Time Magazine Lists '100 Greatest Albums' (Beatles But NO Pink Floyd)

[matcom]

:eyes:

<snip>

NEW YORK -- Time magazine music critics have come up with a list of the 100 greatest and most influential albums of all time.

The Beatles have five albums on the list, more than any other group: "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band," "Abbey Road," "The White Album," "Revolver" and "Rubber Soul."

The albums are in no particular order.

Bob Dylan leads all male artists with three. Aretha Franklin leads the women with two.

Elvis is on the list as well, as is Eminem, Kanye West, Radiohead, The Rolling Stones, Michael Jackson -- and even The Plastic Ono Band.

But no Pink Floyd. Not even their classic "Dark Side of the Moon," one of the best-selling albums ever.

http://www.wftv.com/entertainment/10315992/detail.html

[acmavm]

1. I really am surprised about Pink Floyd. Considering that the

Dark Side of the Moon cd is still a hit with kids. I just had to buy it and The Wall for my 14-year old.

[Susang]

2. Aw, Oasis is only on there once!

:hide:

Here's the entire list:

http://www.time.com/time/2006/100albums/

[Mad_Dem_X]

26. Oasis but no Floyd?????

Are you fucking kidding me?

[ThomCat]

41. Somebody is either on drugs

or not taking enough. :grr:

[LynneSin]

3. Wait - HOLE made the list and not Pink Floyd

http://www.time.com/time/2006/100albums/index.html

What crack were they smoking?

And Physical Graffiti was such a better album than IV

[Richard Steele]

25. Oh, give us a frickin' BREAK, Time Magazine!

Who the HELL do they think they're kidding
with this nonsense?

Hole? Influential? BWAHAHAHA! :rofl:

[idgiehkt]

38. "Live through This" kicked ass

Since it was probably one of the five albums out of the whole 100 that was by mostly female artists I saw leave it and ditch the Oasis. Live Through This freaking rocked. So did Exile in Guyville by Liz Phair, wonder if that one is on there....

[Zomby Woof]

4. I love when critics anoint themselves cultural arbiters

Pissing on us plebes from their ivory towers. "We have decreed a Top 100, and this shall be the definitive statement on what constitutes proper and correct music consumption!" :eyes:

Without the great Floyd, there would be no Radiohead, whom I never cared for anyway. They are one of those inexplicable critics' darlings who come along 2 or 3 times every decade.

In the 1967 Bob Dylan documentary "Don't Look Back", there is footage of him from 1965, blasting a critic from Time magazine. He sums up beautifully everything that is wrong with that rag, based on their news coverage and biases. I wish I had the transcript here, because it would be a nice rebuttal of this list.

I don't expect much from the TP which once gave George Bush 'Man of the Year' accolades.

[XemaSab]

5. 5 of the albums from the 2000's are anthologies

:eyes:

[XemaSab]

7. Anthologies of artists who didn't make the cut in the 1950's or '60's

:eyes:

[XNASA]

6. As 'Lists' go, that one's not bad.

I'm not a Floyd fan, but evenso.......any Barrett-era Floyd is better than DSOTM.

Also....no Clapton. YEA!!!!!!

And of course, since Dylan leads all artists....I'd say the list is pretty accurate.

[mainegreen]

8. That list is horribly biased to wards certain musical genres.

No Kraftwerk, Throbbing Gristle?

Seriously though, no Kraftwerk?

[meegbear]

9. I'm sure that douchebag Joe Klein had something to do with Floyd not listed ...

WHAT THE FUCK?!?

[RedStateShame]

10. Just so the Baby Boomers know...

When the last one leaves the earth, we're gathering every single recording the Beatles ever made, and we're burning them, smashing them, dropping them to the bottom of the ocean so that future generations don't have to hear the unison drone of how great their pschedelic show tunes were. And, for the record, when we vote in the band that we're going to tell are children was the greatest band of all time and yadda yadda blah, I say we tell them it was the Butthole Surfers.

[Giant Robot]

13. Ummm

Give me a hell yeah to that one!

[begin_within]

22. Wasn't that already done once (after John Lennon said they were more popular than Jesus)?

[Mad_Dem_X]

27. You're going to hell for that

Blasphemer! :grr:

[ProfessorGAC]

34. Yawn!

Boomer-ness has nothing to do with it. They are the sine qua non of popular music for the last 50 years. Get over yourself.
The Professor

[idgiehkt]

40. "pyschedelic show tunes"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


an instant classic... and I can't wait for that day. I'm just freaking sick of them. I was sick of them 20 years ago well before I ever smoked my last joint. Just because a band happened to be getting radio play when a whole generation's hormones hit doesn't make them Godhead.

[LSdemocrat]

52. I really hate it when people claim to speak for others

Guess what? Your music tastes are only representative of you and no one else. I'm 25 and I consider The Beatles the best band ever.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

54. I don't think so. It's not just the Boomers.

I adore the Beatles, and I'm only 15. Several kids from my HS went to see Bob Dylan in concert when he played here in Portland, ME last week. Classic rock doesn't die with its creators, just as jazz from the twenties through the forties has not died, though pretty much every major jazzer is dead by now.

[skygazer]

11. Lists are a lazy person's way of rating things anyway

I've always thought the whole idea of "100 best novels" or "10 best guitarists" or "238 most influential people" was a cop-out. It's all subjective, especially art.

I doubt if the guys of Pink Floyd are losing any sleep over it.

[Lethe]

12. i object to compilation albums

you can't include an Elvis album in the 2000's category

[Lethe]

14. What?? No New Kids on the Block??

what a shame!

[VforVicarious]

15. No Maiden or Rage?!?

Yes, I know the story about this photo, but seriously...THE DUDE IS ON FUCKING FIRE!!! HOW COULD YOU NOT INCLUDE IT!!!??11

[Frank Cannon]

16. Gawd, these music threads are tiresome

And yet, here I post in reply.

Music is about as subjective a topic as there is. I frankly don't care about any popular artists as long as they can play musical instruments well and/or sing on key. It seems like 99% of popular artists can't even accomplish one of those two basic tasks, the bulk of the artists mentioned in this post not excluded.

[jus_the_facts]

17. Well.. they were never on the Warner label...they were initially on Columbia....

...then went with Harvest and on to EMI in later years...was the list exclusive to artists from Warner Records? :shrug:

[Zomby Woof]

Dylan is a Columbia artist

With the exception of 1973-1975 when he was on Asylum, owned by David Geffen, his entire career has been on Columbia.

The Beatles were on EMI in Britain and Capitol in the U.S.

This is just a case of a critic being an asshole, I mean, a critic.

[jus_the_facts]

24. Oh I'm well aware....

...of your intellectual music snobbery...I mean..intellectual music criticisms! :evilgrin:

on edit...I'm just talkin' outta my stoned ass anyway! :D :loveya:

[billyskank]

18. Dammit my whole record collection is shit!

Why didn't anybody tell me!

[asthmaticeog]

19. Don't be TOO hard on Time Mag.

Really, if it weren't for Time, where could one go to learn about developments in music? :shrug:

[Fenris]

20. USA Today is pretty good.

They tell me why I need to like Panic! At The Disco. And they have infographics to back up their assertions. :thumbsup:

[asthmaticeog]

21. But Time is GLOSSY.

Therefore it's better. Duh. :eyes:

[graywarrior]

23. Dylan should be the only one on there.

And Lukas.

That's it. My world.

[taterguy]

28. A list without Mojo Nixon . . .

Is a list that needs some fixin'!!!!!!!!

[Dukkha]

29. worst.list.ever.

Time is showing just how out of touch with reality they are. Most likely they comprised this list based of Billboard charts and not by relevance and influence to music pop culture. Mostly due to the fact they spread themselves too thin and try to include too many music genres so insignificant entries like Dolly Parton, The Stone Roses, and Outkast caused much more worthy artists like Pink Floyd, The Doors, & Nine Inch Nails to get snubbed.

[Initech]

30. EMINEM but no Floyd? What the fuck?

:argh:

[jmowreader]

31. Dead Elvis seems to be well-represented here

You got two 'greatest hits' albums from Elvis that were released after he'd been dead for decades. You got two rap albums whose 'musical accompaniment' is one hundred percent sampled crap, and another that's damn close. The 'most important' Ramones album is also one of their worst--Road to Ruin is much better than Ramones--and you've got a multi-disc album from a producer who wouldn't make an album.

What should be on there? Tommy, The Dark Side of the Moon, Led Zeppelin 4, Iron Maiden's Powerslave (anyone who's got the balls to make a 14-minute rock song deserves to be on some kind of list, and anyone who's got the balls to play it in concert deserves some sort of medal, as do the people who paid money to listen to what is essentially a 14-minute guitar solo), and, of course, NOFX's '45 or 46 Songs That Weren't Good Enough to Go On Our Other Albums' just because of the title.

[PVnRT]

32. What? "Fizzy Fuzzy Big & Buzzy" isn't there?

sheesh

[EOTE]

47. I hope you're not joking.

I picked up that album on a whim and ended up enjoying it quite a bit. Not top 100 material, but good stuff none-the-less. Some notable absentees from the list I can think of are Jeff Buckley's Grace and Freedy Johnston's Perfect World. Both are definitely in my top 5 albums of all time.

[Beer Snob-50]

33. metallica one of the greatest of all time?

maybe i am just getting old. gotta say that the wall should be there however.

[Dukkha]

35. the Metallica entry says it all right here

I clicked on Metallica, and the boy-genius who wrote this (who I shall call shit-for-brains from here on out) brilliantly stated:

"Their next album would be the glossy, gazillion-selling breakthrough, but on Master of Puppets Metallica didn't bother with hooks or pop discipline."

Really. Of course, what Cap'n Research fails to mention is that it was Black, two albums later, not And Justice For All, that had all the released tracks and made all the money. Just because Justice had "One" on it does not make it glossy, nor gazillion-selling.

I hate music "writers". They have a degree and still can't write anything meaningful or thought-provoking, let alone CORRECT.

[MissMillie]

36. Dark Side of the Moon isn't even Pink Floyd's greatest album

IMHO

[HughBeaumont]

37. SIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHHHHH . . .

(What's the Story) Morning Glory Oasis Sony, 1995
Live Through This Hole Geffen, 1994
My Life Mary J. Blige MCA, 1994
The Marshall Mathers LP Eminem Interscope, 2000
The College Dropout Kanye West Roc-a-Fella, 2004
Like a Prayer Madonna Sire/London/Rhino, 1990
Ropin' The Wind Garth Brooks Capitol, 1991


. . . AAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaand I stopped reading.

[idgiehkt]

45. once again...:"Live Through This" fucking kicks ass

Just because the lead singer is grunge's Yoko (and she was doing this before she met what's his name) doesn't detract from the quality of that album, or from "Pretty on the Inside" either, which was also a great one. Yes, Courtney is fucked up, but that doesn't detract from what the band did.

just like Babes in Toyland, who have a more legitimate right to be on that list than Hole, Hole sang about child abuse, rape, and incest. I'm glad Time included a band who dared to sing about relevant topics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgqKOQ73PyE&search=hole%20courtney%20love%20grunge%20live%20unplugged

god forbid someone should actually sing about something relevant.

[HughBeaumont]

53. Nothing Hole has ever done was quality.

Possibly the worst act I've ever seen live. Bad sound quality, average to just plain awful songs, lame stage presence . . . and I haven't even gotten to the cliche drug-diva antics of the far-undeserving-of-her-fame rag pig that fronts them.

For all the relevant topics in Hole's lyrics, Crapney sure didn't practice what she preached and took whatever semblence of effort her band put forth down with her. I never thought they were good songwriters.

Babes in Toyland was the far superior band of that niche (hell, L7 was better than Hole, tossed tampons and all), live and on record, yet got second-tier press and buried thanks to the Courtney Lame spectacle.

[bullwinkle428]

39. Where in the HELL is Right Said Fred???

:popcorn:

[mtnester]

42. No Floyd huh?

DSOTM has to be in there...it was so completely different from anything else ever before it. Sheesh, its STAYING power alone ought to have landed it there

[Burma Jones]

43. What was it that Zappa said of Rock Journalism????

"Definition of rock journalism: People who can’t write, doing interviews with people who can’t think, in order to prepare articles for people who can’t read."

[Broken_Hero]

44. Well...no Floyd...

I disagree with about half, if not more of that list...but to each their own...but I seriously lodge compliant, when Floyd gets snubbed and Kanye West gets in? WTF? Seriously...I'm suprised Britany Spears wasn't on that list...it would have completed the joke...

[sfdiva]

46. I am not a fan of Floyd ... But I do have 3 of the 5 of those Beatles albums n/t

[av8rdave]

48. And only one Neil Young album (not even his best)

Whoever came up with that compilation missed the mark!

[Parche]

49. albums

Pink Floyd has done more for music, then that F-IN and who in the hell is Kanya West??
And why would they have eminem on that, he is the worst, rap is NOT music

[LTR]

50. WHAT??? No "Bat Out Of Hell"?

Okay, this list is totally fucked!

A few observations:

1. At least they included Public Enemy, AC/DC's "Back In Black" and Metallica's "Master Of Puppets".

2. Pavement sucks.

3. Half century-old compilations from Hank Williams, Chuck Berry and Elvis Presley do not count. I'll forgive them for Robert Johnson. Still, too many greatest hits compilations.

4. "1999" was better than "Purple Rain" and "Sign Of The Times".

5. Pavement sucks.

6. The poll of albums that should have made the list sounds more intriguing than many of the entries that actually did make it.

7. "Straight Outta Compton" by N.W.A. was a highly underrated album. This thing was pretty mind-blowing when it was released.

8. What? No "Frampton Comes Alive"?

9. P-Funk made the list twice!

10. Pavement sucks.

[last_texas_dem]

51. Overall, it's fairly typical of these lists

They always annoy me, and yet I can't help looking at them. It's a sad, sad affliction of mine. But it's typical of these sorts of lists for several reasons:

1) It overstates the importance of albums released in the decade that the list was made. "Rolling Stone" did this a couple years ago when they included three Eminem albums on the top 500 albums of all time. I think listmakers should not include albums released five, maybe even ten, years ago when they assess all-time influence because it's really impossible to assess the influence of something that is that recent. Not that a number of these albums won't have a major all-time influence, but I think it always distorts the credibility of these lists when they include albums released around the same time the list is being published.

2) Critics hate progressive-rock. Remember this when you consider who has been inducted or is being considered for induction in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. These guys just decided to take it one step further and not include Pink Floyd. Generally, critics will give Pink Floyd a break for being a sort-of, semi-prog band, because of their popularity. I guess they just decided to show their true colors all the way on this one. Did I mention critics annoy me?

3) They mess up the fairness of the criteria by including compilation albums. Not that those Elvis, Hank Williams, and Sam Cooke compilations aren't great, and I'm assuming their reason for including them is because they were artists of the 45-RPM era (or 78-RPM era, in the case of Williams) who weren't focusing on recording albums, but on recording songs. Still, it really shakes things up if you the criteria up to include compilations. There are no doubt hundreds of artists whose "greatest hits" collections surpass any album they ever released, and hundreds more artists who never made a truly great album who you could put together a great compilation album out of.

Anyway, those are just some of my thoughts on this. Can't believe I'm wasting my time getting annoyed at one of these lists again (once you've seen one of these lists, you've essentially seen them all) but here I am.