To "rock fans", what is meant to be the canonical, everyone can agree on, album of the decade?

I have no idea.

I asked a bunch of rock fans this question and the best answer I got was "Origin of Symetry", which has to be wrong.

is this it?
http://www.bside-rock.com/IMG/jpg/the_strokes_-_is_this_it_a.jpg

http://rateyourmusic.com/list/overmatik/best_rock_albums_from_the_decade_00___09_so_far/

Haha, Trevor Tanner of the Bolshoi at number three. That list has gotta be right.

Elephant, perhaps?

Yeah, Elephant. Seven Nation Army is certainly the consensus rock song of the decade.

oh, certainly.

In Rainblolws?

Among mainstream US rock fans, American Idiot, Toxcicity or Elephant would get a lot of votes, I'd think.

Is there ever a single disc "all rock fans" agreed was the best of its decade? Top 10s are easier.

Is there ever a single disc "all rock fans" agreed was the best of its decade? Top 10s are easier.

― Daniel, Esq., Monday, 16 February 2009 20:07 (24 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Nevermind.

I think lots of people put OK Computer over Nevermind in the 90s.

(I wouldn't, but there you are.)

"Lateralus" is a good shout actually, I had it down as a late 90s release for some reason. Possibly because I don't give a shit about Tool.

When I say "rock", btw, I'm excluding indie because, y'know, the last thing we need on ILx is another Thread About Indie And Critical Consensus.

xp

I'm guessing that Yoshimi and Kid A are going to be thereabouts in exciting lists of this sort of thing.

I always thought it was gonna be Kid A

Yeah, I forgot that was in the 00s.

I mean, if you consider Radiohead "indie" or whatever, that's your hangup cuz frat goons and rock radio cheeseballs and headbangers and dads and everyone else likes Radiohead so

top 1000 albums of the 00s on rateyourmusic
http://rateyourmusic.com/charts/top/album/2000s

I really don't know how many layers of parody we're operating at by now

Whiney was right: re: I always thought it was gonna be Kid A

no way that Lateralus would make it, backlash against tool is pretty solid, particularly that album

Lateralus in at 6 - still an impressive showing on the rym rankings

i'm trying to think of what constitutes my favorite "mainstream" rock record...maybe Songs for the Deaf?

Looking at RYM it seems like the 00s was the decade of Opeth, Masta Ace and Clint Mansell.

I wouldn't have thought Kid A a few years ago, but Whiney is right: These days, Radiohead has moved into that "everybody likes them" space(I think In Rainbows really helped in that regard). Kid A is a fine choice. I thought maybe Toxcicity since it was No. 1 on 09.11.01, and I remember people at the time wrote that it somehow captured the national mood, and it certainly was loved by a lot of "frat goons and rock radio cheeseballs and headbangers" and so on.

(xp)

yeah, but the indie pantspissers and rockist critics who make these type of lists sadly do not rep for System Of A Down like they do for Radiohead.

the pitchfork influence in the top 100 is still noticeable

good thread to cross reference with: Good major Label Rock/Metal albums from Late 90's-2008?

Don't have a good answer, but of everything mentioned so far, Toxicity would be my pick.

I'm always psyched when one of those tunes comes up randomly on my ipod.

I don't think you trust in my
Self-righteous suicide
I cry
When angels deserve to DIE!!!!

I'm not sure there have ever been better lyrics...

that song is a jam

is this a parody thread?

How's about:
Funeral
X&Y
Welcome to the Black Parade?

Funeral is indie, jerkster

well 'scuse me, I suppose I should've known by death-metallers radiohead being all over this thread

The answer is obviously Source Tags And Codes ffs

is this serious or is dom just really bored/trolling

Speakerboxxx/The Love Below is the rock album of the decade. (#2: Is This It)

Didn't "rock fans" dismiss Nirvana in 1993?

The Strokes

I just checked RS and apparently it's still Sgt. Pepper.

Justice - †

actual lols - A+ whoever

ahahhaha

As far as metal-influenced radio rock goes, Toxicity remains fantastic. It's a shame SOAD still seem to get tossed in the same "let's do our best to forget about them" bin as nu-metal garbage on the basis of blind association. Getting radioplay alongside the likes Trapt and Crazy Town will do that to you, I guess.

I'd say OK Computer.

Who said the album of the 00s actually had to be from the 00s?

Is this a sad state of affairs? Yeah, kinda.

THe funny thing is that "Origin of Symmetry" is better than most of the things mentioned in this thread. FACT.

Seriously, now, and this will be a rare instance of seriousness from me on this thread, I actually agree with edwardo

The Darkness: Permission To Land
or whatever it was called

Permission to suck?

Duh.

http://www.soundstagedirect.com/media/beatles_love.jpg

QOTSA - Songs for the Deaf

Return to Cookie Mountain?
Yankee Hotel Foxtrot?

Oh wait.. to "rock fans.."

In that case, no.. with extra "no" emphasis on the 2nd half of the decade.

Return to Sucky Mountain?

Yankee Hotel Sucktrot?

my top 6 of the 00s, so far (rock & unrock):

1) MF Doom & Madlib - Madvillainy
2) Erykah Badu - NuAmerykah Part 1: 4th World War
3) The Fall - The Real New Fall LP
4) High on Fire - Blessed Black Wings
5) Radiohead - Kid A
6) Peaches - The Teaches of Peaches

you don't know the name of the group that made your favorite album of the decade?

it's called madvillain...but I just hate typing out "Madvillain - Madvillainy"...just seems redundant to me...

Love and Theft gets my vote.

I also dig:

The White Stripes - White Blood Cells (way better than Elephant)
The Wrens - Meadowlands
Drive-By Truckers - Decoration Day

The most interesting band/artist to emerge in the decade is MIA. That kind of thing is not my usual cup of musical tea, but she is the real deal. Whatever "it" is, she's got it.

Is this it - the strokes. Definitely, though the canonical band would be the white stripes instead of The Strokes.

Whatever "it" is, she's got it.

Herpes, presumably.

Franz Ferdinand's debut, maybe?

Or, OK, maybe The Strokes too, but Franz Ferdinand is like The Strokes with tunes, and somewhat having escape from the tin box, The Strokes recorded that album inside.

slightly off topic,

would i be correct in saying the first yearly poll for ILM was 2002

The ILX Readers Poll 2002 - RECORDS OF THE YEAR

and there were no organized ilm polls for 2000 and 2001 or indeed 2003?

before a decade poll early next year, these need organizing first

If we're talking "everyone can agree" on, can I just express formal dissent over The Strokes? I'm not going to get into detailing why I dislike them so wholeheartedly, it's just that I'm damn sure I'm not the only one to be utterly underwhelmed by 'em. White Stripes, i could be talked into.

The Hives also made a great record.

that's true, except they didn't, and nobody likes them, and they suck

Blood Visions, of course!

"What is 2000s rock?"
"The Strokes?"
"Yeah, the Strokes"
"The Strokes!"
"Fuck the Strokes!"
"Yeah, Fuck the Strokes!!"
"But c'mon, The Strokes..."
"Seriously dudes, he's got a point about the Strokes."
"Whatever dude, I hate the Strokes!"
"Me too. Strokes are douchy."
"Fuck them Strokes!"
"I would like the Strokes, but they're not as good as some other eh band."
+
"I kinda liked the Strokes then."
"Not me. The Strokes are lame."
-----------------------------------
Duh, The Strokes

who are "rock fans"? metalheads? classic rock people who don't move much outside canonical 60s/70s stuff? indie kids who don't like the electro stuff? punx? emoez? generalists who just happen to prefer guitar-based music (like uh, U2, REM, coldplay, dave matthews)?

i mean, what one sound could possibly appeal to all those people? radiohead might be the best bet, cuz not only are they popular, they seem to appeal to all kinds of otherwise primarily niche-dwelling music fans.

strokes would be the answer if the OP wondered what rock record = album of the decade to all kindsa people, and not just "rock fans".

F--k the Strokes.

(xp)

Succinct and to the point.

I saw the Strokes twice and the Hives once, and the Hives kicked the Strokes collective ass so far out of sight the Hubble Telescope couldn't have registered their cute 80's digital watches. I haven't seen anything good said about the Strokes that wouldn't count a hundred times for the Dandy Warhols, who wrote better songs and had more hits,

was hoping you wouldn't pick up on this. i thot you meant the vines :(

i like the hives better than the strokes, but i dont' see how my tastes enter into it

OK, Strokes represent Rock to people who don't like Rock = win? WTF?

gotta be something by qotsa, system, or the white stripes, surely?

quotsa or stripes maybe, system no way - alienates too many subtribes

metal dudes can mostly get behind QOTSA, and so can indie dudes. Whereas lots of indie dudes wouldn't ride for System, and a lot of metal dudes wouldn't ride for White Stripes.

i think some of that foo fighters nonsense might actually be the answer here.

m@tth OTM

FF have some of the same problems as stripes & system, but then again, have lots of appeal outside metal & indie peeplz: the silent majority guitar-based radio pop crowd. think they work better as competition for the strokes in "decade-defining rock bands for not-just-rock fans"

Guys, I already said Kid A like three days ago, we can stop arguing.

unless you guys want to debate the concept of "everyone"

except what if it's OK conputer, or that free rainbows one?

Why do we even need an album of the fucking decade?

many x-posts.

Please. If you're talking about bands liked by not-just-rock fans there isn't a universe in which The Strokes are even 20% as popular as Foo Fighters (the fact that the latter have been shit for the entirety of this decade notwithstanding).

Alfred OTM but the question is about what it is not whether one is needed. (What's not needed is me baiting Radiohead fanboys so I'll shut up now).

xxpost

One came out in 1997 and the other stfu

Shit, I don't even like Radiohead, I'm just saying that the writing's been on the wall for six years that every magazine read by rockist people is gonna have Kid A at the top

Says more about the hyper-involvement of Radiohead fans amongst the readership than consensus mind. I can't see Foo Fighters fans being as slavishly devoted, somehow.

my album of the decade is Ulver - Blood Inside fwiw, but nobody except like me and Scott Seward and maybe John Justen will vote for it, and Scott doesn't vote in polls

If you're talking about bands liked by not-just-rock fans there isn't a universe in which The Strokes are even 20% as popular as Foo Fighters

yeah, but being popular does not necessarily = becoming a (or thee) decade defining. a disproportionate number of supposedly "decade defining" records & bands underperformed, sales-wise. plus i don't really know anyone who holds the foos in especially high regard, so it's hard to properly account for them

i went through a few weeks of loving the blood inside, but then it went away

Besides which most people who like rock music don't read rock magazines (or post on websites for that matter). Kid A can eat a dick (and does) amongst most _rock_ fans, who probably haven't listened to it in eight years.

x-post I didn't say Foo Fighters defined the decade canonically (obviously they don't), I was responding to the post above where it said that if THAT was the criterion, FF would "rival" The Strokes, which is nonsense, as on that score the FFs would probably be the runaway winner, maybe QOTSA in second (and QOTSA are a substantially better band than 00s FF).

;_;

KID A

esp, since we haven't really have any other "canonical" records in that Pet Sounds sense of the word in the last ten years (save maybe Jay-Z's The Blueprint), like they used to do with The Soft Bulletin or Nevermind or Miseducation Of Lauren Hill or Odelay.

magazines, scared of the internet, have been making their coverage more pandering (Fall Out Boy cover x1000) and their critical opinions more chaloppy to compete. The hivemind agrees on the same 500-or-so bands (yay fleet foxes! yay TV On The Radio!), but after Kid A, no one can really agree on ONE BAND or ONE ALBUM like we did Nirvana and the Beatles

Kid A was the last rock album to be a critical EVENT

And people aren't gonna forget that when compiling their boring, boring lists

And it's a rock album.

my thought re: foo fighters is that no one really seems to bother to dislike them either, they have some sort of teflon innocuousness to them that makes them invisible to ire.

obviously not a glowing statement from me about them but everyone i know that is into the rock and roll music seems to have this "ehh yeah whatever, they're fine" and maybe i am just cynically thinking that that is what makes for canonical albums of the decade in decades past.

xposts

more Kid A x-post
It's preposterous to say that just because amongst critics it enjoys Beatles-esque approval that _everyone_ among _rock fans_ can agree with it. Universal critical acclaim doesn't alter the fact that it is still a polarising record. Event != canonical agreement.

(also it's completely shit)

i don't know that your take on the tastes of "most rock fans" is accurate, edwardo. suspect that most rock fans is a bigger bucket than yr giving it credit for, and that the most die-hard rock fans (i.e., teenz in black clothing) will be playing the SHIT out of it for decades to come.

and you kinda misinterpreted my earlier post. i think strokes will become a decade-defining rock band for all kindsa people because they sort of have that "whee! fun" oldies radio/dance club vibe built in. people will be wedding dancing to songs off is this it for similar decades as those mentioned above. dunno that foos will have this kinda pop nostalgia power, but who knows?

it being the kid a/gaydiohead

also it's completely shit

― edwardo

the fact that you have an opinion is clearly making you biased and therefore QED

xsomethingpost

every rock fan i've ever met loves radiohead! they're the clear winner because unlike the Strokes (uh, huge backlash) or Foo Fighters (indie rocker hated) or TVOTR (rock radio ignored) they unite hipsters and meatheads and dads and critics and little brothers and MTV watchers and Pitchfork readers and Starbucks and Stereogum and everyone. They're the only band who crosses all the demographics. They are the easy walk.

Maybe not as much as Nevermind in the 90s, but way moreso than London Calling in the 80s.

Kid A is a good album. A very good album. I'd be a little disappointed if it won a decade poll.

i mostly agree with you wrt radiohead Whiney, but i know a bunch of guitar loving ok computer dudes that hate kid a with a passion.

I think it's a huge bucket, the pool or rock fans that is, and I don't think it's easy to pin it down, but I'd say it's a cert that what is critically acclaimed and what tops magazine polls is a very very very tiny proportion of what you'd have to take into account when working out what THE CANONICAL CHOICE IS of people who self-identify as rock fans. Many of whom are pretty quiet about their tastes as the number of people who LIKE music who are forthright and communicative about what they prefer is actually way smaller than you think.

"Songs for the Deaf" strikes me as the best answer so far.

x-post I'm winding you up, contenderizer.

Songs For The Deaf didn't even go platinum. What the fuck planet do you live on?

The Strokes/Radiohead back biting nonsense here makes me want to nominate Rush's Vapour Trails

I reckon Geir is on to something re: Franz

every rock fan i've ever met loves radiohead!

I know plenty - PLEEENNTYY - of "rock fans" who would regard radiohead as "that weird faggot arty music", so, no. Sorry.

FooFighters, yeah. QOTSA maybe in the early 2k's but not now.

I'm thinking of generic "I listen to Clear Channel radio stations and buy chart music" rock fans here, mind you, which is as broad a church as can be assumed, surely.

people will be wedding dancing to songs off is this it for similar decades as those mentioned above.

^^^ this is actually true. i think that the strokes' albums, for better or for worse, will have some nostalgic staying power.

i think it's actually very similar to both of those, though more in terms of they way they're all now viewed than the way they occurred in their respective moments. throw dark side of the moon in there, too. all rock canon klassiks - not just popular and influential, but sanctified by some invisible (critical) hand.

franz f = even narrower in their rock appeal than the strokes. indie + pop + dance is their circle. no real appeal to throwback/dadrocker types, metalheads.

that was in response to whiney's mention of nevermind & london calling

I think that is probably a very accurate reduction of Franz Ferdinand's fans (at least US-wide) but you could do that to most of the other albums and artists being discussed.

I don't think you trust in my
Self-righteous suicide
I cry
When angels deserve to DIE!!!!

I'm not sure there have ever been better lyrics...

that song is comedy gold at rock clubs. the bouncy start gets everyone all fired up, so much so that they forget that 60% of the tune consists of slow, maudlin wailing. cue a dancefloor full of frustrated metalheads standing around looking utterly unsure what to do with themselves. some may emote-mime if you're lucky.

sorry.

as you were.

NEVER FORGET

Uh, won't it likely be My Chemical Romance or something? I mean, isn't that our generation's Nirvana?

no

to the ongoing and extremely important question of foo fighters, the reason gaydiohead win out over FF (and strokes and other FF bands named after things related to wars and maybe even white strhipes) = rockism. it's not about having fans or radioplay or chart hits, though those matter - it's about artistic artistry, breaking new ground, the cutting age, and being seriously important for reasons to be enumerated, etc. that's what makes bands not just present or remembered, but symbolic, iconic.

the reason that led zep IV and london calling seem to bookend the 70s (not that they're alone in that) isn't just sales or hooks or fans, it's that there's a narrative of significance attached to each. they're not just collections of songs, they're expressions tapping into something "valuable". this narrative is super dominant and self-supporting at this point. like the foo fighters, bachman turner overdrive, BOC and grand funk sold records, rocked stadiums, authored extremely classic tunes that will live in history for all the days of mankind. but they never managed to create an aura of almost holy "artistic importance" around themselves. so they're not enshrined in the decade-defining cubbyholes of history. they're just these bands, see.

radiohead have done this, as did nirvana in the 90s, and maybe kinda NIN? sonic youth? kyuss? suspect that the slowly increasing importance of the latter will sneak rated R & songs for the deaf into the decade-definement biz (as also-rans) long before foo fighterses. who will be remembered as record your dad had, plus maybe it was that guy from nirvana.

As the thread title calls upon "rock fans" rather than rock fans, I have nothing to add except to agree that "rock fans" would certainly favour Radiohead, while rock fans would probably prefer something more like one of Motorhead's or Killing Joke's last two albums.

. . . Or maybe it's because Foo Fighters suck.

(xp)

contenderizer otm until he started talking about kyuss

while rock fans would probably prefer something more like one of Motorhead's or Killing Joke's last two albums.

― moley

no, you're thinking of "real rock" fans, which as far as i can tell is some kind of drug cult, but i understand the confusion

i <3 kyuss, it makes me think wrong

whiney consistenly otm. i dont get this thread really, as we're all being a bit retarded if we (1) honestly think there's a record or band that can actually claim to unite any substantial majority of rock fans and (2) are really giving dom's trolly thread 100+ posts

consistently*

NEVER FORGET PART 2

When the best-of-the-decade lists start popping up in 10 months or so, these are the 8 albums that will be mentioned the most frequently in publications read by "rock fans":

The Strokes: Is This It
Bob Dylan: Love and Theft
Radiohead: Kid A
Emimen: Marshall Mathers LP
Green Day: American Idiot
Outkast: Either Stankonia or Speakerboxxx
White Stripes: Elephant (should be White Blood Cells)
MIA: Kala

Blue collar local guys will vouch for Green Day, Eminem, and Foos but not White Stripes and Strokes

I hope it's Arular

korn's list seems reasonable, and when it gets all esspanded out like that, it seems reasonable to rope in more not-so-entirely-crit-friendly stuff, like MCR's the black parade, SoaD's toxicity, tool's lateralus, fall out boy's infinity on high and i dunno, whatever the fuck U2 and REM did this decade. that one with beautiful day.

plus some coldplay record or other

plus what else? deftones' white pony might once have been a runner-up, but they never followed it up properly, interest died. QotSA: songs for the deaf, shoo in, duh. that 1st franz ferd lp, yah. HOF's blessed black wings? liars' they were wrong, so we drownded? maybe that next liars has more fans tho. i dunno, do people still rate mogwai records? mclusky do dallas? isis' oceanic?

I care way too much about questions like these and even I think this one's a lost cause.

there must be other rock musics that people will feel inclined to list (other than guaranteed winners test icicles, babyshambles and creed, of course). hold steady's first couple, gossip's standing in the way of control, maybe all hands on the bad one (or is that too late 90s?), maybe boris' pink. hives veni, vidi, vicious. noisy skeng from blood brothers, battles, lightning bolts, etc. black dice beaches & canyons. are animal collective a "rock band"? were they ever? what about hot chip? is is ridiculous to think that the exploding hearts will get a few sympathy points here and there? does anybody else like that "little razorblade song"? god, there have to be about a hundred more...

matos: well, yeah

spoon, shins (and post-shins/death cab development of fleet foxes type bearded west coast amerindie), eome of yr more time-honored wilco and ted leo records, arcade fire (really?), but i dunno if gorillas were ever a proper band, and didn't they used to have a arctic monkeys over there that they were quite excited about, or was that related the whole test icicles fiasco? BLACK ONE.

O_o

Considering by this point in the 90s there were at least 10-15 nailed on straight into the canon big rock albums, this decade really doesn't seem to have produced many. I think this *might* have something to do with the decline of the album as a physical format.

Kid A feels like an end-of-the-90s album more than a beginning-of-the-00s one - pretty much the last time anyone dropped Warp as a hip influence. Elephant seems like as good a call as any, in that crucial 'recognisable from the very first note' way.

In twenty years, when people are asked to name the biggest rock band of the 00's, they're going to say Coldplay and you all know it. If you're looking for a rock band that "united the masses" this decade (kids and grandmas know their songs, they're the rock band it's OK for R&B fans to like), then look no further.

Wow Contenderizer. Just...wow

Merriweather Post Pavilion

Foo Fighters seem like a pretty good call: omnipresent, neither really objectionable not terribly memorable, kind of rock ambience of the period. The sort of thing that only becomes obvious with the distance of a decade or so.

"Neither really objectionable not terribly memorable" does not equal canonical, not by a long shot.

err, isn't this thread about the album, not the band of the decade ?

You're right. But "Neither really objectionable not terribly memorable" is what you end up with when you talk about "everyone can agree on". Canonical can be something else again.

Dunno, if "Nevermind" was the one for a previous decade, it's neither of those things...

Dudes, when people say things like "everyone can agree", they do not actually mean everyone.

Well, even "Happy Birthday to you" can be counted as canonical, and yet people get depressed by it. It's memorable, though...

ok, definitely the 2000s failed to have an 'album of the decade'. it's official. it's 2009.

people badmouth the 90s, but Nevermind and OK Computer were there. and you didn't have to like these albuns to accept the fact either one was THE album of the 90s. I'm not talking about personal opinion here.

but 'Is this it'? 'Elephant'? Even Kid A it's hard to defend without using some brainy argument.

brainy argument for Kid A:

the anti-tunes are as good as the tunes, man.

Argh argh argh we're taking Dom's lolthread seriously

brainy argument for Kid A:

the anti-tunes are as good as the tunes, man.

ok then. Kid A, the album of 2000s

Too much Kid A in this thread, not enough Kid Rock.

I'd say OK ComputerDevil Without a Cause.

Who said the album of the 00s actually had to be from the 00s?

Actually, I'd probably say "Hybrid Theory" by Linkin Park.

http://www.thevines.com/release/filename/2/Highly_Evolved.jpg

another music forum came up with this list:

The Ondarock Forum Best Albums of the 00s
http://rateyourmusic.com/list/ondarockforum/the_ondarock_forum_best_albums_of_the_00s

153 album listed

note: number 1:
Kid A
Radiohead
Kid A (2000)

Blue collar local guys will vouch for Green Day, Eminem, and Foos but not White Stripes and Strokes

― i'm pretty sure that's not what he meant by twinky train (los blue jeans), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 12:06 AM (9 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

rong

Return to Sucky Mountain?

Yankee Hotel Sucktrot?

Fuck all of you.

I think this decade more than ever the gulf between the established music media [print, radio, tv] and what is going outside the mainstream has grown wider.

Just look at the crap that has been mentioned on this thread, The Hives [retro bucket wrenching crap], Queens of the Stone Age [one trick pony riff merchants], Foo Fighters [making the same radio friendly album over and over again], The Strokes [simpleton music for college kids], White Stripes [rather limited and one dimensional], The Darkness [comedy rock], the Shins [tedious indie rock drivel], The Hold Steady [trad rock tripe that needs a good critical bashing]

All the bands you just mentioned are good except for The Hold Steady.

Queens of the Stone Age [one trick pony riff merchants]

This one is just rong rong rong.

the Shins [tedious indie rock drivel]

Goddamnit Chutes Too Narrow is not tedious or drivel.. If this is honestly what people think, then why did any of you bother listening to any rock since 2000?

I think the best straight-up rock album since 2000 is Gimme Fiction, but I'm not sure if I count as a "rock fan.."

Does anybody wanna give me an OTM on Linkin Park? I think I fucking nailed it!

you listen to the wrong type of rock

try: Ephel Duath, Agalloch, Negura Bunget, Isis, Miriodor, Supersilent, Scott Walker, Ulver, Cave In, Dark Tranquillity, Earthtone 9, Neurosis

yay!

Thread delivers

Cave In, Dark Tranquillity

masterful use of commas

I have one Cave In record and it is very not good. I think I might have bought the wrong one though.

Cavein - Jupiter - is the masterpiece

http://www.cavein.net/disc/hh66652.htm

Always get Cave In, Capdown and Kapowski confused.

not one Chinese Democracy nod...

at the drive in?

What about Chikinki? xxp

lol I remember Chikinki

you listen to the wrong type of rock

Thanks!

I was going to say Hybrid Theory myself upthread, but was worried I'd be ostracised. If we really are taking this seriously, how about Back to Black?

re: you listen to the wrong type of rock

that statement was a response to:

If this is honestly what people think, then why did any of you bother listening to any rock since 2000?

― billstevejim

Word. Isis and Cave-In are awesome, (I haven't heard the rest of your list), but I doubt they're contenders for the canonical rock album of the decade.

good call on linkin park, whoever. plus also the big obvious overlooked, decade framing, present-anticipating rock steady, courtesy of yr no doubt

forgot that one yesterday, but seems super obv in retrospect

reminder of what ilm voted the best albums of the first half of this decade
http://base58.com/ilx/ilm/top100/20002004/

and thank you dj martian for posting approved listening list. i'm glad people still do that

you listen to the wrong type of rock

try: Ephel Duath, Agalloch, Negura Bunget, Isis, Miriodor, Supersilent, Scott Walker, Ulver, Cave In, Dark Tranquillity, Earthtone 9, Neurosis

No I don't.

lol two of my favourite bands are in that DJ Martian list

lot of stuff on mid-point ILX hot list that still might be worth considering: shellac 10000 hurts, real new fall, gallowsbird bark, le tigre, fever to tell, VCN, etc. most unlikely to emerge as among THEE albums, except maybe that yeah yeah yeahs thing, i dunno

"Kid A" isn't a rock album, thus, I don't understand its mention here.

lol two of my favourite bands are in that DJ Martian list

Which ones, country matters?

guys i think we have to wait until the lil wayne rock album drops before we decide this

kid A: tops rym decade list, ilm mid 00s and ondarock

Boringly, Neurosis and Ulver

a good time to covert more followers to the mighty Ulver

http://www.myspace.com/ulver1
track: Christmas [from Ulver: Blood Inside]

if Depeche Mode turned in a experimental trip-rock band they might sound like this

yer all high. the answer is somethin' by the RHCP (ick!).

rock music in the 00s doesn't get better than this:

the atmospheric brilliance of:

Agalloch - Not Unlike the Waves

from the esteemed 2006 album: Agalloch - Ashes Against the Grain
http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/agalloch/ashes_against_the_grain/

goths keep swingin'

more decade defining rock brilliance:

Negura Bunget - Cunoasterea Tacuta

atmospheric avant progressive post-black metal from Romania

taken from the esteemed 2006 album: Negura Bunget - OM
http://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/negura_bunget/om/

The tragedy is that DJ Martian is posting brilliant, brilliant songs, but the fact they're on this thread will mean they get nothing but derision

"Christmas" is my favourite track on my favourite album of the decade

The tragedy is that DJ Martian is posting brilliant, brilliant songs, but the fact they're on this thread will mean they get nothing but derision

― country matters

*sob*

Well, the derision's kinda earned. This is more a thread to be discussing Linkin Park, Chikinki and maybe The Darkness on. A Dom thread.

They are brilliant tracks, but moving pretty far away from any sort of "canonical" look at the decade.

The brilliance is lost on me. Perhaps I am not a "rock fan".

And yeah, even taking this thread at all seriously, jon otm. Stevem, I think it's more that you're not an experimental black metal fan tbh

i don't know, man - that djmatian approved u-tube rawk is fine for what it is, while it's on, but instantly forgettable thereafter. at least Wolfmother have hooks.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Muse. What about Black Holes and Revelations? Definitely a very popular rock record and very much of this decade.

Also, Rush - Snakes and Arrows - where's the love, folks?

Oh shit, that reminds me

Frances the Mute - The Mars Volta

That was one universally beloved record!

lol @ the last 4 posts

I believe a Muse record kicked off this discussion, but it was Origin of Symmetry.

(I actually LOVE FtM but was kinda hoping TMV wouldn't make it onto this thread)

exactly jon, but I somehow think Moodles is operating to a plan on this thread

I'm not operating on any plan. Those two records would definitely be in my top 10 for rock records of the decade.
Rush may not get much love from anyone else, but I think the Muse suggestion is reasonable.

I'm kind of ignorant of Muse's earlier records, so I didn't realize that Origin was their's too.

if Depeche Mode turned in a experimental trip-rock band they might sound like this

thanks for ensuring I'll never listen to them!

some records that came out

2000:
relationship of command - at the drive-in
parachutes - coldplay
the white pony - deftones
the sickness - disturbed
veni, vedi, vicious - hives
hybrid theory - linkin park
mad season - matchbox 20
kid a - radiohead
1000 hurts - shellac
all hands on the bad one - sleater kinney

2001:
love and theft - bob dylan
vision creation newsun - boredoms
sinner - drowning pool
gorillaz - gorillaz
origin of symmetry - muse
silver side up - nickelback
rock steady - no doubt
come clean - puddle of mudd
oh, inverted world - shins
break the cycle - staind
is this it - strokes
toxicity - system of a down
lateralus - tool

2002:
source tags and codes - ...and you will know us by the trail of dead
i get wet - andrew WK
beaches and canyons - black dice
yoshimi battles the pink robots - flaming lips
oceanic - isis
neon golden - notwist
songs for the deaf - queens of the stone age
yankee hotel foxtrot - wilco

2003:
transatlanticism - death cab for cutie
a mark, a mission, a brand, a scar - dashboard confessional
kid rock - kid rock
hypermagic mountain - lightning bolt
de-loused in the comatorium - mars volta
sing sing death house - the distillers
the real new fall LP - the fall
elephant - white stripes
fever to tell - yeah yeah yeahs

2004:
sung tongs - animal collective
funeral - arcade fire
crimes - blood brothers
franz ferdinand - franz ferdinand
american idiot - green day
they were wrong, so we drowned - liars
leviathan - mastodon
vol. 3: the subliminal verses - slipknot
burned mind - wolf eyes

2005:
X&Y - coldplay
from under the cork tree - fall out boy
blessed black wings - high on fire
wonderful rainbow - lightning bolt
frances the mute - mars volta
gimme fiction - spoon
black one - sunn0)))
hypnotize - system of a down
standing in the way of control - the gossip
separation sunday - the hold steady

2006:
the warning - hot chip
blood mountain - mastodon
black holes and revelations - muse
the black parade - my chemical romance
pearl jam - pearl jam
10,000 days - tool
return to cookie mountain - tv on the radio

2007:
new wave - against me!
mirrored - battles
pink - boris
infinity on high - fall out boy
in rainbows - radiohead

2008:
saint dymphna - gang gang dance
vampire weekend - vampire weekend
oracular spectacular - MGMT
when the world comes down - all american rejects
pretty. odd - panic at the disco

2009:
merriweather post pavilion - animal collective

somewhere in there = a definement of sorts. plus why am i supposed to care who started this thread?

lol louis and DJ, yeah i could sit here and post shit off like the first blind shake record and all this other obscure shit i like but they are not going to be canonized.

lot of that stuff i listed isn't gonna be canonized, either, but i expect that pretty much all of it will be listened to and talked about and playlisted and soundtracked and passed on for a long, long time. defining the decade, defining "rock music" in some sense, defining whatever comes next. some of it canonized by people who do that for a living, most of it just listened to by people.

You've left out LCD Soundsystem, which has cheered me up a bit. Seems a fairly accurate reflection of consensus. Listened to MPP last night again, and despite the occasionally pleasant melody, I REALLY don't get why it's so beloved, beyond "it has a big sound and lots of spangly noises". Good opening track, but pretty dull when faced with its plaudits.

This thread was started as obvious trolling for challopry and general amusement; taking it seriously undermines the deliberately crass gaucheness of the question (i.e. clearly there isn't one canonical, agreed-upon album, especially a "rock" album, whatever that means, and to claim that there is one is in a word stupid). You've done slightly different and given a list of albums from all popular genres that you reckon would figure largely in end-of-decade thoughts.

Matt OTM, and I wasn't actually suggesting for a second that Ulver should be part of a general "canon". They make music for only the most inquisitive listeners to pursue at their leisure.

*something slightly different

i thought about LCD soundsystem, then retardedly left em off the list! no idea why. debut and SOS definitely should be on there. easy money canon fodder.

also, i'm a moran for leaving up the bracket and libertines s/t off the list. so transatlantic aphasias. teaches of peaches?

silver side up - nickelback
rock steady - no doubt
come clean - puddle of mudd

^^among these imo

rock steady - no doubt

^am v. happy with how much love this is receiving

i have to figure that funeral wd be the archetypal 00s album bcz the 00s is where i stopped giving a f*ck abt current music, and arcade fire actually played a pretty big part in that...

funeral - no one then knew that what they were mourning was Time Itself..

They make music for only the most inquisitive listeners to pursue at their leisure.

Do you even notice anymore when your semantics are contradictory?

other albums i've been wanting to check out:

wolf eyes - burned mind
shellac - 10000 hurts
sunno))) - black one
comets on fire - blue cathedral
ulver - blood inside (thx lj!)
avey tare and panda bear - spirit theyre gione spirit theyve vanished
melt banana - cell scape

also:

the clientele - strange geometery

xpost

i think he meant they make music for columbo

teaches of peaches?

my pretend girlfriend's favourite album (don't ask)

xp lol (ahh columbo)

blue cathedral is cool, not mind-blowing or anything
burned mind is totally awesome but only when you're in the mood
cell-scape is flat-out brilliance

and black one is like burned mind but even more mood-specific, can be a right old slog if you're not in full-on zombie-zen patience mode

the first comets on fire, field recordings on the sun, it way more mind-blowing but i like blue cathedral more as the middle ground between total freakout and becoming sort of more like the Dead.

yeah, what i've heard of "field recordings from the sun" is way more freaked-out than blue cathedral, which is more "classic rock" if anything, albeit with some mighty noised-out moments, especially towards the end of the album ("blue tomb" is really, REALLY nice)

10000 hurts and blood inside are both great.

i am 100% ignorant when it comes to comets on fire, prob should fix that, although the whole turning into the dead thing makes me squeamish.

i like sunn o))) in concept but never actually enjoy them in reality.

^^^^sorta this, although Black One really clicks in specific circumstances.

I wasn't gonna further comment on Blood Inside because I've already done enough of that tbh. Would like to hear the Shellac record.

its genius and is really the only shellac record that kind of scrapes at the big black catologue in terms of awesomeness. (note: have not heard italian greyhoud. anyone know if the vinyl has the same "accessory" as 100 hurts?)

left a zero out to make up for the extra one i already used.

this might be my noms for outerspacial timecapsular "00 teh canon", ranked:

1) standing in the way of control - the gossip (2005)
2) elephant - the white stripes (2003)
3) rock steady - no doubt (2001)
4) all hands on the bad one - sleater kinney (2000)
5) kid a - radiohead (2000)
6) songs for the deaf - queens of the stone age (2002)
7) LCD soundsystem - LCD soundsystem (2004)
8) is this it - strokes (2001)
9) franz ferdinand - franz ferdinand (2004)
10) gimme fiction - spoon (2005)

not my favorite rock records of decade by any means, but some split between my tastes and what seems retrospectively "important" / likely to be widely remembered & loved. nothing after 2005, which is funny: no contemp indie beardo shit. no wolf parade or fleet foxes or shins or arcade fire or whatever. probly just a reflection of waht DAM said (my finally disconnecting from the pop rock mainstream somewhere around the 06).

plus, drugs, you should totally get into those wolf eyes (burned mind, dread, dead hills), shellacs (1000 hurts = GR*!), sunns (black one is the only real necessary). and cell-scape yah! on the fence, re: the blood inside.

JJ-

yep italian greyhound comes with a loose CD, the vinyl packaging is quite simple to die for, as per usual.

my personal ranking of shellac records:

1) Terraform
2) At Action Park
3) 1000 Hurts
4) Excellent Italian Greyhound

NOTE: whisper thin margin between the first three...much larger separation between the 3rd and 4th

Greyhound is "okay"...has a handful of super classic Shellac jams, esp End of Radio...some of the filler feels really slight. too much Bob singing.

is this thread too nood without mention of pink, avril, k clarkson, etc?

i guess i consider those artists pop music that uses some rock sonic signifiers rather than actual rock music.

me too, but i'm not sure that "i consider" is the most significant issue here. do a lot of other ppl think of them as rock artists? in 10 or 20 years time will they seem to represent "rock in the new millennium"?

[this might be my noms for outerspacial timecapsular "00 teh canon", ranked:

1) standing in the way of control - the gossip (2005)

do you live in not America?

i guess i consider those artists pop music that uses some rock sonic signifiers rather than actual rock music.

― Yo, I just copped dat brand new Manity Kane cd. (M@tt He1ges0n), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 2:37 PM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

me too, but i'm not sure that "i consider" is the most significant issue here. do a lot of other ppl think of them as rock artists? in 10 or 20 years time will they seem to represent "rock in the new millennium"?

― contenderizer, Wednesday, February 18, 2009 2:41 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this made me think about shit

slowburner.gif

in the 70s or 80s was there shit we would now consider rock no question but at the time folks was like "id consider this pop that uses rock signifiers" or whatev

"rock signifiers" only came into being when pop when all robot beats and keyborads. they were still using live guitars and keybs until the mid-80s

*went

do you live in not America?

― Whiney G. Weingarten

i not live in not america. and maybe my love for the record/band is distorting my view, but wait and see. i have the feeling that this will become a serious long-term rock icon record. just a guess...

kreytisborads

xpost

When people think "pop" now they think of britney songs that are made in some ProTools gizmo not shit like The Bay City Rollers which was a band

or I guess maybe you could say Pat Benatar was the Pink to Olivia Newton John's Britney because she dressed like a punk rocker?

When people think "pop" now they think of britney songs that are made in some ProTools gizmo not shit like The Bay City Rollers which was a band

― American Idiotbag (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 7:58 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah i see what you're saying...more just my own definition but i don't really consider, say, the current format of Of Montreal "rock" music either

or I guess maybe you could say Pat Benatar was the Pink to Olivia Newton John's Britney because she dressed like a punk rocker?

― American Idiotbag (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:00 PM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

benatar though had a band, had that big burly dude she was married to.

re: and what

i think in the 70s, it was more like, this isn't ROCK, man, it's fucking "punk" bullshit (or disco bullshit, or funk bullshit, or maybe even pop bullshit). applied to stuff like talking heads, chic, pistols, blondie, devo, parliament -- all of which now seem like canon. same with early 00s rejection of prince, b-52s, michael jackson, mark knopfler's "MTV faggots", etc.

plus, yeah: rockist objections to the likes of pat benatar, peter frampton, bay city rollers

but "band vs. not-band" as the divider between "rock & not-rock" now seems totally dead, regardless of what carducci might say

thing is, i sort of agree with carducci and think he is bonkers but mostly OTM.

me too, but i'm not sure that "i consider" is the most significant issue here. do a lot of other ppl think of them as rock artists? in 10 or 20 years time will they seem to represent "rock in the new millennium"?

― contenderizer

lol what no

maybe not. i suppose there's every reason to think the current rough definition of "rock" will persist with core intact for 20+ years. and even if the mainstream conception shifts over time, there'll still be a bunch of stoners in ripped jeans spinning OM (or the yardbirds) in a basement somewhere, laughing at the idea that "shit like pink" could be considered rock by any standard.

just floating the thought

i realize i am simplifying this to the absolute max here but basically shouldn't "rock" be guitar driven? i think the point you raised was interesting if you took it indirectly but i dont think we'll ever be calling "womanizer" a rock song

my feeling is if you call any contemporary western genre "rock" you're really just falling into the same world as all those Rolling Stone "greatest rock albums of all time" lists with 8 token rap/dance/etc. albums. i don't think "rock" necessarily should signify bands or guitars or live drums or whatever, and the gray area there is more gray than ever, but still it ain't hard to make the distinction.

shouldn't "rock" be guitar driven? i think the point you raised was interesting if you took it indirectly but i dont think we'll ever be calling "womanizer" a rock song

― k3vin k.

^ it is, currently (more or less), but things are getting awful shakey in that regard. what is a "guitar"? an instrument, sure, but isn't it also a sound? and isn't music increasingly becoming the art of combining sounds, and less the art of playing physical instruments?

i mean, there are "guitars" (or guitar-like sounds) in avril's music, and peaches' too. and they both tap into the iconography, attitude and cultural identity of "rock music" and the "rock and roller". isn't rock, like metal, an identity as much as it is a specific sound? if you cop the stance and sneer and history and style of rock -- and if, deep down, the flame burns bright in your heart -- then aren't you, really, "real rock"?

i mean, weren't suicide a rock band?

some dude more OTM. i know what rock is and ain't. but on the other hand, that only applies to me. in my book, peaches is rock, avril ain't. but i KNOW that lots of die-hard "rock fans" would disagree with me on that. and any serious line-drawing discussion about this stuff is ridic wasted effort.

some dude more OTM. i know what rock is and ain't. but on the other hand, that only applies to me. in my book, peaches is rock, avril ain't. but i KNOW that lots of die-hard "rock fans" would disagree with me on that. and any serious line-drawing discussion about this stuff is ridic wasted effort.

it formed babby

yeah i agree w/ you both; the line, if there even is one any more, is reapidly becoming more and more blurred, and it's really more of an impossible-to-qulaify tambre thing at this point. aka "i know rock music when i hear it"

JJ-

a song i forgot about - "kittypants" -- of excellent italian greyhound just popped up on shuffle and it's pretty awesome

Given what "rock fan" is getting whittled down here, album of the decade is Guitar Hero.

actually that's prolly the real answer

I made a playlist of stuff by Spoon, QOTSA, White Stripes, YYYs, Interpol and The Strokes to play on random. Since I only have albums since 2004 on my work computer, and I hadn't really played the later Interpol and Strokes stuff much, it's kind of fun to hear those cuts now. It's a tricky craft in the 00s, making simple rock albums that don't sound stale. I was disappointed by a lot of those at the time, but I guess I've been in the mood for 'em. The new Rakes kind of scratches that itch too.

Nice to see a lot of mentions for Black One - a record that ripped my head inside out and took me to places I wouldn't have thought of going to otherwise. But no way an "everyone can agree on" LP, anymore than key efforts from the Velvets, Stooges etc. would have been 5-10 years after their release.

Fuck the whole idea of a canon anyhow.

canon happens while u sleep

Oh yeah, it happens. Doesn't make a bit of difference to what I like, though.

what is critically acclaimed and what tops magazine polls is a very very very tiny proportion of what you'd have to take into account when working out what THE CANONICAL CHOICE IS of people who self-identify as rock fans

I disagree. Canons aren't formed in vacuums. People's conception of albums as not just good and cool but indeed "classic" and "canonical" is in large measure mediated by things like magazine lists, radio polls, etc. I'm not talking about hipster music-nerd publications or even high-profile sites like Pitchfork, but if "rock fans" (sort of a caricature on this thread, but I'll go along with it) are even bothering to think about things like canons, then they're surely going to be influenced by what a mainstream, rock-oriented pub like Rolling Stone has to say.

Rock albums from the '00s that appeared in Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All-Time list from November 2003:

316. No Doubt, Rock Steady (arguably a pop album but from a band that was at one time considered rock)
367. The Strokes, Is This It
390. White Stripes, Elephant
428. Radiohead, Kid A
432. Peter Wolf, Sleepless (obviously the wild card here)
440. Beck, Sea Change
467. Bob Dylan, Love and Theft
473. Coldplay, A Rush of Blood to the Head

Also, fwiw, non-compilation rock albums from the '00s that appeared on Time magazine's list of the 100 greatest albums of all-time, 2006:

PJ Harvey, Stories from the City, Stories from the Sea
Radiohead, Kid A

huh. has anyone heard that peter wolf album??

I think Jann Wenner just has a crush on him or something.

yeah, i accidentally left beck off that list of decade-defining rock reckords (along with the probably more relevant LCDSS). tho beck is more a 90s-defining kinda guy, sea change is a good call, esp as it anticipates the gentling of indie over the next 7 years. pj harvey seems even more "of 90s" than beck, but stories from the city... deserves a nod.

The RS list did come out right before the mainstreaming of indie rock, though: I'd be curious to see whether something like Funeral would make the list were they to do it again in 2009.

Can I just say that it's really gay for people to come on this thread talking about how stupid this thread is? You only get to do this once every ten years for crying out loud. And aren't most of you friggin music critics? For the love of God people...

Now that I got that off my chest, let me add to my comprehensive list of best rock albums of the decade, or at least the ones that will place in the top 20 of lists read by "rock fans."

The Strokes: Is This It
Bob Dylan: Love and Theft
Radiohead: Kid A
Emimen: Marshall Mathers LP
Green Day: American Idiot
Outkast: Either Stankonia or Speakerboxxx
White Stripes: Elephant (should be White Blood Cells)
MIA: Kala
Kanye West: Late Registration
Sufjan Stevens: Illinois
The Shins: Chutes Too Narrow
TV On The Radio: Dear Science
Coldplay: A Rush Of Blood...
Arcade Fire: Funeral
U2: All That You Can't Leave Behind
Robert Plant Alison Krauss: Raising Sand
My Morning Jacket: Z
Fountains of Wayne: Welcome Interstate Managers
Ryan Adams: Gold
Bright Eyes: Lifted...
Queens Of The Stone Age: Songs For The Deaf

Super Sleeper Picks:
Joe Strummer: Global A Go Go
Broken Social Scene: You Forgot It In People
Neko Case: Fox Confessor
Primal Scream: XTRMN8TR
New Pornographers: Electric Version (should be Mass Romantic)
Libertines: Up The Bracket

Kornrulez6969's short list of the best 2000s albums you haven't heard but should...

The Glands: The Glands
The Mendoza Line: Lost In Revelry

Emimen: Marshall Mathers LP
MIA: Kala
Kanye West: Late Registration

i honestly don't mean to appear dense, but who would consider these 'rock' albums? isn't this conflating pop and rock? i'm sure this has been discussed already but i can't be fucked to read everything here

A friend just mentioned The Glands album in one of those 15 albums that changed your life lists on Facebook today. Now Kornrulz6969. It's $4.99 at Reckless, just a block out of my way before I get to the train. It's a sign.

i'm okay with what korn is doing, but share k3vin's scepticism. i'd conceived of this as "what ROCK albums will make the rock canon?" that's a narrow way to frame it, but it does force us to draw weird (and potentially interesting) lines in the sand

korn's version is way more simple: "what albums will make the rock canon?" but maybe it's too broad, too simple? looked at on those terms, the list oughtta be FULL of hip-hop and stuff like daft punk & c. at which point it becomes just another generic "best of the decade" list

i like the narrow, rockist focus on "rock albums only!", in part because it gives us a chance to reconsider what that might mean -- (hopefully) without getting all gross about it

ITS GOING TO BE FUCKING KID A WHY ARE YOU PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT SUNNO)))

cuz single ablum = estupido, and this is more challenging

glad to see Love & Theft get a nod; Modern Times is deserving as well.
the rockist elite will no doubt laugh at my Conor Oberst (s/t) obsession - he's a bloody visionary.
and Drive-by Truckers'-brighter than creations dark
and the wrens- meadowlands are VERY special, imo
Kid A is alright background music, but that's about all the time i have for it - it kinda bores me to sit and listen to; while the wrens on the other hand make me wanna curl up with the lyrics with headphones on

are you talking about waht you like, oar are you talking about TEH CANON?

guess i'm saying that in a perfect world dbt's would be agreed upon- i sure think that record is worthy

I'm not convinced about Kid A. First, I really have trouble thinking of it as a rock album (any more than the Eminem album is a rock album). And I just don't agree that Kid A has the kind of broad, unifying appeal that Whiney claims it to. I guess I'm basing that largely just on personal experience (even with 'rock listeners' who like the older Radiohead stuff). Maybe if there was more than one big single off it, I'd be more convinced. American Idiot seems reasonable and I see the case for Elephant, even Coldplay.

i stand by kid a (as one of the few, though not as THE ONE) largely on the strength of the radiohead art-myth. they've got every other band in the world beat at the "getting people to say our music is important" game. big part of canomization

The REAL album of the decade, rock or otherwise, is Quebec by Ween.

Wait, so nobody's mentioned Yankee Hotel Foxtrot yet? (Really though, I'd say the most sensible nomination on the thread is probably American Idiot. And I don't like that one, either.)

Return to Cookie Mountain?
Yankee Hotel Foxtrot?

Oh wait.. to "rock fans.."

In that case, no.. with extra "no" emphasis on the 2nd half of the decade.

― billstevejim, Monday, 16 February 2009 22:58 (3 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Return to Sucky Mountain?

Yankee Hotel Sucktrot?

― ilxor, Monday, 16 February 2009 23:55 (3 days ago) Bookmark

I really like YHF, fwiw.

Actually prefer Kid A to American Idiot as music, believe it or not. But one inevitable problem with Kid A -- not gonna read the whole thread to see if anybody's mentioned this; somebody probably did -- is that it will always be a followup album. And yeah, I like it more than OK Computer, too.) (American Idiot is only a followup album to Dookie if London Calling was a followup album to The Clash.)

Problem with White Stripes -- who I like more than Radiohead or Green Day, but who cares -- is that they have way too many '00s albums that people care about, so they'd split their votes.

plus kid a does so many other decade-defining things: mainstreams a distinctly "indie" sensibility (fragile, sentimental, childlike/ish, self-loathing, comfort-seeking), ignores boundaries between rock & pop & elecrowhatever, gets psychedelic as all hell, relentlessly futurist.

can't see many of the other records serving so well as a metaphor for and statement about the times. white stripes = too reactionary (in the proud tradition of garage rock). coldplay too watered down. american idiot's probably in the running, but i don't hear anything quite as game-changing in it.

The Glands album ....It's a sign.

Holy mackerel, you are in for a treat. Seriously, you have no idea. Get it and let me know what you think. It's completely retarded that nobody knows who they were. SO good.

Outdoor Miner seems to have my exact taste in music. Conor Oberst made the best record of 2008. And The Wrens Meadowlands is in my top 5 of the 2000s. But they'e too obscure to figure in any meaningful way on big end-of-decade lists. You should hear The Glands too.

I still don't consider the one on top a "rock" album, but otherwise:
http://rateyourmusic.com/customchart?page=1&chart_type=top&type=album&year=2000s&genre_include=1&genres=rock&include_child_genres=t&include=both&origin_countries=&limit=none&countries=

A bit too much metal there (typical RYM). This is the same chart without child genres:
http://rateyourmusic.com/customchart?page=1&chart_type=top&type=album&year=2000s&genre_include=1&genres=rock&include=both&origin_countries=&limit=none&countries=

And well.. Still not good. They should have had an opportunity to only include albums that have been rated by at least 1000 people.

I'm halfway through The Glands. It's like a dreamier Game Theory with some Kinks, nice so far.

I'm not convinced about Kid A. First, I really have trouble thinking of it as a rock album (any more than the Eminem album is a rock album). And I just don't agree that Kid A has the kind of broad, unifying appeal that Whiney claims it to. I guess I'm basing that largely just on personal experience (even with 'rock listeners' who like the older Radiohead stuff). Maybe if there was more than one big single off it, I'd be more convinced. American Idiot seems reasonable and I see the case for Elephant, even Coldplay.

― Sundar, Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:19 PM (2 hours ago)

come on.

leave me alone.. this question was stupid to begin with. the 00's contained far too many rock subgenres for "rock fans" to agree on anything. (probably xpost since this is a fairly obvious statement)

that said.. although it's not strictly a rock record, every last "rock fan" i know enjoys kid a.

TBH, I was thinking of The Eminem Show when I posted that.

This kind of blows my mind:

every last "rock fan" i know enjoys kid a.

Not even every mainstream rock critic enjoyed it!

attempt to come up with THEE answer to dom's question isn't worth the trouble. kid a is a good suggestion, that's all - something that probly oughtta be on the list somewhere. taking it much farther than that seems silly. i'm guessing that it'll be seen as one of the definitive new century records a few decades down the road, but that's just my shot in the dark

sundar OTM, though. i've known some rock pplz to sneer at radiohead/ kid a

Not even every mainstream rock critic enjoyed it!

I didn't say it was universally beloved..

dudes i do not know how many times i have to repeat this, but there is a huge backlash against kid a among average "rock dudes". the repeated DUH IT IS OBVIOUSLY KID A SHUT UP on this thread is either A) amusing trolling B) completely insane or C) people that imagine rock in a critical vacuum in which the titular "rock fans" aren't allowed to vote.

it is the radiohead album i like most, but the general rock dude public couldn't give a fuck about it, srsly.

Yes this is true.. Kid Rock, for example, stated his opinions about Kid A very loudly, which echoed what many fans of more "traditional" rock were feeling at the time.. but there are also people who dislike any band. There are lots people who hate The Beatles, who are probably the most beloved group ever. This is why the question is stupid.. there's no such thing as an album that "everyone can agree on.."

However...

Seven Nation Army is certainly the consensus rock song of the decade.

This is severely OTM.

jjj: i think you're being a little presumptive about the "general rock dude public". lazer radiohead @ the science center draws a lot of GRDs. and this isn't about what some universal rock stan hivemind thinks of this or that record, but how the 00s will be logged in the great rock canon of evermore. similar thing, but not exactly the same

dude all i do all day is sell guitars to the "general rock dude public" and i am telling you that the same dudes that voted OK computer as the best guitar album in the guitar world poll about guitar rock in the 90's thought that Kid A was a betrayal of ROCKNESS/ a pile of unlistenable techno shit.

john, (the titular) "canonical" =! what rock dads agree on.

'canon' implies some sort of critical consensus

guitar stores ppl is a significant slice of GRDP, but it aint the whole thing, not by a long shot. and the narrow-minded loudmouth jerk skew factor is CRAZY high. i mean, use a "cool" indie rock record store as the other end of the spectrum, stick a pin somewhere in the middle, and i think that's probably as fair a picture as yr. gonna get.

that said, i think it's a mistake to narrow the canon to critical consensus and nothing else. critics howling in a vacuum about stuff no one else cares about tend to be marginalized. critics are one element, super-die hard geeks (especially musicians) are another, and the general public is a third.

truth be told, i think the average rock listener dude thinks of "Kid A" as a misstep. and even i, who thinks it is a perfectly good album, dont really think of it in a "rock" context. it might be a top 50 of the decade contender for albums in general, but "the rock album of the decade"? no chance.

not rock enough is a valid objection, but i don't know how universal it is. to purists, sure. to less conservative types, not so much.

plus i still think yr narrowing GRDP down to too narrow a strawman. that dude exists, sure, but he isn't a fair picture of "rock fans" in general.

i mean, i think kid a and other, similar (and dissimilar) records have done a lot over the late 90s and 00s to broaden the definition of rock. maybe i'm wrong...

dude, using actual people that i talk to as an example is the exact opposite of strawmanning. calling it "what rock dads agree on." and "the narrow-minded loudmouth jerk skew factor" is straw man 101.

also i think the whole idea of broadening the definition of rock implies a certain bias towards the results you are looking for.

agreed taht "narrow-minded jerk loudmouth" was a cruel strawman. but i calls em as i sees em. if the people yr. talking about are super open-minded, gentle and thoughtful in how they construct and deconstruct "rock", lemme know. strawman i was objecting to is the reduction of rock fans to the guitar store crowd. that demo is a legit and often vocal subset of rock fans, but they are not by any means the whole deal.

not sure about that last point. looking at the 00s, completely independent of gaydioheads, i see a broadening and intermingling of scenes and sounds -- this becoming super apparent only in the last few years.

that's not an attempt to open the door for kid a, just an observation based on what seems to be going on

agreed taht "narrow-minded jerk loudmouth" was a cruel strawman. but i calls em as i sees em. if the people yr. talking about are super open-minded, gentle and thoughtful in how they construct and deconstruct "rock", lemme know.

you are still strawmanning though, creating a not open-minded, ungentle, unthoughtful group of people that are incapable of "deconstructing" rock that fail to see "Kid A" as a rock album. all i am saying is that i know lots of regular joe strawman style rock dudes that couldn't give a fuck about kid a, and i know a lot of music-critic big ear strawman dudes that think "Kid A" is shit hot awesome, but because it is a "important album" not an "important rock album".

I read two thirds of this thread and my eyes went blurry, so I say

Actually, I'd probably say "Hybrid Theory" by Linkin Park.

― kingkongvsgodzilla, Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:09 AM

jjj: i admit the strawmanning, somewhat regretfully. but i've spent enough time in & around guitar stores to have opinions, as you do. i'm a way overcommitted rock geek, but guitar store dudes (this unfair generalization i've formed based on experiences & interactions, good & bad) aren't exactly my tribe. some are, some aren't, and i don't mean any of this personally. same goes music-critic big ear strawman dudes, though, yeah, i stray more in that direction.

that said, i realize i've said some dickish shit here, esp in that post you just quoted. regretted it as soon as i hit submit. i have this concept that NOT ALL but a fair contingent of guitar store dudes and guitar magazine voters are sort of proud to be somewhat narrow-minded in defense of rock. this may be bullshit, but it's this impression i've gathered. what i'm observing & describing has nothing to do with intelligence or capacity or any of that shit: it's a shared vision, an ethos. rock doesn't need to be "constructed or deconstructed". it just IS. shit either is or isn't rock. metalheads stray in this direction, too, and the metalhead/guitar store crossover is huge. or seems to be (again, my impression only)

in using non-rock language like "gentle and thoughful" i was kinda trying to poke wink-wink holes in my own strawman, for lols. guess that didn't come across.

lol louis and DJ, yeah i could sit here and post shit off like the first blind shake record and all this other obscure shit i like but they are not going to be canonized.

― Yo, I just copped dat brand new Manity Kane cd. (M@tt He1ges0n), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:13 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i know what you did last nite...

mommy, how iz cannon formed?

what iz rawk?

this man may have an answer:

http://www.dickdestiny.com/arroganceblog.jpg

the whole rock-or-unrock question is b.s. to begin with: suicde is rock bcz it was influenced by rockabilly but soft cell isnt rock bcz it was influenced by suicide?

also i know whole swathes of diehard rockists that consider white stripes as indie scum...and this is in michigan, mind you...and quite a few who can't stand kid rock or linkin park or nickelback. they might like kid a if they listened to it, just bcz of how trippy it is, but maybe not...

(kid a was more in league with the college-stoner crowds I encountered...not so much the diehard grunge leftovers I hung out with in high school & after dropping out of college...)

'in league' is a poor word choice there...i meant something more along the lines of 'catered to'

but that's neither here nor there, bcz what this thread really allows me to do is to plug some of my favourite albums of the decade...

here's two more with rock signifiers that I really like:

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h279/juicyfrt/51Syp8o1r8L__SL500_AA280_.jpg

this one is fantastic; might make my top 10

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h279/juicyfrt/51qWzsTPOdL__SL500_AA280_.jpg

this one not quite as great, but still lots of fun...

also I think Chuck is otm wr2 White Stripes having so many albums so as to split the competition (I wd vote for de Stijl (plus awes non album covers like Jolene and Party of Special Things to Do!)) though I think as a whole Elephant has much more chance making top 5 lists than Is This It? (or the Marshall Mathers LP, which will scare & shame critics with its rampant alleged misogyny-homophobia into placing it lower than prolley wd have been expected say eight years ago...)

love secret wars, not as much as each one teach one, but luv still = luv

each one teach one is another on the to-get list (if only a bit farther down), but "winter shaker"....damn.

oh damn that clinic album is so good

honest answer? there isn't one cause Jack White never bothered to manufacture one. that said, my money's on Marshall Mathers.

xps

nice mekons-ish cover on that Oneida disc.

the whole rock-or-unrock question is b.s. to begin with: suicde is rock bcz it was influenced by rockabilly but soft cell isnt rock bcz it was influenced by suicide?

yeah it IS b.s. but it's b.s. that's true.

like i can't give you some smart guy answer, all reasoned out, why suicide is rock and soft cell isn't...but it's just a fact. like it's cold outside or it's not. or it's raining or not.

^ more inclined to side w this than the "bends is rock but kid a is not" argument. rock, like metal, isn't strictly a matter of sound/instrumentation. it's a culture as much as anything else

which is a not-terribly-smart, half-reasoned answer. soft cell weren't "of rock". that's not where they were coming from, who they were speaking to, or what they were talking about. kraftwerk sit somewhere in the middle.

I think the biggest issue in this thread is whether "rock fans" means "average guitar-store rock dudes" or merely "rockists."

and I can agree with that...Suicide brought certain aspects of rock into Silver Apples-type minimalist-techno,a nd then Soft Cell took it out (replacing it with Motown prhaps?) so Soft Cell consciously veered away from what Vega & Rev were doing in that sense...but it gets very very amorphous when you try to distill the rock from all of its practicioners and turn it into its own sustainable entity...Suicide is unquestionably rock, and so is Amon Duul II, but you take out all the unrock elements of the two bands and get down to their true rock essence and youre still dealing with apples &oranges...you get me?

xpost whats the difference jay?

but you take out all the unrock elements of the two bands and get down to their true rock essence and youre still dealing with apples &oranges...you get me?

yah, 100% i wanted to 2nd guess myself on the "rock is a culture" bit for exactly that reason. it's more like a bunch of cultures - sometimes cooperative, sometimes hostile - loosely grouped under a very tattered banner. which makes it easy to sort out in a fuzzy logic sort of way, but hard to nail down foursquare once and for all.

xpost

average guitar store rock dudes don't waste this much time thinking about whether or not soft cell was rock or not?

AGSRD, what's on yr ipod?

don't need a weather man to tell who's a eurodisco fag, don't follow leaders, watch your parking meters, etc etc

http://konsyenz.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/hoobastank-the-reason.jpg

Major LOLs at the Hoobastank album cover.

note: UK magazine Classic Rock listed Linkin Park's Hybrid Theory at #72 on its 100 greatest rock albums of all time list

xpost I think that there is a certain element of condescension implicit in thinking that the "average stoner rock dude"'s tastes are not the result of the same deliberate choices that any self-respecting aesthete has to make, and speaking of 'rockism' and my admitted hair-splitting in derogatory tones is a half-successful attempt in hiding that condescension...

and while Hoobastank makes a great punchline I think its off the mark in a way that only reinforces my opinion...there isn't that many average stoner rock dudes jamming out to "The Reason"...

^i wouldn't argue with that at all.

there's a certain amount of condescension implicit in posting on this messageboard really.

(also average guitar STORE dudes vs. average stoner rock dudes is different camps IMO)

xpost i'm actually going to retract this statement, as I am not as much up for debating this point as I thought I was...um just because some people read mags and blogs and buys weird music bcz of that, and other people are satisfied with listening to what they encounter on the radio, doesn't mean that anybody is snobz...

as far as condescension = ILM..I certainly have had moments where I comport myself as being God's gift to rockcriticism...

xpost whats the difference jay?

Guitar-store dudes are a subset of rockists. This question is more interesting to me if we're talking about rockists as a whole, and especially those who are actually in the business of canon building -- like Rolling Stone and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame -- rather than some strawman who frequents guitar stores and listens exclusively to rock radio. I'm less interested in which Tool or QOTSA album that sort of person likes best and more in what this decade's Nevermind or OK Computer is going to turn out to be on an greatest-albums-of-all-time list in 2020.

(also average guitar STORE dudes vs. average stoner rock dudes is different camps IMO)

and this is very much close to what I wz saying as far as some of my friends think White Stripes as arty fagz....

oh so Jay ur taking the thread srsly then?

1 Kid A
2 Speakerboxx/Love Below
3 Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
4 Elephant
5 some MIA album

dark horse: Silent Shout

i've been condescending as hell on this thred (plus aspie, reactionary, etc), but it's hard not to be when yr geeking out. who the fuck listens to hoobastank? agree that the distinction m@tt's making -- gtr store dudez vs. stonar rock dudez -- is worth observing, tho it's a mighty fine beard-hair to split

actually more interesting question: is it bcz theyre rock albums that OK & Nevermind are era-defining? is there something inherently rockist about defining a decade with a couple of albums? (well, duh) see it seems that...

Ok & Nevermind: Albums of the 90s = I love the 90s = tacky nostalgia =popism? (tho I wdnt know fer sure what that word means)

(ps i'm totally bluffing about The Knife...I havent heard it...I told you I dropped off the face for a minute...)

I don't think I know any average stoner rock dudes my age tbh unless you count the kids who still listen to Dave Matthews Band

Albums of the 90s = I love the 90s

This connection seems weak. Part of their canonical status derives from the fact that they're considered "timeless," whereas I Love the '90s suggests a "lol 90s" attitude toward something.

contenderizer uve been saying lots of good stuff. my main point wz that the choices one makes in order to become a rockist and in order to become an average rock fan are parallel to the point of being nearly identical, save that option #1 involves more reading and opinions and stuff...why shouldnt average stoner dudes be rockists? that was all i was saying...

yeah but making them rep for a decade works against their canon timelessness

(xpost to jay)

even though I am a college-age male rock fan I am totally out of touch with what the average college-age male rock fan listens to. my friends all listen to different things it seems like.

1 Kid A
2 Speakerboxx/Love Below
3 Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
4 Elephant
5 some MIA album

dark horse: Silent Shout

― Drugs A. Money

serious? cuz one of the fun things about this thread is trying to draw (or vaguely imply) some totally indefensible line in the sand between "rock albums, specifically" and the larger pop context that those so-called rock albums occur in. the fact that this game is impossible but can still be played is the challenging, interesting part.

i say that cuz i think what yr. doing is more like listing a big tent pazz/jop canon, with some radio rockist emphasis, rolling stone style. a much less tricky prospect, and on that level i'm with you. throw in the marshall mathers LP, discovery, rock steady, maybe a WTF drone metal album for texture, et voila.

BUT WHAT R THE ROCK RECORDS? (check the guy's rock record)

yeah but making them rep for a decade works against their canon timelessness

Well, there's a difference between "best album of the decade" vs. "album most representative of the decade." I guess I thought we were talking primarily about the former.

the choices one makes in order to become a rockist and in order to become an average rock fan are parallel to the point of being nearly identical, save that option #1 involves more reading and opinions and stuff.

Sure, but what it comes down to for me is whether we're trying to identify this decade's Nevermind or this decade's Dirt.

jay was talking abt canon...right now tha top 5 list is what i thought was most likely to go canon...for the most part all I've been trying to do is find cool maybe-overlooked rock records and building up some buzz for them for the inevitable end-of-decade poll, lest they get forgotten...i've been dropping hints of making a end-of-decade list around these parts for a little while now; i'm wondering if Dom wasnt taking the piss out of me when he fired up this lulzthread...

is there something inherently rockist about defining a decade with a couple of albums?

― Drugs A. Money

not necessarily. what i've been doing here is trying to suss out (project, imagine) what ppl a few years/decades down the line will think of the 00s, think of "rock", think of the relationship btwn the 2, and how they'll solidify those conceptions in a canon. it's not a totally imaginary enterprise, cuz you can see the groundwork for future understandings being laid in the now.

that's why i've been trying to maintain some kind of critical distance, to de-emphasize what i think the decade "should" be remembered for (what it would be remembered for if everybody was as smart & perspicacitated as me), and to concentrate instead on observable history-creep.

also jay: lotsa Dirt fans are Nevermind fans (and vice versa; Dirt's a pretty good record*)

*(tho I'm wondering if its a pop record; it gets by mainly on its radio-ready singles...)

contenderizer you might be right...sry if most of my rock-isnt-a-word bs rhetoric is sucking the fun out of the thread...

I remember in 2001 VH1 was all like "Creed: the future of rock???"

The death knell of being able to answer this question honestly must have come well before OK Computer cos that record is okay at best and it's still considered a touchstone

Well, there's a difference between "best album of the decade" vs. "album most representative of the decade. I guess I thought we were talking primarily about the former.

― jaymc

see, i'm coming at this from a very different direction. although it's relevant, i'm not talking about or the former AT ALL. i'm sort of talking about the latter, but primarily in terms of how "the canon" will conceptualize the decade, influencing the selection of represeners. in making my case for kid A, i leaned heavily on why i think it's representative -- but i did this only to suggest that this built-in representativeness gives it a leg up in the canonization process.

I remember in 2001 VH1 was all like "Creed: the future of rock???"

― on some charter shit no doubt (Curt1s Stephens), Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:40 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

no they werent

vidz or it didnt happen

the list contenderizer posted earlier is pretty OTM - think viva la vida prob belongs on there too

maybe it was 2000

also jay: lotsa Dirt fans are Nevermind fans (and vice versa; Dirt's a pretty good record*)

Oh, no doubt. I'm not claiming these are separate groups, nor even implying anything about the quality of each record, just that one is canonized and the other isn't, for better or worse.

I don't remember exactly what was said but I remember the words "future of rock music" were spoken over a vid of Scott Stapp in full-on Christ mode soaring over the crowd with 3d revolving camera effects and dramatic guitar wranglin'

damn I'm actually getting nostalgic for those early '00s music video gimmicks now

I'm not claiming these are separate groups, nor even implying anything about the quality of each record, just that one is canonized and the other isn't, for better or worse.

― jaymc

not so sure about that. in the overall critical canon, nirvana shines from on high, but in the more contentious rockist trenches, the difference between the two isn't quite as vast.

to put my last post another way, i'm talking about the "best of the decade" and "representative of the decade" as though they're two sides of the same coin. dirt and nevermind have both been canonized, though in different ways.

knee-jerk "yr talkin bout ROCK lolz" thing is weird

but jay did Nevermind only gain access to the rockist canon? I know it's kind of unhip right now to namedrop Nirvana, but certainly their contributions to popular music have been universally acknowledged at least?

or do rockists not like Dirt? is that what ur saying?

knee-jerk "yr talkin bout ROCK lolz" thing is weird

me?

Honestly I think Coldplay are probably the band we're looking for here even if I & other ppl here aren't fans.

no, not u, drugz. just something that's come up here and there on the thread

yeah, Kid A is so representative that it couldn't even win the P&J poll in its year of release.

oh yeah I guess Kid A would probably work too wouldn't it

Collision Course - Linkin Park and Jay-Z

coldplay are a risky call, cuz they not only piss off the die-hards & rockists, they don't enjoy a great deal of critical respect. plus the UK/US divide is pronounced. and again, i think bands that can't manage to establish auras of art/crit-holiness around their work are rarely canonized. this is why nirvana tend to ace out AIC. coldplay don't even get junk-pain cred points.

yeah, Kid A is so representative that it couldn't even win the P&J poll in its year of release.

― Ioannis

kid A is and was divisive. i'm not saying it's THE RECORD OF THE 00s, but i have the feeling that even its divisiveness will only add to its cred in the long run

didn't read thread, but if one were to argue that Nevermind is the canonical rock album of the 90s, I suppose a case could be made for one of the White Stripes' big sellers? Elephant? I'm guessing it doesn't come near the stratospheric numbers that Nevermind did, but I imagine "rock" doesn't move the units it did 15 years ago, either.

the properties of Kid A seem to have been taken by the greater rockcrit mass (pop is a music; rock is a body of criticism) as a sort of guideline of what interesting music sounded like this decade...its relentlesly futurist technological impulse meant that most of the beloved indie albums of the decade would at least dabble in electrodrizzle*...its strains of anti-music, and anti-song would lend artistic currency to all different types of experimentation in noise and formlessness...hell, it could be said that its lingering devotion to anthemic rock prolley managed to leave a niche for bands like The Killers to attain quasi-cool status, plus Radiohead leaving rock behind meant that Coldplay could sell 5 million albums...

I imagine people could call bullshit on every point i made, and its true...Kid A prolley did not make electronica or noise cool. it's bcz I'm kind of a rock fan that I dont know this, but I do imagine that 95% of the population is at least as ignorant as me, so I imagine that theres a lot of people out there to whom Kid A acted as a way into the decade...

most of the beloved indie albums of the decade would at least dabble in electrodrizzle

^^ pretty questionable premise imo

prolley; I'm groping for something but I don't think I nailed it in that post

i LOVE elephant, and it seems like one of the few big rock records of the 00s that held up WR2 critical respect and popular attention. plus it is undeniably a ROCK RECORD -- very formalist and even reactionary in its rockist agenda and respect for the canon.

but there are a lot of ways that it just isn't nevermind (or nevermind the bollocks). first, it didn't have a profound influence on rock and pop. if anything, it came at the tail end of a blip in interest in retro-formalist rock, capping a small splash with few ripples. second, as you say, it wasn't a MASSIVE hit. just a strong steady seller that got a lot of press attention at the time. finally, it doesn't really articulate a generational POV. it's a great record, but by no means a rallying cry.

EDIT: and i'm totally on board with drugz' claims about radiohead's influence. said pretty much the same thing sometime yesterday. the phrase "most of the beloved indie albums of the decade would at least dabble" is overstated, but still conveys a useful truth about what's going on now and how radiohead (and beck, and teh flaming lips, and lots of others) laid the groundwork.

kid a does a much better job of satisfying these last 3 demands. it was more influential, a bigger hit, and it seemed to speak as the emotional voice of its moment.

i dont really like Elephant

weird. stuck my "EDIT" in the middle of the post. last paragraph was sposed to come before the one preceding.

to restate: you did nail it, drugz. only problem is that u hyperbolized a bit. and not liking elephant is cool. i'm a garage rock stan from way back, and was so totally on board with the white stripes at that point that they could do no wrong. the fact that they managed to crank out "seven nation army" in the process sealed the deal forever

yeah i like garage rock a lot too...BIG Dirtbombs fan...like a bunch of White Stripes records just not that one...

If Nevermind is the canonical choice of the 90s, what would be the record of the 80s?

Or put in a slightly different way, do we expect every decade to have a single album that has a huge galvanizing effect on the music world the way Nevermind did?

daydream nation?

dare?

VH MCMLXXXIV

eh?

rly?

maybe the 80s were a different world

idk :-/

Thrillerz??

some might not want to call it "rock" butit did huge numbers, had EVH, and sort of legitimaized (?) video & pop/rock synergism?? That's pretty fuckin 80s..

maybe i prefer purple rain

^^ good case could be made

moodles: NO. expecting every decade to boil down to THE RECORD is foolish, and the OG thread question is fucked. we're much better off talking about trends and "what is rock lol", putting together groups of albums that represent in different ways.

i posted a top 10 list yesterday, but i'm thinking that it doesn't pay enough attention to the beardy/saddo mostly-west-coast US indie thing that's really taken off over the last five years. not sure how to shorthand that. i'm thinking maybe sufjan stevens' illinois is the spokesmodel for a whole bunch of stuff, including that, though it seems a counterintuitive pick (not west coast, not beardy, sorta un-rock)

My question about the 80s was kind of goofy anyway since I immediately thought of about a dozen records that all had huge impacts on the rock world.

I think it may be safe to say that as time goes on, these huge landscape-altering records become fewer and farther between.

thriller & purple rain are good 80s picks. so are appetite for destruction & shout at the devil. daydream nation & surfer rosa. closer? pornography & disintegration? madonna LP (not rock?)

again, lists are the way to go

80s "rock" - Appetite for Destruction, The Joshua Tree or (gulp) Money For Nothing

most of the beloved indie albums of the decade would at least dabble in electrodrizzle

^^ pretty questionable premise imo

― LMA.O. Scott (some dude), Thursday, February 19, 2009 2:14 PM (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^^this^^^

the most electrodrizzly most white folks/indie heads i know tend to get is gorillaz + teh postal service

maybe this is just a southern thing but in the car with indie kids ur still likelier to hear 2pac or mf doom than anything blog-housey

If Nevermind is the canonical choice of the 90s, what would be the record of the 80s?

Using the criteria as I understand it for this thread, maybe: Bruce Springsteen, Born In The USA; Guns and Roses, Appetite for Destruction; U2, The Joshua Tree; Police, Synchronicity; Van Halen, 1984; Bon Jovi, Slippery When Wet; or Def Leppard, Pyromania.

These aren't the best rock discs of the 1980s, but that isn't the question.

probly joshua tree imo

I asked a bunch of rock fans this question and the best answer I got was "Origin of Symetry", which has to be wrong.

― Ringtone bisexual bible shower (The stickman from the hilarious xkcd comics), Monday, 16 February 2009 19:32 (3 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

This is probably right.

although, true, it's spelled wrong...

these huge landscape-altering records become fewer and farther between

dunno about that. i think music people are more balkanized, so they're less aware of how the landcape outside their niche is being altered. think there have been tons of big, game-changing records in the 00s. maybe not so many big rock records though...

electrodrizzly most white folks/indie heads i know tend to get is gorillaz + teh postal service

― harry s tfuman

but, see, that shit is EXACTLY what i meant by "electrodribble" in the 1st place. plus kid a, and yoshimi battles the pink, and whatever beck record, and looper, and (more distantly) all that gross indie dance shit everybody loves to hate.

80s "rock" - Appetite for Destruction, The Joshua Tree or (gulp) Money For Nothing

It's called Brothers in Arms, idiot. 'Born in the USA' is the right answer for the 80s anyway

Drugs A. Money, I wonder if you are misunderstanding what I mean by "rockism," a term I'm already regretting bringing up. The "overall critical canon" -- as exemplified by the Rolling Stone 500-best albums list -- is, for all intents and purposes, a rockist canon. The very impulse to canonize is, as you yourself suggest upthread, a rockist one. Rockists could find something to like about both Nirvana and Alice in Chains, since both bands "kept it real" to some degree. But I'd argue that the ones who would champion Alice in Chains alongside Nirvana are a minority group within the larger rockist community.

Let's look at it this way. Albums that wind up being canonized by Rolling Stone are typically praised by both critics and fans: rarely will you find an album on the list that hasn't done decent sales, unless it has some great mythology behind it or is considered extremely influential. Nevermind is the rare album that critics loved, fans bought by the millions, and it was seen as a milestone in the lineage of rock history. Its place in the "overall critical canon" is thus secure. Dirt, while a very good record that had multi-platinum sales at the time, simply didn't have the same degree of critical support. And while you can make a good argument that it was wildly influential -- plenty of grunge and post-grunge bands borrowed from the Alice in Chains template -- the album's reputation after its initial mainstream success lay mostly among these Average Rock Dudes we've been talking about. 35-year-olds are still putting "Rooster" on the jukebox, but 19-year-olds aren't buying it like they are old Nirvana records.

Appetite & Joshua TRee, yep... I'm trying to think of things that did hueg numbers, made lots of top ten lists but like, even little kids were totally in to.

xxxxpost Daniel ESQ's list looks pretty good

(and buy top 10 lists, i mean P&J and the like, not just Spin and RS)

35-year-olds are still putting "Rooster" on the jukebox, but 19-year-olds aren't buying it like they are old Nirvana records.

^^also v. important

HYSTERIA?...SLIPPERY WHEN WET???????

Bruce Springsteen, Born In The USA; Guns and Roses, Appetite for Destruction; U2, The Joshua Tree; Police, Synchronicity; Van Halen, 1984; Bon Jovi, Slippery When Wet; or Def Leppard, Pyromania

this this this this this. some of that is THE CANON, some of it ain't, but it's a big part of how we remember the 80s. plus speaking in tongues, freedom of choice, plus the other stuff i said before, etc.

overlooks THE CANON though, and the way we set up weird moats between the "important" and the not.

i'm not convinced kids are buying old nirvana records...besides that jay i agree with yr post...what does rockism mean though?

hahah well, he had me up through 1984

yeah contenderizer but isnt the canon were talking about pretty much a 90s narrative...? like the SST stuff thats canon (which is what I assume what youre talking about) that we like could pretty much be seen as prequels to Nevermind, does it really have anything to do with the 80s itself?

35-year-olds are still putting "Rooster" on the jukebox, but 19-year-olds aren't buying it like they are old Nirvana records.

― jaymc

is this totally true though? nevermind has become an evergreen classic, selling and selling and selling, like how dark side of the moon hung around the top 100 album charts for over a decade, but i'm not sure that dirt has been cast into the dustbins of h. rather, i think it's become a popular & well-respected cult album (oxymoron alert) among heavy-seeking rockist types -- a strain whose visibility & numbers have risen significantly over the last decade.

HYSTERIA?...SLIPPERY WHEN WET???????

Yeah, I stand by this. I grew up in the 80s (in fact, today's my 41st birthday, making me nostalgic and . . . a little sad, actually), and it's hard to overstate the popular impact of these discs. I can't stand Bon Jovi, FWIW, but Slippery When Wet was a big deal to a lot of kids, and the group seemed to hit that spot between rock-macho and boyish-looks that made them popular with a lot of high school and college girls (other bands did this, too, but Bon Jovi was a big success with a long track record of charting hits). And Pyromania was an even bigger hit, and I think has gained stature among critics in the years since it was released. Hysteria is a sort-of good album, but as someone said upthread, it was "the follow-up."

i dunno, i think pyromania was big, but hysteria sold way more and was HUGE for like 4 years...there's only like 2 or 3 songs off that album that weren't singles

80s stuff was very relevant to the 80s, but only if you were there ;)

i mean, "the canon" is an old narrative, though an everchanging one. a lot of the push-pull in the 80s had to do with how all this new shit (punk, post-punk, new wave, hardcore, hair metal, synthpop, prince & MJ) related to then well established 60s/70s rolling stone "rock importance" canon.

that last to drugz

True. It's still always been "the follow-up" to me.

(xp to Matt)

i'm not convinced kids are buying old nirvana records

Well, kids aren't buying anything anymore, to be fair.

hysteria is good-call 80s record, but mentioning it seems wilfully perverse, given that this whole discussion is framed by the canon, thus critical respect, myths regarding artistic quality & importance, etc.

master of puppets

what i'm saying though is inside the 00s as we still are, at least you & I can agree that Kid A is the most significant album, and we prolley coul have said the same thing for Nevermind IN the 90s (though--oddly overlooked on this thread--there are prolley at least 5 albums that are considered more relevant nowadays) but could a lot of the 80s canonical choices be consider all that important IN the 80s, not knowing that Nirvana, Grunge, shoegazer, everything that happened not two years later would drastically change the game?

also, weirdly i've been listening to hysteria a lot lately and to me it's sort of the one place where almost all the trends of the 80s sort of merge into one....hair metal, really produced pop, drum machines, samplers, guitar solos, clean Police style guitar arpegios, crazy vocal harmonies...

it's sort of the reverse of something like avril i mentioned upthread...sort of a hard rock record with pop signifiers

i remember reading in Mojo once that their stated goal was to make the "Thriller of heavy metal" which seems like the ultimate 80s goal.

oh master of puppets is a good point...lol nevermind etc.

00's sucks sucks sucks as far as rock goes. sucks.

hysteria is good-call 80s record, but mentioning it seems wilfully perverse, given that this whole discussion is framed by the canon, thus critical respect, myths regarding artistic quality & importance, etc.

granted I didn't pay all that much attention to reviews when this came out but I have memories of all of the ones I did see being 5-star jizzfests

mak(ing) the "Thriller of heavy metal" (was) like the ultimate 80s goal.

That or having more ménage à trois with mother/daughter combinations than any other hair-metal band.

80s canonical choices be consider all that important IN the 80s, not knowing that Nirvana, Grunge, shoegazer, everything that happened not two years later would drastically change the game?

i see what you mean. no, and yes. 80s were a different era in a lot of ways. in one really important way: development of an indie rock subculture before it became obvious that it was a farm league system. records like damaged, zen arcade, daydream nation, psychocandy, the perfect prescription & c. were regarded as instant-canon classics pretty much from the day of release, but only by critics and within a relatively small circle of "hipster" fans. i suspect that they'd still be held in high regard, even w/out the influence they cast on the likes of MBV & nirvana (though, you know, if things were different, they'd be different).

I have memories of all of the ones I did see being 5-star jizzfests

― HI DERE

i have memories of a LOT of people taking the piss, esp more rockist/hipster types. plus it's not like the succeeding decades have done a lot to burnish the rep. i think it's mostly remembered as a kitschy fun party record, beloved of strippers and people who appreciate irony

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/207338/review/12285422/hysteria

xxxp to contenderizer right...zen arcade, surfer rosa, daydream nation...they're the blessed black wings, and blood inside, and burned mind of their day...

records like damaged, zen arcade, daydream nation, psychocandy, the perfect prescription & c. were regarded as instant-canon classics pretty much from the day of release, but only by critics and within a relatively small circle of "hipster" fans.

this (my words) probably much more true in the US than the UK. pop press (NME/MM) seemed hugely influential in the UK and went apeshit over this stuff. the massive, seemingly unbridgeable gulf between indie-mainstream was more a US thing

xp hey strippers like all kind of music...

what's the oddest song you've seen a stripper dance to?

that's an after-the-fact review from 2006, Dan. i doubt that RS dug it at the time.

here's Xgau's review from back in the day, tho:

Hysteria [Mercury, 1987]
You know about the music, and if you don't think you'll like it you won't: impeccable pop metal of no discernible content, it will inspire active interest only in AOR programmers and the several million addicts of the genre. In short, it's product--but as product, significant, because it's product for the CD age. Stuck with over an hour of material after four years (after all, could twelve songs be any shorter?), they elected to put it all on one disc because as technocrats they instinctively conceive for formats that can accommodate an hour of music: cassettes, which now outsell vinyl discs, and CDs, which outdollar them. The cassette sound is a little too dim, as commercial cassette sound usually is, and though I sometimes find myself preferring the depth of the vinyl once I've turned my amp up to six or seven, the clarity of the CD gets more and more decisive as the needle approaches the outgroove. I mean, I have trouble perceiving these guys as human beings under ideal circumstances. Not docked a notch because at least they didn't pad it into a double. C

lol @ slamming a record by saying it will inspire interest in "only several million people"

i dunno, are "addicts" people?

yeah, i remember reading hysteria reviews in RS, spin, voice (?), bunch of other places. reception was mixed, at best.

edit: pretty much like that xgau bit. catchy, but fake, "sold out", empty. rockist value differentiators very much in play

Well, fwiw, I seem to remember that RS gave Nevermind just 3-stars upon its release.

"Servicable catchy rock" was basically the review.

Well, fwiw, I seem to remember that RS gave Nevermind just 3-stars upon its release.

― Daniel, Esq.

i.e., in-the-moment RS reviews as a poor guide to what will eventually end in the RS canon

the perfect prescription & c. were regarded as instant-canon classics pretty much from the day of release

probably much more true in the US than the UK

Uh, not for those two albums (whatever they are.) And fwiw, U.S. critics hardly went ga-ga over Damaged when it came out either. Mostly, they ignored it.

"of no discernible content" is the part that always kills me.

xxp

Uh, not for those two albums (whatever they are.) And fwiw, U.S. critics hardly went ga-ga over Damaged when it came out either. Mostly, they ignored it.

― xhuxk

think i may have been a little unclear there, xhuxk. my point was that the albums i mentioned were regarded as instant-canon classic within their indie underworlds. that in the US at the time, the divide between indie and mainstream seemed much larger than it did in the UK. so indie-crit sanctification in many cases took time creeping up into the mainstream (or into the long-memory indie semi-mainstream, anyway). damaged and spacemen 3's perfect prescrip being examples.

This question is totally flawed.. "rock fans" has yet to be defined in this thread as it can mean 1 of 100 things. Make the question less vague and you may find your answer.

Origin Of Symmetry might be a good answer for U.K. residents and anglophiles.

why don't we try to define what rock fans does not mean, in the purpose of this thread first?

trying to define "rock fans" is probably a losing game. different fans define the genre differently. what emerges from all those conflicting definitions is some kind of vague, blurry ghost that can't really be pinned down, but exists nonetheless. we've gotta work with the uncertainty.

changed my mind. its without doubt fever to tell.

2000:
relationship of command - at the drive-in
parachutes - coldplay
the white pony - deftones
the sickness - disturbed
veni, vedi, vicious - hives
hybrid theory - linkin park
mad season - matchbox 20
kid a - radiohead
1000 hurts - shellac
all hands on the bad one - sleater kinney

2001:
love and theft - bob dylan
vision creation newsun - boredoms
sinner - drowning pool
gorillaz - gorillaz
origin of symmetry - muse
silver side up - nickelback
rock steady - no doubt
come clean - puddle of mudd
oh, inverted world - shins
break the cycle - staind
is this it - strokes
toxicity - system of a down
lateralus - tool

2002:
source tags and codes - ...and you will know us by the trail of dead
i get wet - andrew WK
beaches and canyons - black dice
yoshimi battles the pink robots - flaming lips
oceanic - isis
neon golden - notwist
songs for the deaf - queens of the stone age
yankee hotel foxtrot - wilco

2003:
transatlanticism - death cab for cutie
a mark, a mission, a brand, a scar - dashboard confessional
kid rock - kid rock
hypermagic mountain - lightning bolt
de-loused in the comatorium - mars volta
sing sing death house - the distillers
the real new fall LP - the fall
elephant - white stripes
fever to tell - yeah yeah yeahs

2004:
sung tongs - animal collective
funeral - arcade fire
crimes - blood brothers
franz ferdinand - franz ferdinand
american idiot - green day
they were wrong, so we drowned - liars
leviathan - mastodon
vol. 3: the subliminal verses - slipknot
burned mind - wolf eyes

2005:
X&Y - coldplay
from under the cork tree - fall out boy
blessed black wings - high on fire
wonderful rainbow - lightning bolt
frances the mute - mars volta
gimme fiction - spoon
black one - sunn0)))
hypnotize - system of a down
standing in the way of control - the gossip
separation sunday - the hold steady

2006:
the warning - hot chip
blood mountain - mastodon
black holes and revelations - muse
the black parade - my chemical romance
pearl jam - pearl jam
10,000 days - tool
return to cookie mountain - tv on the radio

2007:
new wave - against me!
mirrored - battles
pink - boris
infinity on high - fall out boy
in rainbows - radiohead

2008:
saint dymphna - gang gang dance
vampire weekend - vampire weekend
oracular spectacular - MGMT
when the world comes down - all american rejects
pretty. odd - panic at the disco

2009:
merriweather post pavilion - animal collective

just wanted to reiterate how happy these lists make me...

That's a kinda awesome list, dude.

nickelback especially

but i haven't liked nickelback since they were a silverchair/bush rip-off band...

(or at least since their silverchair/bush imitations were a marginal blip on the altrockradio landscape)

No, I totally dig. I was definitely listening to Nickelback in 2001. Of course, I was sixteen at the time, but still. You're missing Evanescence, tho.

wow lol am i older than you Mordy?

only time I thought I might like Evanescence was in that Seether "Broken" video when Amy Lee had that pair of black angel wings...w/o that lingering perv element in my personality Evanescence wd be of zero interest to me...

however contenderizer's inclusion of white pony, toxicity, and hypnotize only serves to reinforce this list's awesomeness

I guess you are! I think I love your list because it almost mirrors my own music listening evolution pretty spot-on. Except it's missing some screamo/emo albums that I was listening to around 18-19 years old (Thursday, Thrice, Coheed + Cambria, etc) and skips directly to Fall Out Boy. Tho you do have Dashboard.

Also, these lists are reminding me of tons of albums I loved, and haven't listened to in awhile. Nostalgia ftw!

To "rock fans", what is meant to be the canonical, everyone can agree on, album of the decade?

There is none.

coheed wd not be too bad in here...

yeah, there's tons of stuff i should have included but spaced on, both shit and shine. 00s decade of rock

whats that coheed song that actually charted a while back?...it sounded kind of like "kashmir", and actually managed to cop some of that song's grandeur, without being crushed by its colossal weight...so thats an accomplishment...

Dave Matthews Band had their big album this decade (Everyday), and if I remember correctly, Dispatch had their big album in 2000? Also, has The Rising been mentioned yet? That seems like a shoe-in for a certain kind of critical rock album list.

Hot Fuss, maybe?

Dave Matthews Band had their big album this decade (Everyday)

What? Under the Table and Dreaming and Crash both sold upwards of 6 million; Everyday sold half that.

Also, I certainly don't travel in jam-band circles, but you're only the second person I've ever heard mention the band Dispatch.

I don't travel in big jam-band circles, but among college-stoners Dispatch has always seemed huge. And you're right. For some reason I blocked out those other DMB albums. I'll admit -- not the hugest college-rock fan.

i skipped the screamo stuff cuz i'm so unfamiliar -- i dunno what's worth a mention. thursday, thrice, taking back sunday? WTF? was kinda into the braid, promise ring, get up kids & hot water music type stuff, but that was late 90s. jimmy eat world bleed american shoulda been on there. maybe cave-in's jupiter. dillinger four? different kinda thing, smaller scale...

and what about coheed? i always wrote em off cuz the whole premise seemed so goofy, but i was listening to some tracks tonight and kinda dug em. goofy as hell, but in a way that reminds me of the rush/BOC sci-fi stuff i used to dork out on as a kid. singer even sounds like geddy. what's the best place to start?

Sadly, the answer is teh chilly pepperz.

sadly, that is some bullshit

If it's RHCP, it's By the Way. Wasn't Californication in the late 90s?

nah

well yeah

but 1999, impact was in the 00s

if yr gonna rope in the late 90s (which seems reasonable), you might as well say the soft bulletin

Or Play? That seems like a precursor for a lot of 00's music (though maybe not 00's "rock" music).

Let's just throw in the first Gay Dad album and be done with it.

Let's just throw in away the first Gay Dad album and be done with it

The more I think about it, the more I think All That You Can't Leave Behind might take this. Or The Rising. Betcha they both show up top 10 on any RS top albums of the decade list.

God, what got worse? ILM or music?

Both are FANT!

^^^ all that you can't leave behind is another that i meant, somewhere in the back of my mind, to include in that decade list, but spaced on. and play's a good 99 suggestion, though more for crossover-to-rock (influence on rock?) than as a rock record. shit, "southside" alone. though it's lower-level, commercially speaking, the self-titled le tigre record is another that seems to have cast a long shadow.

what's the deal with californication though? massive hit, "substantial" in the sense rolling stone likes, but how did it define the 00s of rock?

all i know is that coldplay's ass is still cashing checks that all you can't leave behind wrote...

The more I think about it, the more I think All That You Can't Leave Behind might take this. Or The Rising.

No way. Wrong decade.

^lol

the Coheed song was "welcome Home": great song.

that girl on the strokes cover has a nice side butt

are you so sure it's a girl

The July and August 2001 cover art of Is This It is by Colin Lane and features a photograph of a woman's nude bottom and hip, with a leather-gloved hand suggestively resting on it.[21] The model was later revealed to be Lane's then-girlfriend, who explained that the photoshoot was spontaneous and happened after she came out of the shower naked. Lane recalled that a stylist had left the glove in his apartment and noted, "We did about 10 shots. There was no real inspiration, I was just trying to take a sexy picture."[22] The result was included in the book The Greatest Album Covers of All Time, in which Grant Scott, one of the editors, noted influences from the daring works of Helmut Newton and Guy Bordin in its design. Scott concludes, "It’s either a stylish or graphically strong cover or a sexist Smell the Glove travesty." Although British retail chains HMV and Woolworths objected to the photograph's controversial nature, they stocked the album without amendment.[21]

The group deliberately left out the grammatically correct question mark from the album title because aesthetically, "it did not look right".[23] The booklet insert contains stylized separate portraits of The Strokes, Raphael, Gentles, and Bowersock, all photographed by Lane.[7] For the American market and the October 2001 release, the cover art of Is This It was changed to a microscopic close-up of particle collisions. RCA product manager Dave Gottlieb commented that "it was straight up a band decision", while Gentles indicated that Casablancas had wanted it to appear globally. According to the band's manager, the frontman phoned him before the Japan and Europe release and said, "I found something even cooler than the a ... picture." At the time, the Lane photograph was already at the presses and was included in the July and August 2001 versions.[24] The Strokes' 2003 biography mentions the fear of objections from America's conservative retail industry and right-wing lobby as reasons for the artwork's alteration.[23]

someone played last nite at a wedding reception i was at 30 mins ago.
sounded like it will probably get played at wedding receptions forever. unlike anything on Kid A.

chicken dance: song of the millenium

after she came out of the shower naked.

Ok, yeah it'd been weird if she came out of the shower with those gloves on.

Strong point Jamie. I also think that for any album to be canonical it should withold the test of wedding receptions. Celine Dion is the biggest thing since sliced bread.

But when you touch me like this And you hold me like that I just have to admit that it's all coming back to me

i wrote a lot of things in this thread

someone played last nite at a wedding reception i was at 30 mins ago.
sounded like it will probably get played at wedding receptions forever. unlike anything on Kid A.

precisely the reason why at my wedding I only want songs from Nevermind and OK Computer being played.

But nothing from Loveless! My wedding will be loveful!

If we're talking about "Clear Channel Rock Fan," it's going to be Nickelback. :(

Or probably Dave Matthews...

http://www.cmj.com/relay/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/TapesnTapes_Loon.jpg

what a stupid thread

http://i55.tinypic.com/2w4z7sm.jpg

the strokes are useless reactionaries but their choice to change the album cover was a laudable decision.

I didn't even know Americans got a diff'rent strokes cover.

Theres that running Tapes n' Tapes gag! Its like your git-r-done, markers.

sorta, but sorta maybe kick back a bit with that shit dude

http://vvoice.vo.llnwd.net/e14/robert-plant-and-alison-krauss.1794905.40.jpg

what a stupid thread

― I'm a Grizzily Bear Now (CaptainLorax), Saturday, October 2, 2010 7:46 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

got any youtubes about how the gov't is concealing the best ILX threads?

All rock fans like "OK Computer" but that was not an 00s album, and "Kid A" is considerably more controversial amongst rock fans. Dance/electronica fans may prefer "Kid A" though, but they would never list it as their favourite album of the 00s nevertheless.

All rock fans like "OK Computer"

That's not opinion, it's science.

i think 'funeral' is the only canonical agreed-upon album from the 00s that i still like

rock album i mean

actually the real answer to this thread is

http://images.uulyrics.com/cover/a/andrew-wk/album-i-get-wet.jpg

Mark Ronson sings the praises of QotSA's Rated R in today's NY Times so that must be the correct answer.

The album of the decade is that first leaked version of Veckatimest. It's the only one I've heard, too.

it's been
two weeks since I challopsed you

i think 'funeral' is the only canonical agreed-upon album from the 00s that i still like

― ciderpress, Sunday, October 3, 2010 8:53 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

rock album i mean

― ciderpress, Sunday, October 3, 2010 8:54 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

If "Funeral" is the only rock album from a 10 years period you like, then I guess you cannot be considered a rock fan.

Not that I know, I am no typical rock fan, and tend to find most canonical rock albums slightly overrated. Just that I dislike R&B and hip-hop much more. Rock is passable, after all.

Canonical pop albums, on the other hand, but there hasn't been a classic pop album in the classic songwriting sense added to the critical canon since "Woodface".

i think 'funeral' is the only canonical agreed-upon album from the 00s that i still like

does not equal

"i think 'funeral' is the only rock album from the 00s that i still like"

Geir on a roll.

A rock 'n roll even.

ciderpress OTM

If "Funeral" is the only rock album from a 10 years period you like, then I guess you cannot be considered a rock fan.

Funeral nixxed. We're talking about proper rock with noisy guitars and riffs and solos not Pitchfork indie.

has to be 'is this it' then

or something by white stripes

http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/cov200/drf400/f444/f44455lkaoe.jpg

something by Voxtrot

We're talking about proper rock with noisy guitars and riffs

You mean, industrial and metal? Genres that didn't even exist at the time the rock genre was established?

if the jr cult continues to grow i wouldn't bet against blood visions giving some of the competition a run for rock canon dominance, but that's kind of a personal pipe dream. maybe it already is canonical everyone can agree on punk album though

Big & Rich: Album of the Decade?

question answered, lock thread

yeah i was just talking about albums that are hailed as modern classics up there, i'm thinking of stuff like 'is this it?' and 'kid a' and 'elephant' and whatever, there's tons of rock albums from the decade that i love but none of them were major events critically

never trust a critic?

We're talking about proper rock with noisy guitars and riffs

You mean, industrial and metal? Genres that didn't even exist at the time the rock genre was established?

― Tied Up In Geir (Geir Hongro), Sunday, October 3, 2010 7:54 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

or more like... the numerous types of proper rock with noisy guitars and riffs that did exist at the time the rock genre was established.

Geir is way too Hong up on genre stereotypes

The Andrew WK album really is amazing, and totally underrated. I think it maybe is the album of the decade.

"I Get Wet" is my #1 for the decade for sure.

"I found something ever cooler than the ass picture."

I'm blown away by Geir, yet again. Kudos.

or something by white stripes

This seems OTM ^^

I'd venture to guess White Blood Cells or Elephant -- didn't the latter have a bigger profile? According to Wikipedia it's sold almost 2 million copies in the US alone... sounds like consensus to me!

or more like... the numerous types of proper rock with noisy guitars and riffs that did exist at the time the rock genre was established.

Well, garage rock then... But you still didn't like The White Stripes nor any other of the garage rock revival names of the early 00s?

My point being, it seems you want 00s rock to be much more extreme in terms of noise than rock was in the 70s/80s, but then it isn't rock anymore.

And what you're saying is that genres that are derivative or partially derivative of rock didn't exist before rock. I think that is a tautology, but that might just be me.

Rock is rock. Rock today is what rock was in 1968.

no

I dunno, a band called Earth are probably the most important band in rock still.

Rock is rock. Rock today is what rock was in 1968.

this is ludicrous. one might just as well say that "rock today is what rock was in 1955-57." excluding all baroque pop a la the beatles & zombies, excluding all prog and acid rock, excluding everything that doesn't sound of a part with chuck berry, bill haley, jerry lee lewis, little richard, elvis, buddy holly, etc. and that's just ridiculous. rock continued to expand and redefine itself for decades, is perhaps still doing so today.

INSTANT HONGRO CLASSIC

this is ludicrous. one might just as well say that "rock today is what rock was in 1955-57."

No. Because there was no rock in 1955-57. Just rock'n'roll. Which is another genre.

Rock is by its very definition what The Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix and Cream were doing around 1967-68. That was rock then, and that is the definition of rock today. So I guess the likes of Paul Weller and Lenny Kravitz probably come closer to true rock than anyone else.

Just the same way pop by its very definition was whatever The Beatles, The Beach Boys and The Byrds were doing around the same time.

Geir is funk rock (funkadelic etc) and metal not rock?

you're manipulating the terms to suit your own idea of what these genres should be, and drawing arbitrary distinctions between things that exist on a continuum. the word "rock" has existed for almost as long as "rock and roll", and originally described exactly the same thing. we can treat early "rock and roll" as the progenitor subgenre of rock (the umbrella genre), leading into things like baroque pop, acid rock, prog, folk rock, etc. - but they're all still just types of rock music, points on the curve. same goes for later permutations like heavy metal, punk, indie rock, noise rock, hardcore, etc.

likewise, the term "pop" predates the 67-68 era by at least a decade, if not more.

Geir is funk rock (funkadelic etc) and metal not rock?

Funk rock is a subgenre of funk, metal is a subgenre of rock, but not really rock.

"Pop" dates back to the 20s.

you're manipulating the terms to suit your own idea of what these genres should be, and drawing arbitrary distinctions between things that exist on a continuum. the word "rock" has existed for almost as long as "rock and roll", and originally described exactly the same thing. we can treat early "rock and roll" as the progenitor subgenre of rock (the umbrella genre), leading into things like baroque pop, acid rock, prog, folk rock, etc. - but they're all still just types of rock music, points on the curve. same goes for later permutations like heavy metal, punk, indie rock, noise rock, hardcore, etc.

likewise, the term "pop" predates the 67-68 era by at least a decade, if not more.

But nobody cared about rock history before the baby boomers. The baby boomers have defined everything once and for all. They know this, they have the key to this. We should all respect the authority of the baby boomers.

Rock history didn't exist before the baby boomers

There was no rock in pre-WWII america or anywhere else.

Please make We should all respect the authority of the baby boomers. the new board description.

And geir, of course Metal is Rock.

We should all respect the authority of the baby boomers.

even if you're not trolling, you're trolling

if I respected the musical opinions of most baby boomers I know then all rock music would sound like Loverboy

because I would be making all rock music

if I respected the musical opinions of most baby boomers I know then all rock music would sound like Loverboy

The typical AOR fan is born in the 50s or 60s, not in the late 40s.