Jump to content

Your most controversial music opinions


CaledonianGonzo
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I once heard the Stones described as trying to do traditional blues, but failing, creating something much more interesting. The problem comes when bands get good at emulating the bands that influenced them, at which point you think - what's the point?

Or worse, the bit where bands get good at emulating themselves. That way is certain creative bankruptcy. Not many bands manage to escape that trap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Although that was back in the sixties when bands were cranking out an album every couple of months.

It does seem like the 60s bands that we still talk about were several albums in before their best album. 

Pink Floyd, The Doors, The Beach Boys, Beatles, Simon & Garfunkel and Paul Simon as a solo artist. And don't get me started on Bowie, since some days I think his best studio album was his 25th (and some days as early as his fourth).

I'm going to actually go out on a limb here and say that bands whose debut wasn't the best, are on the whole not as good as the bands who make their best work later on. Again, there are obviously some exceptions, like The Stone Roses and probably Arcade Fire. But bands with truly great debuts? I don't think there are that many, even if I agree that the first album being the best is the norm.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cba to go back through the thread so apologies if already been said but:

Radiohead are a bang average indie band who got lucky and happened to come through at a time when there wasn't really much guitar based music. If they'd started 5 years later and broke during the indie boom of the late 00s then they'd be part of the pack like the killers, arctic monkeys, etc

Kanye is the most important musician of the 21st century. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice. You got me thinking there, @stuartbert two hats

Off the top of my head, truly great debut albums. I'm off to bed now, but will no doubt wake up with a load of others

 

The Clash

Dizzee Rascal - Boy in the Corner

The Streets  - OPM

Never ind the bollocks, here's the sex pistols

Kanye - College dropout

Patti Smith - Horses

Velvet Underground and Nico

The Sttrokes

The Mary Chain - Psychocandy

Bjork - Debut (as I mentioned above)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, topmarksbri said:

cba to go back through the thread so apologies if already been said but:

Radiohead are a bang average indie band who got lucky and happened to come through at a time when there wasn't really much guitar based music. If they'd started 5 years later and broke during the indie boom of the late 00s then they'd be part of the pack like the killers, arctic monkeys, etc

Kanye is the most important musician of the 21st century. 

To be fair you just namechecked a couple of headline level bands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mardy said:

Nice. You got me thinking there, @stuartbert two hats

Off the top of my head, truly great debut albums. I'm off to bed now, but will no doubt wake up with a load of others

 

The Clash

Dizzee Rascal - Boy in the Corner

The Streets  - OPM

Never ind the bollocks, here's the sex pistols

Kanye - College dropout

Patti Smith - Horses

Velvet Underground and Nico

The Sttrokes

The Mary Chain - Psychocandy

Bjork - Debut (as I mentioned above)

 

 

I suppose I need to think of 11 great acts who improved over time?  I'd still include Bjork in my list; despite being fond of her second* album "Debut", I think Post is better and even if I didn't, she clearly grew as an artist over the years, even if she was less commercial.

* It's only technically her second album, she only wrote one song on her actual debut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I suppose I need to think of 11 great acts who improved over time?  I'd still include Bjork in my list; despite being fond of her second* album "Debut", I think Post is better and even if I didn't, she clearly grew as an artist over the years, even if she was less commercial.

* It's only technically her second album, she only wrote one song on her actual debut.

Nah, man, no need, not a competition, those were just the first I thought of. Interestingly, I reckon it's the proper big hitters, like the genuinely world class artists, who improved over time, or made more interesting work a few albums down the line. Maybe that's the essence of it, an ability to experiment, to reject your previous work that makes them truly great, yer, Beatles, yer Bowie, yer Prince, yer Dylan. It's what separates them from yer Oasises of this world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mardy said:

Nice. You got me thinking there, @stuartbert two hats

Off the top of my head, truly great debut albums. I'm off to bed now, but will no doubt wake up with a load of others

 

The Clash

Dizzee Rascal - Boy in the Corner

The Streets  - OPM

Never ind the bollocks, here's the sex pistols

Kanye - College dropout

Patti Smith - Horses

Velvet Underground and Nico

The Sttrokes

The Mary Chain - Psychocandy

Bjork - Debut (as I mentioned above)

 

 

Arctic Monkeys - wpsiatwin

kendrick - good kid maad city

nas - illmatic

arcade fire - funeral

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There’s fucking loads of no-mark acts who never became big, who either disappeared after one album or settled into plodding mediocrity but who have an absolutely belting first album. Not big headliner type acts more 2pm other stage, never really made it despite a cracker of a debut. It’s enough, of course it is, it’s more than I could ever achieve, and it’s those sort of bands I want to salute, really. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mardy said:

Yeah, there are obviously some really massive exceptions, but I reckon for a good 90% of acts, their first album is the essential one. Diminishing returns after that. Like I say, not true in all cases, but definitely in the overwhelming majority. And hardly anybody's 5th album is the one. Can only think of a handful of people like that.

The Joshua Tree.

Different Class.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mardy said:

There’s fucking loads of no-mark acts who never became big, who either disappeared after one album or settled into plodding mediocrity but who have an absolutely belting first album. Not big headliner type acts more 2pm other stage, never really made it despite a cracker of a debut. It’s enough, of course it is, it’s more than I could ever achieve, and it’s those sort of bands I want to salute, really. 

 

It's worth remembering that unless an act is brand new to music when they record their first proper album, it's often a compilation of all their best tunes written as an unsigned band, rather than a collection of songs written in the period directly before going into the studio. Thus, the "difficult second album syndrome".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to think of a band that had just one brilliant album that wasn't their debut and the best I could come up with was Chris Rea, who released music for donkey's years before having success. But that doesn't really count because:

* I'm not sure The Lady In Red was actually good, even if it was successful.

* It was a single song, not a classic album.

 

So, the pattern seems to be, if they only have one great album, it's the first.  Although the pattern doesn't work the only way round, bands can start with their strongest work and go on to make better music in the future, even if they never quite sustain it for a full album - Arcade Fire in particular, but you might also want to chuck in Oasis or Bjork in there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I'm trying to think of a band that had just one brilliant album that wasn't their debut and the best I could come up with was Chris Rea, who released music for donkey's years before having success. But that doesn't really count because:

* I'm not sure The Lady In Red was actually good, even if it was successful.

* It was a single song, not a classic album.

 

So, the pattern seems to be, if they only have one great album, it's the first.  Although the pattern doesn't work the only way round, bands can start with their strongest work and go on to make better music in the future, even if they never quite sustain it for a full album - Arcade Fire in particular, but you might also want to chuck in Oasis or Bjork in there. 

You're getting your Reas and de Burghs mixed up again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I'm trying to think of a band that had just one brilliant album that wasn't their debut and the best

Personally I think Red Hot Chili Peppers fit this to a T.

First four albums are kinda crap and well below the radar. Blood Sugar Sex Magik is brilliant and very successful. Everything since has been a significant step down in quality, although I do like One Hot Minute myself. But there's no question that Californication was successful, even if to these ears, it is horrid, much like everything they've released since.

A case could be made for INXS, although quite a few of the non-Kick albums are very good too, but sales certainly don't reflect this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mardy said:

Nice. You got me thinking there, @stuartbert two hats

Off the top of my head, truly great debut albums. I'm off to bed now, but will no doubt wake up with a load of others

 

The Clash

Dizzee Rascal - Boy in the Corner

The Streets  - OPM

Never ind the bollocks, here's the sex pistols

Kanye - College dropout

Patti Smith - Horses

Velvet Underground and Nico

The Sttrokes

The Mary Chain - Psychocandy

Bjork - Debut (as I mentioned above)

 

 

Dunno about truly great, but when I think of a band that never recaptured a first album my mind always goes to Stereophonics (yeah I know).

Word Gets Around had a wonderfully raw sound to it, and the songs themselves were great pictures of small town life.

Performance & Cocktails was decent enough, but as it got more polished it lost that urgency. And downwards from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...