Rolling Stone 50 Albums of 2005

[Crow]

http://www.rollingstone.com/special/8952414?rnd=1135315919906&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1212

1. Kanye West, Late Registration

2. The Rolling Stones, A Bigger Bang

3. White Stripes, Get Behind Me Satan

4. Fiona Apple, Extraordinary Machine

5. Bruce Springsteen, Devils and Dust

6. My Morning Jacket, Z

7. Beck, Guero

8. Bright Eyes, I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning

9. Sufjan Stevens, Illinois

10. 50 Cent, The Massacre

11. M.I.A., Arular

12. Sleater-Kinney, The Woods

13. Various Artists, Run the Road

14. Thelonious Monk Quartet With John Coltrane, At Carnegie Hall

15. Gorillaz, Demon Days

16. John Legend, Get Lifted

17. Van Morrison, Magic Time

18. Kings of Leon, Aha Shake Heartbreak

19. The Magic Numbers, The Magic Numbers

20. System of a Down, Mezmerize/Hypnotize

[Spatula]

Bullshit. I hate Rolling Stone. That is the worst Top Twenty I have ever seen.

[Crow]

#1 & #10 are fucking awful cd's, Demon Days should be higher and although White Stripes rock they dont deserve 3rd

[Jesus]

And Children of Bodom are Absent.

[Boggy700]

Oh, it would seem that my taste in music reaches beyond the narrow scope of mainstream lists.
Although I do love Beck's 'Guero', and Gorillaz seems good too.
(I've been meaning to order the new Fiona Apple album for my mom.)

[Harmony]

Beck, Guero
Bright Eyes, I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning
Gorillaz, Demon Days

Those are the ones I would put on my list, so it's not all bad though there are some pretty awful ones up there.

[Blaksmoke]

I like Late Registration, and Demon Days shouldn't even be on that list.

[D3adcell]

Who the hell makes these lists? That is a horible list. Why does everything on that list have to be mainstream, it just pisses me off.

[Stay Vertical]

In your honor #30?!?!
That fucking sucks.

[OutlawAdidas]

Korn should be up there

[Moses]

Sufjan kicks ass.

[Pro A.]

Late Registration, I thought, was pretty good.

Their movie list, I think, is much better. A History of Violence is an odd, but more than acceptable choice as the best movie of 2005.

[Moses]

linkplzthx.

[Pro A.]

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/8952409

Thats the link to their movie list.

[Moses]

Their 2, 3 and 4 are shit. Now Capote and Squid&Whale, those were good.

[DankHero]

im impressed about number 14, because it is NOT mainstream, and i never thought it would have been put up there

[cubist]

Not very much mainstream, no.

Now, here's the thing. Mainstream can be great. The Beatles are possibly the most mainstream band of all time forever and infinity, and they are also one of the best, and the most important. A lot of mainstream music is good.

But most of it, yes, is utter shit.

Fuck it, what do you expect? 95% of their readers would be pissed off if they did a real top 50 list, because they wouldn't recognise any of the artists. Even "The Wire" has regressed into pseudo-underground coverage. Real music requires effort to find. Not because it's cool to be a poor starving artist, nor because none of your friends have heard of them. It's simply because the greatest musicians, when it comes to the music, are such self-indulgent fucks who refuse to acknowledge the existence of any other viewpoint when creating their art. So when you listen to a CD by them, it's not going to be "everyone can sing along", it's going to be a complete "I LOVE THIS" or "I FUCKING HATE THIS" scenario. Self-serving art is the most pure, and thusly will never appeal to everyone - the "Mainstream" is not where shit music exists, merely music with a wide appeal.

I could never argue that a lot of songs on the radio are catchy. The first time I heard Linkin Park I found a few of their songs catchy. After a few listens I got sick of it, but you get my point. It's not bad music, it's just designed to appeal to the broadest audience possible. Unpopular music is made to appeal only to the creator, and so only people who see (well, hear) things the same way will appreciate it. But when you find such music, oh God, is it awesome.


ramble ramble ramble, i need more vodka yay
ramble ramble ramble, with Demiurge I play

[Fats]

11. M.I.A., Arular

Yey, great artist, great album. Other than that, yeah, the list seems somewhat poor in places... 50 Cent? What?

[Nate]

Korn should be up there

no.

[Moses]

Movie list is almost better.

[Spatula]

It's not that they used some mainstream bands and mainstream names--I love Gorillaz, The White Stripes, The Rolling Stones, and Beck. It's just the placement that they didn't hit right.

Kanye West's new album should NOT be in the top twenty, as it wasn't an album of songs that was all five-stars. Demon Days, Get Behind Me Satan, Frances the Mute (an Opera of sorts), Aha Shake Heartbreak, and The Woods should be higher rated. They were all amazing albums that completely redefined the bands that represented them--and aside from Get Behind Me Satan, in my opinion, every track in those aforementioned albums were five-star tracks.

I could go on forever about how bullshit that list is.

Rolling Stone was a magazine made not to please the people--it was made to focus on good music and music-related opinions. Now it's just politics and asshole elitist kids who get it to seem popular.

[Boggy700]

Fuck it, what do you expect? 95% of their readers would be pissed off if they did a real top 50 list, because they wouldn't recognise any of the artists. Even "The Wire" has regressed into pseudo-underground coverage. Real music requires effort to find. Not because it's cool to be a poor starving artist, nor because none of your friends have heard of them. It's simply because the greatest musicians, when it comes to the music, are such self-indulgent fucks who refuse to acknowledge the existence of any other viewpoint when creating their art. So when you listen to a CD by them, it's not going to be "everyone can sing along", it's going to be a complete "I LOVE THIS" or "I FUCKING HATE THIS" scenario. Self-serving art is the most pure, and thusly will never appeal to everyone - the "Mainstream" is not where shit music exists, merely music with a wide appeal.

Yeah, I remember someone saying to me that The Doors is (or is it 'are'?) good but "very self-indulgent", and I honestly could not figure out why that was a bad thing.
If a band is self-indulgent they must be enjoying what they're doing a lot, and as such, a real fan of their music, would love it too.
If a band isn't enjoying their own music why should they expect anyone else to?
Making music shouldn't be about creating something and then passing it off to someone else if they happen to enjoy it.
It should be about enjoying creating something and sharing it.

I'm going to stop before I end up typing an essay-legnth post that no one wants to read.
So consider this thought: ought to be thought out.