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

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.

I believe the "baby boomer" phase was up to the late fifties.

..and here to illustrate this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S.BirthRate.1909.2003.png

Ach, romo.

http://img-s3-01.mytextgraphics.com/sparklee/2010/10/05/23ada9627d38870a8e6f8aac7c04b445.gif

<img style="visibility:hidden;width:0px;height:0px;" border=0 width=0 height=0 src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/IMP/CXNID=2000002.0NXC/bT*xJmx*PTEyODYyODg2NTkyMzQmcHQ9MTI4NjI4ODcwMzU*NiZwPTc*MzIxJmQ9Jmc9MSZvPTdhMzUwNzMxZTkwOTQ3NGZhOGI1/ZTFiNjI2Y2JiMjhj.gif"; /><a href="http://www.sparklee.com";><img src="http://img-s3-01.mytextgraphics.com/sparklee/2010/10/05/79e2b9dba4fed5a51ad42a4d8b1e33a6.gif"; border="0" alt="Glitter Text Graphics - http://www.sparklee.com"; /></a><br /><br /><a href='http://www.docloop.com'>;doctor reviews</a>

This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below.

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 does n't sound of a part with chuck berry, bill haley, jerry lee lewis, little richard, elvis, buddy holly, etc. and that's just ridiculous.

I've actually read a few critics that have tried to say something similar; it was a kind of a fashionable angle to approach things for a minute...

Geir raising his game. Hats off.