Top 500 albums of all time

As far as the Sgt. Pepper thing goes....

I think it's held up remarkably well considering it was made in 1967.
A very transitory year for music.
A shift from that mono 'wall of sound' to more stereo sounding things.
I don't know for certain, though I'm thinking that more than 4 tracks were becoming more available.
(I'll look and see how many were used on the Pepper album)

Psychedellia was the prevelant sound.
And not to step on your toes Vic (hope you take this well :wink: )....
I think Pepper's holds up much better than the very dated sound of Status Quo's 'Pictures of Matchstick Men'

It was also supposedly the first 'concept' album. (though it really wasn't)

IMO - most of McCartney's songs can be scrapped....
The other's had some really good material though.
Especially Lennon who scored with the GREATEST song EVER....
A Day in the Life (excluding that McCartney middle part :P )

Things like A Little Help From my Friends - covered beautifully by Joe Cocker (w/Jimmy Page on guitar)

It was a landmark recording.
I think that more than anything was the reason for it's #1 status.

Sure, the Beatle's had better albums....
Pepper's was the turning point though.
Different from their previous albums, while laying the foundation for what was to come.

Speaking of 'concept albums', and going with the whole Steppenwolf should be inducted into the R&R HOF bit....
My all time FAVORITE Steppenwolf album is 'Monster'.
An incredible influence on the early teen me.
And more than a few of my high school folders had some part of the Monster album cover drawn on it (my vote for best
album cover as well), and a fair dose of song lyric bits scrawled on them from such songs as 'Power Play',
'Draft Resister', & 'Monster/America/Suicide'.

Failed to see that one on the list as well.

Oh well.

Ken

I saw a couple of comments questioning Michael Jackson's Thiller album being high up on the list. No matter if and where you'd place it in the list, it's hard to argue these points.

1. 47 million copies sold world-wide.
2. Unlike most (IMHO-horrible) pop music albums, this one had all good songs.
3. The video support for the title song (and others) had a HUGE influence on the MTV set.
4. Big influence on American pop culture. Had everyone doing moon-walks, wearing one glove, etc.
5. Cross-over guests drew in more fans than he normally would have. (Paul McCartney and Eddie Van Halen)

I had it on LP, cassette and now CD. The funny thing is, I really do not like pop music....especially the last 15-20 years or so.

Psychedellia was the prevelant sound.
And not to step on your toes Vic (hope you take this well )....
I think Pepper's holds up much better than the very dated sound of Status Quo's 'Pictures of Matchstick Men'

I agree with you there Ken, "Matchstick Men" was nothing more than plastic pop/psychedelia, but it got the band noticed and it bears little resemblance to their trademark heads-down-legs-apart-let's-BOOOGIE! image for the past 37 years or so.....although it still gets a lot of radio play!

No, I think the thing with Pepper, it's easy to tell the Beatles (especially John and Paul) were heavily influenced by the old-time music hall acts - that to me is the prevailing imagery of the album. It sounds like an album that could have been written in the 20's or even earlier for the most part.

Roy, I agree with your point re Thriller too - it's hard to ignore the stats. Thank the deity of your choice I've succesfully managed to avoid the album for at least 20 years, that's probably my own personal feelings about whacko Jacko at work. But to have it higher in the list of albums than the ones I mentioned, and other hugely influential albums? That's my real quibble....and just who exactly did Janet Jackson influence? Her and her brother's music is highly derivative - I'll grant you their work is smooth, highly professional and polished, but you could say the same about Mariah Carey, Beyonce, Westlife and hundreds of others, and I don't see them in the list. A triumph of image over substance.

:D :D :D

Vic

Psychedellia was the prevelant sound.
And not to step on your toes Vic (hope you take this well )....
I think Pepper's holds up much better than the very dated sound of Status Quo's 'Pictures of Matchstick Men'
No, I think the thing with Pepper, it's easy to tell the Beatles (especially John and Paul) were heavily influenced by the old-time music hall acts - that to me is the prevailing imagery of the album. It sounds like an album that could have been written in the 20's or even earlier for the most part.

Quite right.

I'm sorry.
I guess I could have worded that a bit better.

What I was trying to say was that 67's prevailing musicscape was psychedelia, with stuff like Matchstick Men (67 or 68???)
being the type of stuff from that era.
All of which is VERY dated, though (like Matchstick Men), still enjoyable to listen to when the mood is right.

I have to say that Pepper was slightly psychedelic. Very subtle.
Which is what keeps it from being dated in my opinion. (Fantastic production) (Like Hendrix, who though heavier into psyhedelic sound, still sounds fresh)

And like you said Vic, they had that old tyme music bit going on. (Especially McCartney)
Which is kinda like the Doors version of psyhedelia - Carnival/Psyhedelic
It seems to be the crossover or combo psychedelia seems to hold up.

The Band's Music From Big Pink is the only other thing from 67 to really have a fresh sound to it today.
And they were so secluded up in Saugertees that they didn't listen to what was on the radio.
Had no idea about the psycedelic thing.

And agreed - Status Quo's main body of work sounds nothing like their origins.
Though it must have been fun while it lasted. :wink:

Ken

Fear not friends...

CFB - Darkside is # 43

Tiffer - #243 Freakout
And ....# 296 We're only in it for the money

Did anyone see Mink Deville's Cabretta album????

Ken

Ah indeed, i only had chance to give a glance at list and pressed ctrl+f and only searched the word "zappa" forgetting the mothers!

But yeah, of course the only way to be happy with one of these lists is if its your own, and I have a lot of trouble just doing that

the thing about these lists is that they come out every year in all kinds of different ways. the records don't change from year to year but the list does. it's all dependent on who does the "listing," imho.

498. Tres Hombres, ZZ Top :roll:

I think Rolling Stone had to much time on their hands :lol:

I dunno, as far as these lists go, this is one of the better and more accurate lists I've ever seen. What is remarkable is the lack of any modern bands at the top. Nirvana (and this is not so modern now) came in at 17th. Is this because these albums have not had enough time to sell, or simply because the music cannot compete??

Not saying this list is perfect, Muddy Waters at #37 is a stretch, as well as Robert Johnson a little higher. No doubt great music, but I really have a hard time believing these albums sold as well as many below them.

It would be interesting to know the factors that go into a list like this.

These lists always make for interesting conversation. Especially when mixing genres (right word?) like they did. I could get into a rant about how pop music lacks talent musical-instrument-wise, but then my wife could get into a rant about how the Allman Brothers drag a song on too long or Neil Young's voice is awful. Good times. It's all about what you like in the end.

What I found odd about this list is some of the compilations making the list. Sure, greatest hits CDs serve a valid purpose, but do they really fit the definition of an album, in at least the "album rock" sense? Of course, I don't know what or even if albums were the thing back in Robert Johnson's day, so I ask that more of a "in the past 40 years" type of thing.

robert johnson is a huge huge influence. everyone i know who plays guitar thinks about him in some way.

I dunno, as far as these lists go, this is one of the better and more accurate lists I've ever seen. What is remarkable is the lack of any modern bands at the top. Nirvana (and this is not so modern now) came in at 17th. Is this because these albums have not had enough time to sell, or simply because the music cannot compete??

Not saying this list is perfect, Muddy Waters at #37 is a stretch, as well as Robert Johnson a little higher. No doubt great music, but I really have a hard time believing these albums sold as well as many below them.

It would be interesting to know the factors that go into a list like this.
I think they're just factoring in their opinion on the quality of the music.

Because if it was on album sales Dark Side of the Moon would be top 5. #43, the hell is that?

The Pixies score twice with Doolittle & Surfer Rosa! Huzzah!!!

I think Rolling Stone had to much time on their hands :lol:

They gave me a free one-year subscription when I bought my Artcore. That was three years ago, and I've canceled the subscription twice. They still send it ...

What I found odd about this list is some of the compilations making the list. Sure, greatest hits CDs serve a valid purpose, but do they really fit the definition of an album, in at least the "album rock" sense? Of course, I don't know what or even if albums were the thing back in Robert Johnson's day, so I ask that more of a "in the past 40 years" type of thing.

Yes, like Rgalvez always insists, I too find compilations a cop out.
I think I tried to pick mostly real albums for my stranded on a desert island set. (And as Vic pointed out, was very difficult
when it came to Dylan)
I did choose a disk from a 6 disc box set though for the Mac.

At any rate, you are correct in your assumption of Robert Johnson.
They had 78s back in 1937 when he recorded his stuff.
And as everyone that owns a old Victrola knows, 78s are album sized except a lot thicker, and only have one song per side....
Like a 45.

The 'album' in question - King of the Delta Blues Singers - came out in 1961 I believe, and was the first attempt to put Johnson's body of work together.

I've been listening to Johnson for the last 20 years (finding out about him through Cream's Crossroads).
I find him indispensible, and as much of an influence on what we hear today as Dylan.
I was very pleased to see him score so highly on this list (for what it's worth).

I've also gotta agree with Kev....
The list isn't called the 500 Top Selling Albums of all time.
Though I'm sure that was a factor.... Just not the only factor.

Ken

EDIT - As far as Nirvana goes...
They beat out Van Morrison's 'Astral Weeks' album.
That's just wrong.
Astral Weeks is a true masterpiece. A beautiful sound painting by a real artist.
Nirvana is a catchy bunch of noise by a flash in the pan (in comparison).
(For those who are about to send me hate mail - I DO LIKE Nirvana)
:wink:

no Oenyaw?