Wandering Hermit Posted February 6, 2022 Share Posted February 6, 2022 A rock album that is done well is symphonic. By that I mean, a symphony is an extended "piece" of music that consists of (usually) four or more distinct movements. The movements have different time signatures, different orchestrations, different melodies, and totally different feels to them. Yet in a good symphony there is a kind of interconnection between them that makes the whole greater than the sum. Four random bits of classical music does not a symphony make. There must a thematic structure, even if each movement has totally different melodies. When a rock album can do something similar, it is magical. More often than not, they miss the mark because a few songs just are not up to snuff.So Wish You Were Here? And Meddle, DSOTM, Animals, and The Wall also! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 Without question for me it's the first record. If the first record sucks I have rarely given a group a second try. Sometimes other records are better than the first I heard My first and still fave Genesis-trick of the tailMegadeth- peace sellsRolling stones- some girlsDream theater- I&WTalking heads - remain in lightPublic enemy- nations of millionsRed hot chile peppers- uplift mofo party planBetween the buried and me- colors Etc etc etc Others I can't recall what I heard first but in general: The younger they were the harder they rocked Last records are rarely if ever the best Usually the more a records sells, the more it sucks. Of course there are exceptions.How do you like Colors 2? Only heard a little bit thus far. Probably buy it eventually. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entre_Perpetuo Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted February 7, 2022 Share Posted February 7, 2022 Without question for me it's the first record. If the first record sucks I have rarely given a group a second try. Sometimes other records are better than the first I heard My first and still fave Genesis-trick of the tailMegadeth- peace sellsRolling stones- some girlsDream theater- I&WTalking heads - remain in lightPublic enemy- nations of millionsRed hot chile peppers- uplift mofo party planBetween the buried and me- colors Etc etc etc Others I can't recall what I heard first but in general: The younger they were the harder they rocked Last records are rarely if ever the best Usually the more a records sells, the more it sucks. Of course there are exceptions. Yep , I agree with pretty much all of that ������������ To follow up on the first record bit. Usually there was a reason why it was the first one you heard. Back in the day it was hearing something on the radio or reading about it. Probably the biggest influence was a trusted musical friend and a recommendation, followed by "if you don't like this one, you probably won't like anything by them" I think it gets even deeper than that. I do find myself gravitating towards the first albums I heard by many bands, even when they're not the obvious consensus first choice (The Yes Album over CTTE, War over The Joshua Tree, The Resistance over Origin Of Symmetry, Crystal Ball over The Grand Illusion, Wasting Light over The Color And The Shape, Animals over DSOTM, The Bends over OK Computer.... though perhaps not coincidentally I heard almost all of those records for the first time over a single summer from early high school). I think there's something about that first time you connect with a new band that's makes it a very difficult threshold for anything else to pass, unless that first album you hear is just obviously not one of the artist's better efforts. Interesting exception for me: Queen. Maybe it doesn't really count since my first Queen album was probably technically their greatest hits, which exposed me to at least one track from every album between Queen II and Hot Space, so I already had this notion about which songs I liked better than others and what their evolution over those first album might be a bit like. But I then went through the studio albums one at a time over the course of four years in chronological order, and my favorite came out to be A Night At The Opera, which I had anticipated from the singles being, if not their best, at least one of their best. The debut was awesome, but easily middle of the pack for me by the time I got through all the albums. Great post, lots to consider about how music appeals to us. Nothing better in my experience than to get in early with an up and coming band, love them to the crest of the commercial success and the start bitching about them selling out! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goose Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 Simple for me - when I`m scanning across my CDs, which ones do I always feel like I could listen to? There are very few that meet that criteria. Some records might be suited to a mood or triggered by something you read, but the records which I always enjoy and want to hear - whether I`m in the car, gardening, decorating, in a good mood or sulking, whatever - are the true great ones.Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexMike Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 (edited) Sound/production is most important to me. The better it sounds to my ears, the more likely I am to prefer it. The recording (especially drums, if it's rock) needs to have enough punch and dynamics to engage me. Albums as thin sounding as Presto rarely get listens from me for that very reason. And in the case of say Judas Priest, it's why I would prefer British Steel over Sad Wings Of Destiny. SWOD has fine songs, but the dated production pulls it down for me. Edited February 8, 2022 by TexMike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex’s Amazing Arpeggios Posted February 8, 2022 Author Share Posted February 8, 2022 Sound/production is most important to me. The better it sounds to my ears, the more likely I am to prefer it. The recording (especially drums, if it's rock) needs to have enough punch and dynamics to engage me. Albums as thin sounding as Presto rarely get listens from me for that very reason. And in the case of say Judas Priest, it's why I would prefer British Steel over Sad Wings Of Destiny. SWOD has fine songs, but the dated production pulls it down for me. Yes I think I understand what you mean.. for examplewhen as a 16 year old at the time , back in ‘ 85 when I first purchasedHeart’s eponymous album which was how I discovered them & got meinto them , when I then purchased on cassette Dreambout Annie & Dog & Butterfly to my ears back at the time it sounded hideously dated. It was a combination of the production and folky acoustic style that I didn’t expect to hear LOL ! I’ve since grown to like all of Heart’s 70s catalogue but still mostly listen to Heart , Brigade & Desire Walks On. Funnily enough also in ‘85 I discovered Bostonand purchased their debut album on cassetteand even though it came out in ‘76 ( the same year asHeart’s ‘ Dreamboat Annie ‘ ) to my ears at the time it didn’t sound dated at all. In fact it sounded pretty current ! I still think Boston & their ‘78 follow up album‘ Don’t Look Back ‘ stills sound great today in 2022 ! So as you say an album’s production is important to ensure many years of repeated listening pleasure ! :-)Hendrix’s Axis : Bold As Love , which came out 55 years ago in ‘67 (!) also production wise still sounds fantastic even today, so was amazingly ahead of its time production wise. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexMike Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Sound/production is most important to me. The better it sounds to my ears, the more likely I am to prefer it. The recording (especially drums, if it's rock) needs to have enough punch and dynamics to engage me. Albums as thin sounding as Presto rarely get listens from me for that very reason. And in the case of say Judas Priest, it's why I would prefer British Steel over Sad Wings Of Destiny. SWOD has fine songs, but the dated production pulls it down for me. Yes I think I understand what you mean.. for examplewhen as a 16 year old at the time , back in ‘ 85 when I first purchasedHeart’s eponymous album which was how I discovered them & got meinto them , when I then purchased on cassette Dreambout Annie &Dog & Butterfly to my ears back at the time it sounded hideously dated.It was a combination of the production and folky acoustic style that I didn’texpect to hear LOL !I’ve since grown to like all of Heart’s 70s catalogue but still mostlylisten to Heart , Brigade & Desire Walks On. Funnily enough also in ‘85 I discovered Bostonand purchased their debut album on cassetteand even though it came out in ‘76 ( the same year asHeart’s ‘ Dreamboat Annie ‘ ) to my ears at the timeit didn’t sound dated at all.In fact it sounded pretty current !I still think Boston & their ‘78 follow up album‘ Don’t Look Back ‘ stills sound great todayin 2022 !So as you say an album’s production is importantto ensure many years of repeated listeningpleasure ! :-)Hendrix’s Axis : Bold As Love , which came out 55 yearsago in ‘67 (!) also production wise still soundsfantastic even today, so was amazingly aheadof its time production wise. Those early Boston albums are among the best sounding rock albums ever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ytserush Posted February 12, 2022 Share Posted February 12, 2022 Generally don't rank albums or songs. Just enjoy listening to most of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now