Comments on: The 100 greatest British albums

The 100 greatest British albums

feelinglistless — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:22:21 -0800

The 100 greatest British albums ... and look what came first. Why? I personally don't believe the justification given. And surely the word Rock is missing from the title of the poll because I don't see many other genres mentioned. To be honest, I'm with Miranda Sawyer on this one -- why aren't more girls aloud?

By: Sijeka

Sijeka — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:59:26 -0800

too much david bowie but that's more than fine with me. Great to see Van Morisson (i always forget he's from UK?!) and Massive attack in the top 10. Oh and good to see the streets' debut on here too. Good list.

By: dodgygeezer

dodgygeezer — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:08:05 -0800

There's a problem with Sawyer's point - she seems to favour single's acts and this is a list of best albums. Maybe she could've nominated Now 72 or something. Also I'd happily admit to being one of her spod-boys and contrary to what she says I love pop music. Whatever did happen to Betty Boo? But the Stone Roses? Shit, I thought we'd gotten over this by now. They were an overated bunch of wankers and only get into these lists because of some misguided loyalty from the northern contingent of whatever magazine is printing the article. Although I guess we should be grateful Radiohead aren't #1. As for the Beatles - personally I think Revolver should be top, the White Album is a scrap book that doesn't belong in the top 50, and Strawberry Fields b\w Penny Lane was far more influential and important than Sgt Pepper. Otherwise, it's a fairly typical list but not bad. Syd's Pink Floyd fares better than Roger's Pink Floyd, and it's quite nice to see Oasis, The Kinks, Echo & the Bunnymen and Talk Talk sneaking in.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:11:14 -0800

What I thought was fire was only the spark... : > it's 80s heavy, which i like--a good list on the whole, and the "Burn it" thing is handy too.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:20:06 -0800

Who the fuck are the Stone Roses? How can this be the best British album of all time if it never even got played on American radio? I'm not suggesting Americans have to agree with the judgment but somewhere in the ballpark would be reasonable. I've been listening to and loving rock and roll, British and American since I got Machine Head in the early '70s and if this was THE GREATEST EVER I would at least be familiar with it. Journalistic Plonkers!

By: TheCuriousOrange

TheCuriousOrange — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:27:32 -0800

I preferred Q magazine's list.

By: grimley

grimley — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:28:51 -0800

I'm in favor of the Roses in the #1 spot. It is sheer brilliance and the only thing that they ever got right. If you haven't heard it, you should - though not the US version which throws Elephant Stone and Fool's Gold into the sequencing. (both are good, but were singles - the former before and the latter after). I'm shocked that at least one of PJ Harvey's early efforts weren't on the list. But look at those who voted.

By: arto

arto — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:28:58 -0800

Personally, though, I would have ranked Massive Attack above the Stone Roses, and "Protection" above "Blue Lines", but it's a bit difficult trying to boil something as personal and inexplicable as musical taste down to the cold, hard world of numbers. Of course, that's not only the greatest flaw of this sort of list, it's also the chief attraction. It's nice, though, to not see the top ten completely locked up by the Usual Sixties Icons. (great band name, eh?) Granted, "Revolver", "Exile on Main Street", "Astral Weeks", etc., were fantastic, but I think a lot of their appeal comes from the time they were released--not only because of the demographic bump of the Baby Boom and the sociopolitical turmoil of the time, but because so much of the possibility space that is rock n' roll was unmapped terrritory at the time. There's a limit to how much you can do, musically, with three chords, a cranked amp and a singalong chorus, and a lot of good bands who tried to push the paramaters a little over the years have gone under fire for being too complex (see: '70s prog), too abrasive (see: The Velvets, the Fall, etc.) or both (see: metal in general)

By: milovoo

milovoo — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:32:14 -0800

Hmm, how can we get people to talk about this random list we've made? I think they're just choosing weird #1's on purpose now. (I actually like the Stone Roses quite a bit, but to claim that they are more important than Pink Floyd, New Order, Black Sabbath, the Police, the Smiths...etc.?!!?) Although I do get One Love stuck in my head more often than any other song, is that a sign of their greatness?

By: pxe2000

pxe2000 — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:44:27 -0800

it's good to see fairport convention in the top fifteen (barely), but unhalfbricking...? wha...? not liege and lief?

By: scody

scody — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:46:12 -0800

WHAT? No Paul Weller? Wild Wood not in the top 100 British albums? And only All Mod Cons (and not Sound Affects as well) to represent the Jam -- and that only ranks in the 50s? I have not the words. Having ranted thus, I'll pipe up to say The Stone Roses is pure shimmering perfection. Is it decisively #1 when you've got London Calling and Revolver and Astral Weeks on its heels? Mebbe not -- but there's a point at which, when you've narrowed any list like this down to a small handful, it seems to me it's essentially impossible to objectively distinguish between levels of excellence. In other words, the Clash or the Beatles or Van would have also been completely defensible #1s; their worth is not being implicitly diminished by being #2-4, just as The Stone Roses wouldn't be any less critically-acclaimed if it wound up somewhere else in the top 10. (Although you should feel free to insert my foaming-at-the-mouth objections to the aforementioned lack of the Jam/Paul Weller here). On a wholly personal note (and in the end, what else are these debates about, really?), there are very few individual records I've listened to as many times as The Stone Roses. I listened to it literally at least once a day (often more) for the first year or so after it was released, and it's been in steady rotation ever since. And it has never failed to sound fresh, never failed to conjure a reaction, never failed to make my pulse race just a little faster. Much like, ahem, the Jam and Paul Weller. *steps off soapbox, tries to decide whether to listen to Wild Wood or All Mod Cons.*

By: macrone

macrone — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:59:37 -0800

scody, I agree that All Mod Cons should have placed much, much higher. My own WTF question: Where the hell is This Year's Model? I see My Aim Is True at 61 -- but that's maybe Costello's fifth best record.

By: dorian

dorian — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:03:29 -0800

no chieftains, no housemartins, no beautiful south, no pogues, no dubstar? (and for the bunnymen, they picked ocean rain?! eh, I guess...)

By: amandaudoff

amandaudoff — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:33:04 -0800

No Cure and they put in Oasis? Ew.

By: vbfg

vbfg — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:40:05 -0800

Who the fuck are the Stone Roses? How can this be the best British album of all time if it never even got played on American radio? I'm not suggesting Americans have to agree with the judgment but somewhere in the ballpark would be reasonable. It's a valid point of view but it's one easily answered with two words. Bruce Springsteen.

By: dorian

dorian — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:40:30 -0800

ah, oasis. at least they did manage to pick blur's parklife.

By: t r a c y

t r a c y — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:44:08 -0800

nice to see one of my all time faves, ABC, on the list. the lexicon of love never gets old, but it does get overlooked. that said, it's an incomplete and fairly blinkered list, like all top 100 whatever lists are.

By: jpburns

jpburns — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:45:38 -0800

... why aren't more girls aloud? "Allowed" is the word you're looking for, unless this was something Freudian...

By: Quartermass

Quartermass — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 13:06:20 -0800

Stone Roses? BOOOORING. . . . It's nice, though, to not see the top ten completely locked up by the Usual Sixties Icons. I agree and disagree. It seems as if the Stone Roses are #1 for this exact reason - if they didn't, people would be bitching about how it is always the same albums at the top, placed there by out of touch music journalists. Revolver is always at the top for good reason. That being said, as if OK Computer shouldn't be at least in the top five. Fucking wankers.

By: vbfg

vbfg — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 13:13:09 -0800

... why aren't more girls aloud? "Allowed" is the word you're looking for, unless this was something Freudian... Girl's Aloud. I'm certain Freud had something to say about their main selling point.

By: the cuban

the cuban — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 13:21:13 -0800

Who the fuck are the Stone Roses? I thought every self-respecting fan of British 'rock and roll' had this on their Wurlitzer.

By: feelinglistless

feelinglistless — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 13:37:19 -0800

Yup, repeating Miranda's misspelling. Granted a number of girl groups are singles bands, but I would have thought the first All Saints album might have made the list. But then if Dislocation Dance don't make it or Pulp then the pecking order is very limited.

By: Faze

Faze — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:42:54 -0800

1. "With the Beatles" 2. "Something Else/Lola vs. The Powerman" -- Kinks 3. "Between the Buttons/Flowers/Aftermath" -- Stones 4. "Please, Please Me/Beatles for Sale/Hard Day's Night" 5. "Face to Face/Village Green Preservation Society" -- Kinks 6. "Badfinger" 7. "Over Under Sideways Down" -- Yardbirds 8. "This is the Modern World" -- Jam 9. "Paying for the Summer of Love" -- The Records 10. "Penny Lane b/w Strawberry Fields" -- The Beatles

By: calico

calico — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:48:45 -0800

Wire. Though to be fair, one of the Observer's contributors points out this strange omission. And speaking as someone who has an awful lot of time for Blur, including Parklife but nothing by Pulp is downright perverse.

By: Blue Stone

Blue Stone — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:12:41 -0800

No Peter Gabriel? Bah! No Cure? WTF? The Bends better than (an unlisted) Amnesiac? Pffft. No PJ Harvey? Finally, something they got right!

By: Quartermass

Quartermass — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:23:20 -0800

Huh, I always assumed that PJ Harvey was a yank. . .

By: feelinglistless

feelinglistless — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:09:08 -0800

Huh, I always assumed that PJ Harvey was a yank. . . Nope, British. I know because about ten years ago I spent a train journey with one of her best mates telling me what great fun she is at parties ....

By: tapeguy

tapeguy — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:13:18 -0800

Huh, I always assumed that PJ Harvey was a yank. . . That's odd. Until now I'd always assumed she was Australian because she used to, ahem, 'be involved with', Nick Cave.

By: riviera

riviera — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:37:42 -0800

No, the Peej is from Devon, she is. And 'Stories from the City, Stories from the Sea' should have been in there. I've not heard anything that's hooked together as well as an album since that one. As for the lack of women, Bunny Sawyer's being a bit tight here: 'Loveless' without Bilinda would have been Flying Saucer Attack; 'Maxinquaye' without Martina would have been... well, a Tricky album; and Massive Attack didn't just use backing singers, for fuck's sake. There are a few that don't get in because the artists have to be 100% British: I don't think Fleetwood Mac should get cut just because of Lindsay and Stevie. Are the Bee Gees left out because they're classed as Australian? What about Scott Walker, who's basically British by adoption? (Kylie, too, for that matter.) Alex James is right, though, about the decline of the album as a coherent entity.

By: riviera

riviera — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:49:14 -0800

By: dorian

dorian — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:49:31 -0800

if you're going to include the bee gees (and I would), then xtc should be on there too. beatles aside, this list seems much more rock (as feelinglistless said straight off) than pop. oh wait, heh, that's what alex james was saying too. snark: van morrison is 100% british?!

By: dobbs

dobbs — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:26:31 -0800

I can't believe Dizzee Rascal's on that list or that anyone's keen on that album. I literally find it unlistenable.

By: trharlan

trharlan — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 19:25:06 -0800

Ride is kind of like Stone Roses, except Ride didn't suck, and did not make the list.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 19:44:10 -0800

vbfg, I suspect most english rock fans have heard of The Boss. May or may not appreciate him but are aware.

By: kahboom

kahboom — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 20:40:43 -0800

No Alan Parson's Project? Bollocks!

By: Oriole Adams

Oriole Adams — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:02:33 -0800

Is the entire list somewhere to be found in that link? I can only find 1-10, 11-14 and 51-57. Oh, and Lexicon of Love.

By: shoepal

shoepal — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:28:04 -0800

*Yawn* POMs and their Top X lists. It's like a national past time or something. *sigh* We've seen the movies, read the books, bought the magazines, listened to the records (AD Infinitum), debated the lists, and revisited the lists, and the records, and the magazines, and the books, and movies and someday we hope you'll withdrawal your heads from your arses so you can see that the sun does indeed set these days. I absolutely love 90% of the records on that effing list, and yeah, you're fit, but my gosh, don't you just know it.

By: wsg

wsg — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:34:07 -0800

What about XTC?! English Settlement!

By: Quartermass

Quartermass — Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:00:40 -0800

Metafilter: We've seen the movies, read the books, bought the magazines, listened to the records (AD Infinitum), debated the lists, and revisited the lists, and the records, and the magazines, and the books, and movies and someday we hope you'll withdrawal your heads from your arses so you can see that the sun does indeed set these days.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 02:14:04 -0800

Oh, and whenever I hear the intro to 'I Wanna Be Adored', like a tidal wave that starts off looking miniscule in the distance and then gathers and gathers and breaks over you, I remember just who the fuck the Stone Roses were, and what that album felt like at the time, amid a musical desert. Damn. Beautifully said (without straying too far into NME-land), riviera. Not a bad list, not a great one, as these usually are. Some albums I haven't actually heard yet, for which I am deeply ashamed, and which I will rectify as soon as possible, so that's good, anyway.

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 02:35:55 -0800

I thought that there were only two of us left in the world who still raved about ABC's "Lexicon of Love." One of the few albums that has never gotten old for me. Hurray!

By: the cuban

the cuban — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:18:09 -0800

snark: van morrison is 100% british?! Yeah, he's from Belfast, which is in the UK.

By: mokujin

mokujin — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:41:33 -0800

Major problems: No Move, no E.L.O. no Wizzard? Why be dissing on Roy Wood and Jeff Lynne fools? No Pretty Things? "Would You Believe" by Billy Nicholls. An amazing album. An amazing album. I cannot say that enough. Why isn't it represented? Glad to see the Gang of Four was on there. How the hell did the La's break the top 50? And where in the name of all things holy is Rick Wakeman's masterpiece "Journey to the Center of the Earth"? I guess that he was on the panel so they couldn't choose that because it would look like favoritism. I have never understood the fuss about the Stone Roses. Over-hyped and over-rated and they are to blame for all the crappy British flavor of the month music of the last 10 years including but not limited to the spice-girls and oasis. That is why GThere are at least fifty better albums on that list. Challenge to Stone Roses fan: Suppose you will only be able to listen to one album for the rest of your life, not constantly of course, but whenever you want to listen to music you will have no choice but to listen to that album. Would you really choose Stone Roses by the Stone Roses over these 99 others to be that album? Honestly? In closing, I will speak five words of Rock that reveal by their absence the complete ridiculousness of this garbage list: 1. Venom 2. Judas 3. Priest 4. Iron 5. Maiden Two more: Motor and Head.

By: dmt

dmt — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:59:10 -0800

Good to see My Bloody Valentine finally getting some of the recognition that they deserve from the mainstream press. Reading this yesterday in the pub together my girlfriend turns to me and says aghast, what, no Cliff Richard? Wrods fail me sometimes!

By: dorian

dorian — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 05:31:31 -0800

Yeah, he's from Belfast, which is in the UK. hence my snark: he's not british. also: amusing to see that skinner was the only one who voted for himself.

By: monkeyJuice

monkeyJuice — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 05:41:16 -0800

do you even know anything ???

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 06:24:41 -0800

The Who don't show up until after #70? And Who's Next is completely omitted? No Slade? No T-Rex? No Fairport Convention? Or Richard & Linda Thompson alone? No Motorhead? But stuff like Manic Street Preachers, Human League, Dexy's Midnight Runners, New Order and fucking Yes is on there? When did England become communist?

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 06:28:41 -0800

I didn't know that there were two albums by Dexys Midnight Runners, let alone that they were top 100 worthy. It's sort of like when the Modern Library put out that list of the Top 100 20th century novels in english and like five of them were by Ford Maddox Ford...

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 06:51:53 -0800

Pet Shop Boys? Coldplay? Portishead? Blur? Primal Scream? Happy Mondays? The Verve? Ok, these people are just trying to piss me off is all. I'm lockingt myself in my room for the duration.

By: doozer_ex_machina

doozer_ex_machina — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 07:11:29 -0800

I think the Stone Roses first album was a cracker. Very enjoyable to listen to, and quite distinct both then and now. To add to a fight I have no dog in: this site makes a cogent point about what "British" means, and Van Morrison fits the bill.

By: shoepal

shoepal — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 07:12:45 -0800

Ha ha, quartermass. V. funny. I think that mokujin has a good point/idea (perhaps something for MeTa). I think it would be interesting to see which (british) albums mefites would choose as their desert island disc. One album for the rest of your life. What say you?

By: octobersurprise

octobersurprise — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 07:13:37 -0800

No Mekons? No Marc Almond?

By: zygoticmynci

zygoticmynci — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:44:24 -0800

OK Computer, The Holy Bible, Parklife and at least one Smiths album should all be top fifteen - two Rolling Stones albums in the top ten is absolutely criminal. I'd choose Mezzanine over Blue Lines, and Abbey Road over Revolver, but that's being picky. That said, where are: Divine Comedy (Promenade), Mogwai (Rock Action), Belle & Sebastian (Tigermilk)? If they could find room for Dizzee Rascal, Coldplay and Rod Stewart then they could find room for those three. Especially Tigermilk, not least because Stuart Murdoch is a judge. But he was probably too shy to suggest it, bless him. One album for the rest of your life. What say you? I'd pick Meat is Murder, or maybe Five Leaves Left.

By: Dreama

Dreama — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:58:32 -0800

I didn't know that there were two albums by Dexys Midnight Runners, let alone that they were top 100 worthy. I knew that there were more than two albums by Dexy's, but two of them in the Top 100 British albums, and only one (very low) offering from Elton John? Regatta de Blanc as their choice of Police disc? What are these folks smoking? The whole Top 100 list thing has been done to death and must end. It just must.

By: niceness

niceness — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:03:27 -0800

Great though it is, as virtually the entire 'Blue Lines' album is built on fucking great (uncredited) samples I can't help but feel cheated. The irony being that the 'seminal' 'Unfinished Sympathy' appears to be one of the few wholly original tracks on the album – are those strings sampled?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:21:12 -0800

OK Computer, The Holy Bible, Parklife and at least one Smiths album should all be top fifteen - two Rolling Stones albums in the top ten is absolutely criminal. *prepares icepick for lobotomy* It's for your own good, sir. Please, wait about 25 years, see if anyone but their aging fans even remembers Blur, Radiohead et al. We already know the answer when it comes to the stones. And I hold those acts and the ones I mentioned above responsible for destroying all that was good in rock and roll.

By: octobersurprise

octobersurprise — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:49:45 -0800

We oppose all rock and roll. Anyway, you can have my copy of Behavior when you pry it from my etc. etc.

By: hackly_fracture

hackly_fracture — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:52:35 -0800

Jonmc, there is a T-Rex album muddled in the middle there somewhere. Slider, I think.

By: milovoo

milovoo — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:12:40 -0800

Please, wait about 25 years, see if anyone but their aging fans even remembers Blur, Radiohead et al. We already know the answer when it comes to the stones. I'm not disagreeing, but who remembers any band other than their aging fans? If it's poppy enough it can be recycled into commercials and adult contemporary, but there are tons of great bands that get completely forgotten once their fans get old, I'm not sure it tells you anything other than their simple popularity in a given decade. If the internet stays in it's current form, we'll have more access to more late obscure artists that have been passed over, but even then, the fan-run sites expire and the info will eventually disappear. The really popular stuff is often the only thing that survives the test of time, regardless of quality. (just as a thought experiment - Would Nick Drake be on this list if it were not for volkswagon? His albums were getting pretty hard to find and unnoticed when they were, before that commercial.)

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:20:03 -0800

Most of what you said is true, milovoo, but the Rolling Stones impact and influence on popular music has already been made plain. Thus zygotic's claim is somewhat ludicrous.

By: zygoticmynci

zygoticmynci — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:22:48 -0800

*prepares icepick for lobotomy* It's for your own good, sir. I know, I know, and in the good old days proper rock 'n roll would have saved you the trouble... In all seriousness, I reckon Parklife and OK Computer respectively defined early and late nineties Britain in the same way that the Stones, my personal taste notwithstanding, did for the sixties. And they shall be similarly remembered. As for the Smiths, I seem to remember us having this one out before, so I'll reluctantly let it rest :)

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:37:14 -0800

And they shall be similarly remembered. Actually, that's the point I'd dispute. Whereas the Stones' best work (Exile, Beggars Banquet, Sticky Fingers) still remains resonant today (questions of taste aside), I submit to you that Blur and Radiohead will seem as dated as Yes and Grand Funk Railroad in 20 years. It's not the era that defines greatness.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:38:31 -0800

And I hasten to add, I wasn't even alive in the 1960's nor did I pick up my love for the Stones from my parents, who could have cared less about music. It's all about the quality.

By: scody

scody — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:59:02 -0800

Suppose you will only be able to listen to one album for the rest of your life, not constantly of course, but whenever you want to listen to music you will have no choice but to listen to that album. Would you really choose Stone Roses by the Stone Roses over these 99 others to be that album? Honestly? Honestly? Yes, I'd be willing. The only other serious "rest-of-my-life" contenders (of the remaining 99 on this particular list, not necessarily out of my entire record collection) would probably be All Mod Cons, London Calling, Revolver, or Ziggy Stardust. Of course there'd be drawbacks to listening to any of them exclusively, but sure: I'd seriously consider listening only to The Stone Roses for the rest of my life. What do I win? On preview: jon, it's an interesting issue you raise about the idea of something sounding "dated." I think that there are records that sound very clearly of their particular cultural moment/date in a way that might be described as being "dated" (the mod R&B-meets-burgeoning psychedelia of the Small Faces' Ogden's Nut Gone Flake, for example, couldn't be anything other than 1968) -- yet I don't think that it diminishes their quality. (I also hasten to add that I'm not comparing the Small Faces to Grand Funk Railroad!) Or to take Blur -- Parklife and Leisure, for example, both sound "dated" in a way to me (neither could be made today, basically)... and yet I think Parklife is a record that will have some resonance down the road, while Leisure simply won't. What, I wonder, are the factors that makes some cultural artifacts both decidedly of their time and transcend their time?

By: zygoticmynci

zygoticmynci — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:08:05 -0800

I submit to you that Blur and Radiohead will seem as dated as Yes and Grand Funk Railroad in 20 years. It's not the era that defines greatness. Absolutely right, and were those albums only notable for capturing some sense of time and place then no, they wouldn't last. You might have a smidgen of a point about Parklife, although after ten years it still sounds as fresh and relevant to my ears as it ever did. But OK Computer? Whatever your reservations about the critical slobbering over Radiohead, and I have many, it's a stunning piece of work - meticulous, obsessive, moving, profoundly creepy. Quality it does not lack. It's a personal thing, of course, which is why this whole listmaking exercise is ultimately futile... were I to compile a top 100 it would be heavy on IDM, shoegazing, post-rock and Joy Division, and would probably make your icepick look a tad blunt. I still think just the one Stones album would have done, though.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:22:49 -0800

What, I wonder, are the factors that makes some cultural artifacts both decidedly of their time and transcend their time? Probably the use of universal and timeless themes, and the avoidance of trendy musical devices. The Stones' Exile On Mainstreet is great chronicle of fatigue, disillusionment and bitterness, which are of course, things that are always part of human existence. In 1972 these thing loomed very large in the lives of the Stones and their audience, thus making it both timely and timeless. Plus they stuck to their core musical verities of aggressive Chuck Berry/Howlin' Wolf derived rock with a smattering of hard country, keeping it from sounding like an artifact, like say "have You Seen Your Mother, Baby" or Their Satanic Majesties Request which (however enjoyable they might be to listen to, have a date stamped on them like a carton of milk.

By: the cuban

the cuban — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:01:23 -0800

Yeah, he's from Belfast, which is in the UK. hence my snark: he's not british. Snark all you want, but people born and raised in Northern Ireland ARE British.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:59:55 -0800

monkeyjuice, why so harsh? I asked a question and, as mentioned in my original comment, I've been listening to rock and roll since the early '70s. My car radio is still programed to mostly rock radio, for what that's worth these days, and still I've never heard the Stone Roses' music. If the record is so great, how come? It's not like these radio stations don't play plenty of British music and two of my three favorite bands are from there, three or four of the top six even.

By: D.C.

D.C. — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:54:41 -0800

Top 100 lists are always biased in one way or another, but the lack of any XTC albums shows this is not a very well-rounded list. English Settlement and Skylarking could easily replace some on that list.

By: thatwhichfalls

thatwhichfalls — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:03:27 -0800

billsaysthis, I think monkeyjuice was responding to this: "Who the fuck are the Stone Roses? How can this be the best British album of all time if it never even got played on American radio?" While, on reflection, I don't think that the Roses first album is the best British rock album ever, I had to think long and hard before coming to that conclusion. The fact that you've never heard it suggests that you aren't as familiar with British rock music as you seem to think. Do yourself a favour - go get a copy. I wish I were in the position again of hearing the album for the first time. It really is that good.

By: thatwhichfalls

thatwhichfalls — Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:04:58 -0800

Oh yeah, and no XTC ??? WTF???

By: johnnyboy

johnnyboy — Tue, 22 Jun 2004 01:45:01 -0800

The stones suck, thats my twopenny 'orth.