2003 Pazz & Jop
February 19, 2004 9:57 PM   Subscribe

The 2003 Pazz & Jop results are in! Apparently it was the year of hip hop (sort of), in both albums and singles. Country music gets kudos for being so "cocksure" in a world of uncertainty. Acoustic jazz scores a big win with The Bad Plus coming in at number 60!
posted by boltman (10 comments total)
That last comment is only half sarcastic.
posted by boltman at 9:58 PM on February 19, 2004

But... But... The Bad Plus kicks ass... Not only is it killa jazz, but the recording is outstanding for you audiophile folks.

Also, if you like them, check out Happy Apple, the band's other project.
posted by LoopSouth at 6:14 AM on February 20, 2004

For a list that hovers below the mainstream radar, check out the Brave New Waves Top 50 for 2003 (just recently posted online).
posted by boost ventilator at 6:40 AM on February 20, 2004

I love the Bad Plus. There I said it. And I don't care if you hipster assholes laugh at me!
posted by eastlakestandard at 6:48 AM on February 20, 2004

For those of you not familiar with P&J, it's unusual for a jazz album to show up at all in the results -- it's basically a best-pop/rock survey. So it actually is quite a coup for the Bad Plus, not that they probably care. Now, the Down Beat Critics Poll, that's another matter...
posted by languagehat at 7:56 AM on February 20, 2004

I like the Bad Plus... And I vote!
posted by drezdn at 9:45 AM on February 20, 2004

The Brave New Waves list is now officially the first time I've sort of known a band on one of these lists. Sort of.
posted by drezdn at 9:46 AM on February 20, 2004

I was converted to a Bad Plus supporter when I saw them at the Village Vanguard last fall--they are great musicians with a totally original sound. I said I was half-sarcastic because it's absurd that a music poll that's supposed to cover jazz doesn't include a jazz album until #60. At the same time, as languagehat says, number 60 is actually quite high for an acoustic insturmental jazz album, historically speaking. So I was happy that they at least beat out the 200 albums listed after them.

Also, I totally don't get the appeal of the White Stripes (#2 on the album chart). It is like a "so bad that they're good" sort of thing? How does bad drummer + very mediocre guitarist + awful singers + no bass player = good?
posted by boltman at 10:13 AM on February 20, 2004

How does bad drummer + very mediocre guitarist + awful singers + no bass player = good?

Usually good songwriting, but if you aren't moved by their songs I can understand your confusion.

Though I guess I shouldn't complain about music nowadays if I'm unfamiliar with most of the albums on the Village Voice and Brave New Waves lists... liked I've only repeatedly listened to the Xiu Xiu and Postal Service albums but that's about it. And it seems like a lot of albums on the lists are by established artists that had done better albums in the past.

And did anyone see how far the list goes, all the way to the 1730s (look who's there, Weird Al Yankovic, Suzanne Vega, and hey, Thee Michelle Gun Elephant, and after a little googling I am also curious about that Ami Yoshida album), though it seems scaled back, I think the 2001 list went into the 6000s.
posted by bobo123 at 10:59 AM on February 20, 2004

How does bad drummer + very mediocre guitarist + awful singers + no bass player = good?

It used to = a Hell Of A Lot Worse.

Have you ever heard their first album?
posted by maggie at 11:49 AM on February 20, 2004

« Older That's your mum, that is   |   play that mean licorish stick. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments