DDD Home Page
DDD Music Lists Page
DDD Movie Lists Page
It is currently Mon Apr 21, 2014 7:11 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 522 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 35  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 3867
Machine Head wrote:
:confused: what? why is acclaim not a criterion?

I'd like to know about this as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
Machine Head wrote:
:confused: what? why is acclaim not a criterion?
and besides, while it didn't fare as well commercially as Pat Benatar's debut, it has maintained a rather strong following to this day while Pat is known widely for 'Hit Me with your Best Shot', which came out later, and that's pretty much it.


No, she's known also for "Heartbreaker" and "We Live For Love" from her first album, which was on the Billboard album chart for a 122 weeks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Machine Head wrote:
:confused: what? why is acclaim not a criterion?

I'd like to know about this as well.


Acclaim was never part of any criteria on any list until Brian made it part of HIS criteria for his 1970s lists. Acclaim just means that rock critics liked it. I don't think that rock critics are very important myself. They shit out of their assholes just like the rest of us. What makes their personal taste more important that the personal taste of anybody else?

If anything, to me, their taste is LESS important, since they are not spending their money to acquire the music they write about.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:52 am
Posts: 1486
Location: The Pearl of the Orient
Bruce wrote:
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Machine Head wrote:
:confused: what? why is acclaim not a criterion?

I'd like to know about this as well.


Acclaim was never part of any criteria on any list until Brian made it part of HIS criteria for his 1970s lists. Acclaim just means that rock critics liked it. I don't think that rock critics are very important myself. They shit out of their assholes just like the rest of us. What makes their personal taste more important that the personal taste of anybody else?

If anything, to me, their taste is LESS important, since they are not spending their money to acquire the music they write about.


I don't see the point of the ones in bold, but for the overall statement, rock critics are nothing but glorified fans, but their opinions do hold clout in the musical community. Not saying that they should, but they do. It's a reality of life that we have to consider in list-making.

Also, acclaim can also mean musicians liked it, and I think that's pretty important to an artist or work's greatness.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 3867
I like the acclaim criterion, but really I'm just curious about why we can't have the same criteria for all the album lists.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
Deany wrote:
Bruce wrote:
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Machine Head wrote:
:confused: what? why is acclaim not a criterion?

I'd like to know about this as well.


Acclaim was never part of any criteria on any list until Brian made it part of HIS criteria for his 1970s lists. Acclaim just means that rock critics liked it. I don't think that rock critics are very important myself. They shit out of their assholes just like the rest of us. What makes their personal taste more important that the personal taste of anybody else?

If anything, to me, their taste is LESS important, since they are not spending their money to acquire the music they write about.


I don't see the point of the ones in bold, but for the overall statement, rock critics are nothing but glorified fans, but their opinions do hold clout in the musical community. Not saying that they should, but they do. It's a reality of life that we have to consider in list-making.

Also, acclaim can also mean musicians liked it, and I think that's pretty important to an artist or work's greatness.


I don't agree that the opinions of critics hold clout. They never did with anybody i knew. Besides, if their opinion does have clout that will be relected in better marks in other parts of the criteria (popularity, impact). If people go out any buy it because a critic likes it, that's fine, but the record should not get double credit for that.

If a musician likes it, that part of "Impact," not acclaim.


Last edited by Bruce on Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 3867
Impact holds less weight to me than acclaim does. If I remember correctly that impact is just musician's opinions, that is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:52 am
Posts: 1486
Location: The Pearl of the Orient
Bruce wrote:
Deany wrote:
Bruce wrote:
Acclaim was never part of any criteria on any list until Brian made it part of HIS criteria for his 1970s lists. Acclaim just means that rock critics liked it. I don't think that rock critics are very important myself. They shit out of their assholes just like the rest of us. What makes their personal taste more important that the personal taste of anybody else?

If anything, to me, their taste is LESS important, since they are not spending their money to acquire the music they write about.


I don't see the point of the ones in bold, but for the overall statement, rock critics are nothing but glorified fans, but their opinions do hold clout in the musical community. Not saying that they should, but they do. It's a reality of life that we have to consider in list-making.

Also, acclaim can also mean musicians liked it, and I think that's pretty important to an artist or work's greatness.


I don't agree that the opinions of critics hold clout. They never did with anybody i knew. Besides, if their opinion does have clout that will be relected in better marks in other parts of the criteria (popularity, impact). If people go out any buy it because a critic likes it, that's fine, but the record should not get double credit for that.

If a musician likes it, that part of "Impact," not acclaim.


That's anecdotal evidence, which is really what you have against critics, so I don't think that's a sound foundation to build on. I agree with you partially, but I'm just saying...

Anyway, there's lots of pieces of art that never hit it big with the public but impressed critics and the musical community. If I remember correctly, musical impact used to be a criterion in a lot of lists, but was changed into acclaim in some due to the ambiguous nature of the word "impact" (and subsequent propensity to be confused with "influence"). Can't we just fuse impact and critical opinion under the "acclaim" title? It's sort of simplifies proceedings.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Impact holds less weight to me than acclaim does. If I remember correctly that impact is just musician's opinions, that is.


So you think it's more significant if critics like it than if other musicians like it?

That's absurd.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 3867
Musicians aren't necessarily an authority on anything. More the reason I support the acclaim criterion over impact, however, is just how much more practical it is to use.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:26 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:52 pm
Posts: 2599
Brett Alan wrote:
Brian wrote:
The Black Crowes album did go 5x platinum, so it wouldn't be the first one I would drop. The others you mentioned could be dropped. For the Stray Cats album, are you counting Built for Speed as the American version of it, and crediting self-titled with the sales for Built for Speed? If so, that album could be kept, but wouldn't have to be. If not, it would be one of the first I would drop.


Yeah, I guess we kind of are...otherwise the Beatles and Jimi Hendrix albums don't have American popularity, either. (Although the Hendrix did have the same title in the US, just a different track listing.)

Otherwise, good points, especially about the Jeff Beck. That probably shouldn't have been there in the first place.


I figured that the Hendrix having the same title might make it a different case. Please Please Me is an important album even without counting the American sales of The Early Beatles.

If acclaim isn't part of the criteria, then The Modern Lovers is another that could be dropped, as I think acclaim is the primary thing it has going for it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:52 pm
Posts: 2599
Bruce wrote:
Brian wrote:
If they aren't dropped, then Whitney and Mariah should definitely be added. I think these 2 are rock anyway, but they're definitely more rock than PP&M.



I see PP&M as more rock than those two albums. PP&M were played on AOR stations a lot in the early days. If they are not rock,why is Dylan's first album rock?


I don't think the Dylan debut is either. Is being played on AOR stations really a good way to determine what's rock? Black artists, which of course Whitney and Mariah are, are largely excluded from that format.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Musicians aren't necessarily an authority on anything. More the reason I support the acclaim criterion over impact, however, is just how much more practical it is to use.


No, I agree, musicians are not necessarily an authority on other people's records, but they stand a better chance of being an authority on other people's records than some journalism major rock critic who doesn't even no a chord change from a b flat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 1:26 am
Posts: 7401
Location: New Jersey
Brian wrote:
Bruce wrote:
Brian wrote:
If they aren't dropped, then Whitney and Mariah should definitely be added. I think these 2 are rock anyway, but they're definitely more rock than PP&M.



I see PP&M as more rock than those two albums. PP&M were played on AOR stations a lot in the early days. If they are not rock,why is Dylan's first album rock?


I don't think the Dylan debut is either. Is being played on AOR stations really a good way to determine what's rock?


It is for most white music. You would hear Pete, Paul an Mary on AOR stations, but not, for instance, Engelbert Humperdinck or Dave Brubeck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 100 Greatest Rock Debut Albums
PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:49 pm
Posts: 3867
Bruce wrote:
a_man_named_gray wrote:
Musicians aren't necessarily an authority on anything. More the reason I support the acclaim criterion over impact, however, is just how much more practical it is to use.


No, I agree, musicians are not necessarily an authority on other people's records, but they stand a better chance of being an authority on other people's records than some journalism major rock critic who doesn't even no a chord change from a b flat.
I suppose how credible a random person from either camp is bound to be a crapshoot. A knowledgeable musician is probably best actually. I'd rather read a music review from a true artist who knows something about something than any critic when I think of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 522 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 35  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:

DigitalDreamDoor.com   

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

DigitalDreamDoor Forum is one part of a music and movie list website whose owner has given its visitors
the privilege to discuss music and movies, and has no control and cannot in any way be held liable over
how, or by whom this board is used. If you read or see anything inappropriate that has been posted,
contact webmaster@digitaldreamdoor.com. Comments in the forum are reviewed before list updates.
Topics include rock music, metal, rap, hip-hop, blues, jazz, songs, albums, guitar, drums, musicians...


DDD Home Page | DDD Music Lists Page | DDD Movie Lists Page