[quote=“axiom”]
Nope, no Minor Threat…Black Flag is on there though, .[/quote]
That right? Bet it wasn’t “The Process of Weeding Out” hehehe. Have to throw it on now 
[quote=“daltongang”][quote=“axiom”]
Nope, no Minor Threat…Black Flag is on there though, .[/quote]
That right? Bet it wasn’t “The Process of Weeding Out” hehehe. Have to throw it on now [/quote]
Hahahaha - friggin’ hilarious. Kinda surprised “Damaged” is in there. Was also surprised to see Husker Du’s “New Day.” Other than that…
Rolling Stone defines “best” in terms of crass commercialism: note the “Buy Now” link under each listing, the fact that the list was created by “an array of musicians, critics, and influential industry figures” (i.e. commercial interests), and the suggestion of using the list for “one monster of a holiday shopping list” (yeah right).
Too bad, they miss great formative influences. Minor Threat was hugely influential, way beyond the DC hardcore scene, and was Ian Mackaye at his best (never cared much for Egg Hunt or Fugazi). Then there’s The Minutemen, Dr. Know, Negative Approach, Corrosion of Conformity, Crucifix, Discharge, G.B.H., the Exploited, the Subhumans, the UK Subs, the English Dogs, Faith/Void, Rites of Spring, Scream, Beefeater, Bad Brains, Government Issue, et al. Hell, I’d settle for Flipper, DRI, Agnostic Front, or Fang. And what of the Sisters of Mercy and Siouxsie and the Banshees? What about Motorhead?
Just a thought.
You last three posters listen to damn fine music 
Damaged was a great album in my opinion.
I didn’t see the list, because they are usually pretty lame like Slurpcheese said. The idea of someone telling me what ‘best’ is and then wanting me to ‘buy’ it is what ruins it for me.
Having read the Rolling Stones 500, I find myself confused.
What is musical greatness? I see that my personal God, Mr Dylan is represented many many times, as are The Beatles. But are these albums really ‘greater’ than some which are much lower down the list?
For me I feel right now that musical greatness should take on board albums which highlight the peak of an artist’s craft. This list seems more to reflect great artists in general.
I love you Bob, but is “Bringing it all back home” an album which highlights your musical genius? Why not have “Nashville Skyline” as his best album? It shows what a talented little so and so he is.
Are ALL those Beatles albums better examples of great music, than say, The Chronic, by Dr. Dre? (A rather shitty showing at #137) Or is it that the Beatles are so respected that they have to have 8 albums which rank higher than other artists.
Just a thought. The way things are going, this will end up in the flounder forum.
Patterson out.
Ok, read the list. Here are my thoughts.
- There were no British people voting in that chart. I.E. No Oasis in the top 20, no Blur, no Stone Roses, no Happy Mondays. (Pills Thrills and Bellyaches,
cccaaallllll the cops) - Nico and the Velvet Underground: What the fuck? Anyone under 50 years old get a casting vote? That is one tough album to enjoy. As a pimply youth working in my local Our Price records I’d get complaints from adults to “Turn that shit off”.
- Hip Hop was very poorly represented. I dare anyone to tell me that Paul’s Boutique wasn’t groundbreaking material. I listen to that album so often. And it’s ranked at 157, behind, probably, an album of slurping noises made by the Beatles. No Doggy Style, no, Blueprint, no Life after Death.
- Funkadelic - One nation under a groove. A good example of an excellent album poorly ranked. Number 177 in that chart. Again behind some ridiculous albums. That is one album to funk you up and get you grooving. A really great album.
- Somethings were just plain forgotten. Simply Red’s STARS, which I believe is crap, sold gazzilions of copies. But no mention of it. So sales didn’t seem to get looked into too deeply.
Ah well, its hard to make a list we all like. But did Bob, and The Beatles really write ALL the best music? Is there no love in your hearts for Stevie Wonder?
Patterson
Surely the fact that there were no British people voting is irrelevent? If nationality were a huge factor, I’d hate to see how many more Beatles and Stones albums would be on the list if all voters were British.
So if the panel were made up entirely of people from Mali, say, or from Burma, then they would come up with a pretty similar list to the Rolling Stones 500? Nico would still be at number 11? Doubt it.
Surely culture influences choice.
You think that everyone in the world agrees on what is good music?
Bababa I feel you are mistaken.
And would age have no influence either?
A British list would have stuff like…
…I mean, c’mon, this is a country where most of the rock critics claim with a straight face that the Smiths were the most important pop band of the past 20 years. (giggles)
So if the panel were made up entirely of people from Mali, say, or from Burma, then they would come up with a pretty similar list to the Rolling Stones 500? Nico would still be at number 11? Doubt it.
Surely culture influences choice.
You think that everyone in the world agrees on what is good music?
Bababa I feel you are mistaken.
And would age have no influence either?[/quote]
I’m sure that if people from Mali voted, the list would be different; since I like African music, I also think their list would be better. However, I do think that lists from the English-speaking diaspora would be more or less the same. I can’t imagine that many serious music critics or musicians from Australia or Canada, say, would not choose the Beatles and the Stones, and obviously, given the number of British choices on Rolling Stone’s top ten, Americans also have no problem choosing British acts.
Err, the “English speaking diaspora” includes people whose ancestors were from Mali. In fact, if it weren’t for them, your precious English/Australian/Canadian music would amount to whitebread Doris Day imitations. All modern pop music worth a damn comes from apings of African-American (circa the Mississippi Delta region) musical forms. More or less.
I agree. However, given that almost all the voters on the Rolling Stone magazine’s list were Americans, and given that modern popular music is essentially West African music brought to America by slaves (and then, to varying degrees, changed by contact with European folk songs, but still in my opinion basically West African music), why are there so few black musicians on the higher reaches of the list, and so many British acts?