Rolling Stone Top 100 of 00's ignores PJ

bicyclejoe

IgotshitID wrote:

Foo Fighters Wasting Light is the best album of the 00's

Two things wrong with that statement: no it's not (but still a great album) and it wasn't released in the 00's. It's 2011.

As the original poster, I have to say I subscribe to Rolling Stone. Some great journalism.
Also, I have a bigger problem with The National not being on the list.
But I just have a problem with most RS lists in general.

Best albums of 00's:

MMJ Z
The Johnny Cash American series (I see them as one)
Pearl Jam self titled
The Raconteurs -- Consolers of he Lonely
The National -- Boxer
Arcade Fire -- Funeral

Newch91

U2's "All That You Can't Leave Behind" and Bruce's "The Rising" should be in the top 10.

I would've thought "Backspacer" would be on the list.

JTH

busconi wrote:

That brings up a good question -- what was your favorite album of 00s?

Not sure how I'd order them but the first three that come to mind:
Arcade Fire - Neon Bible
Wilco - Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
The Hold Steady - Separation Sunday

threefish10

DewieCox wrote:

IgotshitID wrote:

Foo Fighters Wasting Light is the best album of the 00's

Not even close. Hell, it's not even Dave Grohl's best contribution.

What constitutes the 00s? Is it the decade from 2000-10 or is it from 2000 to now?

But yeah I personally think from 2000 has been very good for pearl jam. But I would probably struggle to name 100 albums from the last 11 years and not at least include binaural(if that was even 2000, I think it was). But other then that. But really I don't care what rolling stone or any other "list" says. Music is a very personal and subjective thing. What one person loves the next might think is a pile of shit. Doesnt bother me what anyone chooses to like. I'm not gonna get angry and all out of joint over it. There are better things to worry about.

JTH

threefish10 wrote:

What constitutes the 00s? Is it the decade from 2000-10 or is it from 2000 to now?

I'd say it's 2000-2009.

JTH

JTH wrote:

threefish10 wrote:

What constitutes the 00s? Is it the decade from 2000-10 or is it from 2000 to now?

I'd say it's 2000-2009.

And apparently that's what RS is using for their list:
"This list is not just an argument in favor of the enduring appeal of the album format, but a compelling case that some of the best music of all time came out between 2000 and 2009."

Gibson

It is definitely from 2000 - 2009.

Once we hit 2010, we are in the 10's era.

hell_man_made

bicyclejoe wrote:

I agree with much of this list, but Avacado should have made the cut. Crazy.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists ... s-20110718

definitely agree....avacado is my fave pj record
but then again RS and PJ don't seem to mix....SPIN wouldn't do this to them, imo

Alive_and_Evolving

I couldn't agree more. I appreciate Nirvana for what they did and am a fan of a lot of their music. But let's be honest. If Kurt hadn't died so tragically do you think they would be topping these lists all the time? Nope.[/quote]

I watched an interview with Thom Yorke recently. And he was discussing how an artist's death affects their art. this is me paraphrasing him but he said something along the lines of once something like this happens, the art of that person is forever changed and somewhat tainted because it's forever connected to that event. And then he said something along the lines of when children see art of a man who committed suicide, they're unaware of that and they can see the art for what it is. but when their parents look at the same art, they respond "ah that poor bloke blew his brains out".
But i agree with RS having a radiohead album as #1 i would've just put in rainbows instead. I am surprised pj didn't crack the list at all though

pj23yanks

Remember this was the same magazine that didn't have Mike McCready as one of the top 100 guitar players of all time

Newch91

pj23yanks wrote:

Remember this was the same magazine that didn't have Mike McCready as one of the top 100 guitar players of all time

And the same magazine during the review of Avocado, David Fricke admits he screwed up leaving him out.

threefish10

Alive_and_Evolving wrote:

I watched an interview with Thom Yorke recently. And he was discussing how an artist's death affects their art. this is me paraphrasing him but he said something along the lines of once something like this happens, the art of that person is forever changed and somewhat tainted because it's forever connected to that event. And then he said something along the lines of when children see art of a man who committed suicide, they're unaware of that and they can see the art for what it is. but when their parents look at the same art, they respond "ah that poor bloke blew his brains out".
But i agree with RS having a radiohead album as #1 i would've just put in rainbows instead. I am surprised pj didn't crack the list at all though

i'm not sure if it taints it, but i believe dying prematurely is the best thing that can happen for ones career. just look at the massive amounts of success many have had after their premature death, in some cases more then when they were alive.

one somewhat similar thing happened to a small local band here in brisbane. two of their members did in an horrific car crash driving home in the tour van after a gig. this band had 200 "fans" on facebook. 5 hours after the crash had been all over the news it was up to 2500. and it just kept going up.

Alive_and_Evolving

i'm not sure if it taints it, but i believe dying prematurely is the best thing that can happen for ones career. just look at the massive amounts of success many have had after their premature death, in some cases more then when they were alive.

one somewhat similar thing happened to a small local band here in brisbane. two of their members did in an horrific car crash driving home in the tour van after a gig. this band had 200 "fans" on facebook. 5 hours after the crash had been all over the news it was up to 2500. and it just kept going up.[/quote]

I believe by taints he means takes away the original message and original intention of these songs. And while those fans new fans are great. They ultimately never will have experienced the music the same way as the 250 before his death.

Keiran

Further evidence that Eddie had the right idea when he wiped his adorable bum on stage with a Rolling Stone magazine!

Stryker

Mamasan23 wrote:

washedinblack91 wrote:

Grandmas Jam wrote:

+1, i can not agree with any polls that put Nirvana, smells like teen spirit, or kurt cobain in the top ten of anyhting other then biggest losers. nirvanas good, but not that good. they never even solo for godsakes

i'm so happy i found someone who gets that upset over nirvana being in every list. every time i see his stupid moody face on a list (usually top 20 if not top 10 of something asinine like "best guitarist". UGH) it makes me go on an hour long rant about how their music isn't that great and not technically good and the only thing he did was popularize a music movement that lasted 5 years. UGH I'M SO ANGRY JUST THINKING ABOUT IT!!

I couldn't agree more. I appreciate Nirvana for what they did and am a fan of a lot of their music. But let's be honest. If Kurt hadn't died so tragically do you think they would be topping these lists all the time? Nope.

I've been saying this for years. It absolutely makes me RAGE! If Kurt hadn't killed himself Nirvana would have much less relevance today with how people view music from the early 90's.

hell_man_made

Keiran wrote:

Further evidence that Eddie had the right idea when he wiped his adorable bum on stage with a Rolling Stone magazine!

:thumbup:

rrivers

My biggest problem with the list is that it would take me an hour to scroll through it all because every list on the internet has to be presented in a way to maximize pageviews so I spend days clicking through it.