Your most controversial music opinions

[Hugh Jass]

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

[Mardy]

1 minute ago, Hugh Jass said:

Rubber Soul is the Beatles’ sixth album and IMO the point they started to get interesting.

 

4 minutes ago, danmarks said:

Whos next? 5th album

"Yeah, there are obviously some really massive exceptions"

"And hardly anybody's 5th album is the one. Can only think of a handful of people like that."

 

hehe, as I was posting it, I thought this would happen. I"m not disagreeing with any of those, I can think of a few more, but generally. Like, you know, as I said. The Beatles and the Who. Yep. No problem with that. On the other hand, I can give you a fuck-off long list of bands who's debut was great, and everything else was a poor photocopy of that early promise.

[lessthanwill1]

2 minutes ago, Mardy said:

 

"Yeah, there are obviously some really massive exceptions"

"And hardly anybody's 5th album is the one. Can only think of a handful of people like that."

 

hehe, as I was posting it, I thought this would happen. I"m not disagreeing with any of those, I can think of a few more, but generally. Like, you know, as I said. The Beatles and the Who. Yep. No problem with that. On the other hand, I can give you a fuck-off long list of bands who's debut was great, and everything else was a poor photocopy of that early promise.

I’d be very interested in having an in-depth look at this phenomenon.  My two favourite artists/bands both produced their best album as their third album (Radiohead/Bjork).  Might have to do some research - although I guess the results will be very subjective. 

[Quark]

I've seen bands have real early promise on EPs and the like, but then polish it up and lose what made them interesting when the proper album came out. So frustrating from a fan perspective, although it might be what they were aiming for all along.

[Mardy]

2 minutes ago, lessthanwill1 said:

I’d be very interested in having an in-depth look at this phenomenon.  My two favourite artists/bands both produced their best album as their third album (Radiohead/Bjork).  Might have to do some research - although I guess the results will be very subjective. 

yeah, very subjective. For me, Debut is hands down my favourite of Bjork's stuff, and Radiohead, probably the 4th/5th album is where they start to get good.

[Mardy]

I've always been fascinated why the overwhelming majority of bands tend to get worse with every subsequent album, but authors generally don't get good until a few books into their career.

 

(with obviously the usual caveats and exceptions)

[stuartbert two hats]

9 minutes ago, Quark said:

I've seen bands have real early promise on EPs and the like, but then polish it up and lose what made them interesting when the proper album came out. So frustrating from a fan perspective, although it might be what they were aiming for all along.

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?

[SwedgeAntilles]

The National. 4th album is the critical favourite, their 6 is my personal fav. 

Edited October 3, 2021 by SwedgeAntilles

[Mardy]

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

[stuartbert two hats]

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.

 

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, Mardy said:

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

Like U2.

[topmarksbri]

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. 

[SwedgeAntilles]

could you also not be arsed going back and listening to any of their output during the 21st century? 

Edited October 3, 2021 by SwedgeAntilles

[Mardy]

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)

 

 

[stuartbert two hats]

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.

[topmarksbri]

Just now, SwedgeAntilles said:

could you also not be arsed going back and listening to any of their input during the 21st century? 

I like IR and KOL, both good albums but just don't think they're worthy of the plaudits they receive. 6/7 out of 10 albums. Just my opinion maaaaaan

[SwedgeAntilles]

Interestingly, if they'd started 5 years later than they did they'd have still been 10 years too early for the indie boom of the late 00s.

[topmarksbri]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

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

aye but don't think either are held in the same regard as radiohead

[stuartbert two hats]

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.

[Mardy]

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.

[topmarksbri]

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

[SwedgeAntilles]

Couple of others that came to mind:

• Daft Punk
• Oasis

[maelzoid]

• Appetite for destruction
• the doors
• Are you experienced?
• Grace
• Ten

Prince and Tom Waits - both peaked with their ninth albums.

 

[Mardy]

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. 

 

[incident]

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.