of my desert island CDs.