UK Paper: Top 100 British albums

[MindGoneHaywire]

Albums, not artists, but still, like most lists, the basic form makes some kind of sense, but there are items that make me scratch my head. Now, I don't know how many people are going to share my view that while DSOTM doesn't seem all THAT underrated at #63--although I am surprised to see that it's not significantly higher--but I think that many would agree that placing the Stone Roses at #1 is akin to NME readers voting the Smiths the 'most influential' pop music act of all time. YMMV. There are some rationales from some of the panel involved, most of whom are rock stars, and some essays down towards the bottom, as well.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/omm/0,12103,1033618,00.html

[Davey]

43 The La's, The La's
Go! Discs, 1990; chart position: 30
There they went - heirs apparent to the Beatles
How to create a legend: record one album, quickly disown it, and then retire to your native Liverpool to live off the PRS from one of the Nineties' fondest-loved singles. Such was the career path of Lee Mavers, alleged to be the Britpop generation's Syd Barrett, but - according to what little news has emerged in the last decade - actually a poker-faced family man with a motivation problem.

Whatever, his one work is an assured masterpiece, packed not just with unimpeachably great songs, but also frosted with a northern mysticism that only compounds the enigma of the La's. At times, in fact, the lyrics and music conspire to suggest that he knew exactly what he was doing: as on the curtain-dropping 'Looking Glass', and 'Freedom Song' - a piece in which Mavers gravely announces that 'the masterpiece is done'. He wasn't wrong.
(JH)
Burn it: Way Out; There She Goes; Timeless Melody

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/images/smilies/new/twothumbsedvest.gif

[Stone]

Here's what I posted on another board earlier today about that list:


That first Dexy's album is damn good, but better than something like Entertainment!?!?! I could probably think of a bunch of other albums I like better too.

And how TF did Band on the Run make the list?

But I'm very happy to see things like The La's and Hounds of Love on the list.

Oh, and it seems to be missing about 4 or 5 Kinks albums, if you ask me (which no one did).

As far as the Stone Roses go, yeah, I don't think it should be #1 (I mean, better than Revolver??), but it's likely be in my top 20 or maybe even top 10 British albums.

[audiobill]

No XTC??

No Jethro Tull??

No Black Sabbath??

No George Harrison's "All Things Must Pass"??

As with any list, it has it's limitations and its highlights.
Agreed....Band on the Run WTF??

Cheers,
audiobill

[nobody]

Fun list...

I don't necessarily agree with it. I mean that Stone Roses record is pretty good, but after I Wanna Be Adored opens the thing, the rest is downhill to me. Still, I'm always glad to see something a bit outside the traditional Beatles, Rolling Stones, etc... cannon get recognized. At least it creates a bit of conversation that way instead of those lists that are so predictable you just kinda read down them like....All Beatles records present, check...Everything by the Rolling Stones, pre Emotional Rescue, check...and so on and so forth...

Some good stuff on there that I haven't listened to in a while, which is the most fun for me of anything reading through such lists, getting me to go back and listen to stuff I really like but haven't pulled out in a while, or occasionally letting me in on something I've never heard before.

Glad to see Massive Attack in the top ten, but I'd have had to find a place for Protection, personally. Great to see PIL get props. I think they were just as creative if not more so than the Sex Pistols, but I think they often get overlooked as Johnny's "other band." Fun to see stuff like ABC on there instead of making sure everything is of the utmost seriousness. I like their recent entries. I haven't heard anything out of England that I've liked better than the Streets or Dizzee Rascal lately.

It's fun reading some of the reasoning by the voters, makes it a bit more fun than those ones where everyone is pretty anonymous but you are assured that half a million of the world’s best and brightest conspired to make sure that the list is as accurate as the ten commandments. After all this is just a collection of opinions, it's nice to have a human face on 'em.

Fun reading, thanks for the link.

[Grblgrbl]

To me the biggest surprise (ok, second biggest, Stone Roses is the first - a very good album, but #1???) is the lack of respect the Who got. No Who's Next on the list (unless I missed it), and the highest place for a Who album is Quad at #74!!!!!

[mad rhetorik]

No Black Sabbath??



Check # 92. <b>Paranoid</b> made it on there, but far too underrated IMO. No <b>Number Of The Beast</b> or <b>Ace Of Spades</b> either.




No XTC??



The list is bullocks, as they say. Not a single XTC release, yet they include unspeakable s<a>hit like The Human League. Not to mention that a worthless Beatles cover band (Oasis, to the uninformed) makes the Top 20 while <b>Dark Side Of The Moon</b> is shoved way back to # 63.

Also Yes makes # 51 and King Crimson doesn't get anything. WTF?

<b>The Observer</b> just guaranteed itself a good bit of "why no...[insert artist here]" mail. Controversy is good, I suppose.

[nobody]

Personally, I never understood the fuss some folks make over XTC. Whenver I listen, they come across ads a fairly bland rock band with a little poppy new wavy edge, but certainly nothing to write home about. Along with the hub bub over the first Liz Phair record, they share slots as stuff that I've seen praised by many that has just never registered as anything other than run-of-the-mill to me.

Then again, I'm sure we all had some of our British favorites left out. I wanna see some love for X Ray Spex: Germfree Adolescents and would be happy to see somthing by Motorhead as well.

[Jim Clark]

The list is bullocks, as they say. Not a single XTC release, yet they include unspeakable s<a>hit like The Human League. Not to mention that a worthless Beatles cover band (Oasis, to the uninformed) makes the Top 20 while <b>Dark Side Of The Moon</b> is shoved way back to # 63.



Pretty satisfying list, perhaps one of the best instances I can recall of a list speaking to me. Tons of faves represented including The Human League. I think Dare is a devastatingly emotional album and from a production stand point was one of the more artful efforts of the decade. Even synth haters were digging this album thanks in no small part to the irony of the lyrics vs. Oakley's delivery. Without question it represents an era's culture including fascination (no pun, that's a different album) with technology and fashion. The songs are exceptionally well convceived from start to finish. This was the art of the time and one would be hard pressed to find a better candidate for this or any list.

Besides, I didn't see Frankie on the list so you've got to give me something other than New Order.


jc

[nobody]

just


RELAX


jim


I do agree though that it is nice to see a list that doesn't automatically turn its nose up at anything with synths.

[Lonesome Dave]

Besides, I didn't see Frankie on the list so you've got to give me something other than New Order.
Frankie? You've gotta be kidding? I thought that was one of Tricky Ricky's bones in the closet - not you too!

Hehehe, speaking of 80's MOR synth-pop [winky], probably no news to you but have you heard the new Junior Boys album that's been getting all the good press lately? I listened to some of it but it's a little too much of the synth-pop thing for me which means it's probably right down your memory lane :)

http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/juniorboys/lastexit/
http://www.fastnbulbous.com/juniorboys_last.htm

[Jim Clark]

Frankie? You've gotta be kidding? I thought that was one of Tricky Ricky's bones in the closet - not you too!

Hehehe, speaking of 80's MOR synth-pop [winky], probably no news to you but have you heard the new Junior Boys album that's been getting all the good press lately? I listened to some of it but it's a little too much of the synth-pop thing for me which means it's probably right down your memory lane :)

http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/juniorboys/lastexit/
http://www.fastnbulbous.com/juniorboys_last.htm

Hehe, yep it was actually a bit tongue in check although it's still a good album. Frankie actually created the culture/fashion surrounding them through, I thought, pretty clever marketing plans. Oh yeah, there was some music in there somewhere! Entirely different than Human League.

Yep, it was among the better lists I've seen. MBV, Clash, Smiths, New Order, JD. Plus the Beatles didn't hog the #1 spot again. Those folks at least had the courage of their convictions and I gotta respect that.

Someone else mentioned something about Junior Boys to me and I don't recall ever digging deeper so thanks for the links. EDIT: It was hard to find someone selling that album but I did find a copy at AB-CD. It would be kind of nice to hear some samples first so I'll dig around the net a bit later. Looks like it may have some potential for me-thanks.


jc

[Ex Lion Tamer]

On quick perusal, I thought that it was a pretty cool list that wasn't the usual rote recital of "best" albums, but on further study...

Not enough punk...

Stiff Little Fingers - Inflammable Material(were they left off becasue they're Irish? Aren't Thin Lizzy Irish?)
X-Ray Spex - Germ Free Adolescents

other omissions...

No Pogues, very little Elvis Costello, English Beat, I Just Can't Stop It, I can overllok all of the above, but none of Wires first three albums making the cut....INEXCUSEABLE!!!!!!

[Davey]

On quick perusal, I thought that it was a pretty cool list that wasn't the usual rote recital of "best" albums, but on further study...none of Wires first three albums making the cut....INEXCUSEABLE!!!!!!
Yeah, I was a little surprised by that too since Wire has been back in action the last couple years. People did only get 10 picks, though. The thing I did like about the list was that it came from a variety of people, not just critics or fans. And the introduction article even talks about some of the same shortcomings many of us have mentioned, including your Wire omissions. One of my biggest shocks was to see Robert Wyatt's <i>Rock Bottom</i> even <i>on</i> the list, let alone so high. Love that album, but didn't realize so many others did too. And that is the whole point to many of these lists as they say in their closing remarks, keeping the light on for some great music that would otherwise disappear from public consciousness...well, that and selling magazines with little real or new content :)

<font size=-1>One of the things that makes a list like this even more interesting is the idea that certain albums represent music that is on the edges of impinging upon the collective imagination - Wyatt reminds us of Soft Machine and Matching Mole albums that are missing, Yes makes us wonder about King Crimson, Black Sabbath about heavy metal in general, Brian Eno of all the other Brian Eno albums that are missing. Joy Division of the lack of Throbbing Gristle, Wire, Cabaret Voltaire, Magazine. The Human League of the lack of Depeche Mode. The lack of anything by Aphex Twin. Underworld or Leftfield reminds you of the lack of anything by Matthew Herbert or Four Tet.
.
.
.
We list not just for comfort and because it's a nice new parlour game. We list to remember albums such as Astral Weeks, and Five Leaves Left, This Nation's Saving Grace and Basket of Light, to remember that such albums might have disappeared without lists like this. We list to remember that for every album like those four, there are others as worthy of our attention just out of hearing. Albums and songs waiting to be listed because, like it or not, the list goes on for ever.
</font>

[MindGoneHaywire]

I'm always glad to see something a bit outside the traditional Beatles, Rolling Stones, etc... cannon get recognized. At least it creates a bit of conversation that way instead of those lists that are so predictable you just kinda read down them like....All Beatles records present, check...Everything by the Rolling Stones, pre Emotional Rescue, check...and so on and so forth...

Hey, I'm all for bucking the canon--if it makes sense. In recent years I've seen lists that achieve the former, but rarely the latter. If we want to see those sorts of lists, there's always Rolling Stone, which puts out lists that are annoyingly stuck-in-the-past, but, understanding that mentality, they make sense. This list makes a bit more sense than the idea that the Smiths were the most influential UK band of the past 50 years, but not by much--at least not at the very top.

If a bunch of people want to get together & decide that all of those Beatles & Rolling Stones records don't belong at the top, that's fine. We are so conditioned to seeing that, that it would almost make sense to exclude those two, and maybe the Who & Led Zeppelin, due to their popularity & even ubiquitousness. Maybe run a sidebar ranking the best of some combination of those acts, or whatever acts would make sense in that scenario (given that there are differences in how popular which band & which record were between the UK & the USA & the rest of the world). But if I'm going to accept a list like this, the Stone Roses is not the record I can accept at #1. Someone actually thinks this is better than the first couple of Smiths albums? The first Aztec Camera record didn't even make the list, and to my ears that's so much better than the first Stone Roses record, it isn't even funny. Where's the Soft Boys' A Can Of Bees--or anything by Robyn Hitchcock for that matter? (Actually it's the exclusion of Underwater Moonlight that surprises me more) An ABC album ranks higher than Lennon's Plastic Ono Band? Although I'm not an Astral Weeks fan, I can't complain about its placing; however, Soul II Soul at #15 while Quadrophenia's at #74...and while the first Elvis Costello album can be found at #61, that's the only one you'll find on there, while Talk Talk comes in at #33 & Massive Attack at #9. Throw me a bone here.

I have records by Echo & The Bunnymen & the Psychedelic Furs & Siouxsie & the Banshees & Joy Division that I think are much, much better than that Stone Roses record. I don't quite understand the overrating of Revolver over the past few years, but I've seen this often enough where I'm starting to think it's accepted wisdom. In any case, I'd rate the White Album higher than any album by any of those people I named, quite a bit of whose work I find superior to the Stone Roses. Outside of that I don't think the list is really all that bad, though it's not as refreshing as it might seem at first considering there have been a few of these in recent years that differ from the Rolling Stone/conventional wisdom way of looking at this stuff.

[Worf101]

is there no Queen albums represented on this list? Or did I miss it?

Da Worfster

[nobody]

Well, J, I think you look at things a bit more from a traditional academic standpoint than I do...and you think these lists mean more than I do. I don't mean anything bad by that, but I just don't really see them as having even the slightest chance of being anything near definitive or expressing some sort of mythical true standard of quality. So, to me, getting away from the cannon for variety sake is just as well and in fact better, just because it's more fun, than making sure you include all those golden moldies and making sure you pay enough attention to conventional wisdom.

Sure, my list would look very different from theirs. My list would look very different from practically any list I've ever seen. I would hope that everyone out there could make their own list and that their list would be a very different thing. Just look at the examples they took of people who listed their selections...all people with more than a passing interest in music...all coming up with very different lists...all with valid reasons why they like what they like.

And, in the end, with something like music, as much as the theorists hate to hear it, the bottom line in when answering the question, "What is good music?" is "What do you like?" So, to argue that the list is faulty is to argue that your perspective is different. Now, this may sound simplistic and silly, but if this is not the true bottom line, so to speak, what is?

Does it have to have a certain sound or a certain lyrical perspective? If proficiency with a guitar is a big factor, shouldn't the proggers get more respect than they generally do with these lists? If it is a lyrical thing, shouldn't more singer-songwriters and revolutionary types feature at the top? If it is originality, shouldn't these lists be filled with unlistenable art school experiments, using forms never played before they diligently put it on tape? If it is popularity (which could mean something in the way it express the emotions, no matter how base, of the people at large) why are pop stars pretty well universally reviled on these types of lists? Unless they were pop stars of some era that somehow gets more respect, usually because the guy in charge of hiring writers lived through it. (cheap shot at baby boomers I know, but I couldn’t' resist)

I could give many examples of inconsistency in lists like these that show just how arbitrary they are, but I think we all could. How about the way older R&B acts and old rock acts are able to get away with puerile lyrics and talking about nothing but boy meets girl and how much they'd like to get in some chick's pants, but nowadays an artist that comes out with a new, fun beat and just slaps some lovey lovey lyrics is a hack? What's the difference? Oh originality...well then why do so many 4 piece guitar bands that stick to a rather strident stylistic formula get included?

The first time I really started to grapple with an issue like this was when I was working with a team to select some works of fiction and poetry to go into an anthology. First thing we discussed was, "what do we want to include and why?" Well, as I have seen almost universally happen since in such a situation, someone piped up with the utterly meaningless comment, "I want to focus on quality...not topic...not style...just the best work gets in."

Well, quality is too dependant on personal expectations. Writing which flies in the face of your particular world view often seems to lack logic and cohesion. Yet, to someone with a more similar mindset, it's wonderful. Work that focuses on taboo subjects is seen as merely shocking for shock sake for someone whose world lacks daily bombardment with sex and violence. Yet, many who have grown up in such an environment may see the "shocks" as refreshing honesty.

So, to me, it's all perspective. And, I've babbled enough.

But, damn...Stone Roses at #1? F<a>ucking English.