There Has NEVER been a fully complete good album.

er...mark...help!

"Give me whitesnake or blondies greatest hits over Stone Roses,Astral Weeks,Pet Sounds,Queen Is Dead,Closer ANY day."

Hmmmm.... how do you feel about Parallel Lines?

the Avalanches 'Since I Left You' or Daft Punk's'Homework' are good example...many of the tracks are just segways between others but they are valuable in making up the bigger picture behind the album - a musical travelogue littered with hints, suggestions, after-thoughts, memories that on their own seem throwaway but when combined create a great story of an album....because your life is not a constant string of important events and situations, nor does an album thats designed as a soundtrack to life have to be

The velvet Undeground and Nico
Astral Weeks
Pet Sounds

Not a dud on any of them. I suppose the rather long thrashes at the end of VU is dependent on taste a little - but I don't believe that any of the tracks on the other two albums are anything but great.

perhaps tho, the album is an endangered species on its own - i'd like to see more DVD albums with video for each audio track and a greater level of documentation behind the artefact...something really worth paying money for because it would be more interactive, engage more senses and hopefully possess greater longevity as a product

i do agree that the vast majority of albums contain at least one dud but there are notable exceptions: 76:14, soup, technique. notably, perhaps, none of these are 'rock'.

how do you decide what are the best songs by a band/singer anyway? its not always the singles e.g. The Streets next single is apparently 'Dont Mug Yourself' which seems dumb to me unless he's going to release 'Too Much Brandy' afterwards

so if you dont buy/download the STreets album or find out from someone who has it that 'Too Much Brandy' would be a better choice for single than 'Dont Mug Yourself' then you'll be oblivious to this

no big deal tho, its been traditionally considered that singles only serve to promote the albums they are contained on...of course the single has over the years come to adopt a much greater significance. i find it interesting that the use of albums is being challenged here tho

for years i have actually wanted to be able to order my own compilations either in a shop or online. websites like CDuctive were the first to offer services like this - i dont know how they're doing these days but you SHOULD be able to go to a huge HMV and have a custom CD or minidisc created for you while you wait based on what you or the sales assistant think you might like...thats if you still even WANT CDs

but what about art/packaging/lyrics/information/inlay stuff on the albums? is that worth nothing at all? i'm not sure myself

I agree that many albums contain filler, but it's also possible for albums to form a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. I don't see any need to be so categorical in condemning album-oriented rock. But I completely agree that there's nothing superior about focusing on creating entire albums rather than individual songs.

I have disocvered two salsa albums over the past couple years which I enjoy listening to from beginning to end, and some of whose songs suffer slightly from being removed from the context of the entire album: Willie Colon and Hector Lavoe's El Juicio and Jose "Cheo" Feliciano's Cheo.

Sometimes 'albums' do add up to more than the sum of their parts. More often the parts are all songs or tracks that you'll like at some point, just not all at once. More often than that you end up liking 7 or 8 tracks at least a bit, not just 4, and it becomes economical to have one album not eight singles.

also, what about bands who dont release singles or are extremely reluctant to? Led Zeppelin and Grateful Dead are the classic examples but Radiohead could easily have not bothered releasing anything from their last two albums - likewise Mogwai...how do you assess whether their albums are worth buying when the concept of the single is rendered irrelevant?

i assume this thread was started to concentrate on more commercially-co-operative music tho so regarding the pop spectrum (from Shakira to the Strokes to The Streets) i cant give an example of a pop album with NO filler whatsoever offhand, esp. if you consider interludes and what have you as filler themselves

Maybe thats why I like Thrush Hermit's Clayton Park still, not one album track on it but a whole album worth of them. Just as they finally got their act together they break up, the nerve.

Simply off the top o' my head....

FUNHOUSE by the Stooges (yeah....even "L.A.Blues" is fucking great)
THE CLASH by The Clash
KILLING JOKE by Killing Joke
ROCKET TO RUSSIA by the Ramones
NO SLEEP `TIL HAMMERSMITH by Motorhead
DESTROYER by Kiss (no, I don't fast-forward through "Beth")
EIGHT-LEGGED GROOVE MACHINE by The Wonder Stuff
A NIGHT AT THE OPERA by Queen

We might never agree on this crucial point, but I think maybe I can suggest one you might like: Funkentelechy vs. the Placebo Syndrome by Parliament. No gaps, no holes, weird stuff right next to glorious pop moments, doo-wop science-fiction funk with no apologies.

If you think that album has any filler, than you may be a poppist, and you should just download a bunch of tracks from places all over and burn 'em onto your own CD.

Yes it looks like you've "won". Jesus Christ save us. And save my fucknig patience aswell.

How are we supposed to go about "proving" this? Different posters have given particular examples: take them or leave them.

Orbital - _In Sides_
The Prodigy - _Experience_
Prince and the Revolution - _Around The World In A Day_
Prince and the Revolution - _Parade_
The Cure - _Pornography_
The Cure - _Faith_
Massive Attack - _Mezzanine_
Massive Attack - _Blue Lines_
New Order - _Get Ready_
New Order - _Movement_
My Life With The Thrill Kill Kult - _Confessions Of A Knife_
Skinny Puppy - _Bites_
Apoptygma Berzerk - the newest one, can't remember what it's called (_Harmonizer_?)
Gravediggaz - Damn my memory, what's their first album called?
Prince and the Revolution - _Purple Rain_
A Tribe Called Quest - _The Low End Theory_
The Sugarcubes - _Life's Too Good_
Amon Tobin - _Permutation_
Ministry - _Twitch_
Siouxsie and the Banshees - _Tinderbox_
The Psychedelic Furs - _Talk Talk Talk_
Pet Shop Boys - _Actually_

I could keep listing albums for hours...

My own list goes on for some while, so I'll spare everyone. Naming what is at the top of the list would be redundant at this point.

Of course there are great pop singles. Of course there are faultless albums (though, I grant you, not many - some of the examples above seem to me to have some obvious 2nd rank material on them). Of course it's ulimtately a matter of personal opinion which are which.

What's my personal opinion? 'Chairs Missing' would be hard to fault. And Burning Spear's 'Man in the Hills'. And 'The Clash'. And Maxinquaye - unlike Massive Attack, who only seem to me to have 2 or 3 really wonderful tracks on each album.

As for the canon, for me Revolver and Pet Sounds are extraordinary but have Yellow Submarine and Sloop John B: ironically, poppists should count these as reasons why these two ARE perfect, thereby justifying the concept of a 'great album'.

Astral Weeks and Closer I'm afraid are perfect, so perfect I find it hard to imagine anyone not liking them. And profound. Like I said, these things are personal.

Perhaps the ultimate example of something utterly great as a whole - no matter what you think of individual tracks - thereby justifying all that matters (and all that is irritating) about the idea of an 'album', would be Trout Mask Replica.

can you send me a pic of yourself in 'stunned' mode.

well you're def right there!

Only once have I thought an album was perfect. I remember the first time I listened to Elvis Costello's "My Aim is True" I just stared at the stereo the entire time. I was almost waiting for something to happen to make me not like it. And nothing ever did.

The reason I generally like to listen to albums in their entirety, and not just select my faves from various albums, is that I like to lock into a particular emotional groove (or a well-sequenced series of moods), when I put music on. A well put-together album will have a certain continuity, or emotional follow-through that is engaging, even if some tracks are much better than others. Like if someone took my copy of "Loveless", and replaced "Loomer" (my least favourite track) with a really great song by some completely different band, the new album would consist of 11 parts whose sum would amount to greater than the sum of Loveless' 11 parts. But the new introduction would disturb the flow of the record, and this would jar. A good album amounts to more than the sum of its parts.

(Ned - if yr reading could you pleeeeeeeeeese go over to the 'swamp thing' thread - my curiosity is killing me...)

YESYESYESYES> OTM!

ian, you have a wonderful way of making music utterly unenjoyable.
ever considered writing for CTCL?

ps. ILLMATIC you slag.
pps. BEST DRESSED CHICKEN IN TOWN - best album ever, if you stopped being a spack and actually LIKED reggae then i'd ask you to eat yr hat.

I would love to, but havent a clue how. *stunned look*.

will instead adopt said pose at next London FAP, but only if you are there too and say to me in a convincing way, 'I hear nothing of value in Astral Weeks or Closer, so ner.'

I promise to do this without smirking. If I smirk, I'll buy you a pint. If I don't, you can buy me one.

Shit, what am I up to? It's late! I'm still at work!

Because instrumental music could never be great. That's why John Coltrane, Miles Davis, and all those other musical geniuses all suck.

Huey Lewis & The News "Sports". Knock yourself out.

It seems to me very useful to have a term to refer to things like "Revolver" or "Closer" or "El Juicio" which can be used regardless of whether or not the particular full-length is vinyl, a cassette, a CD, or possibly a collection of MP3s.

A person can use "album" in this way and still say, "The old mono Beatles records sounds warmer," or "Somehow this black market cassette copy of Fairuz's Ishar sounds better to me than the digitally re-mastered EMI Arabia CD version."

Royal Trux - "thank You". Its crap from start to finish.

curveball pick Van Morrison's Veedon Fleece-since Astral Weeks was mentioned already.

And...Love- Forever Changes well maybe not

"Yellow Submarine" and "Sloop John B" are ten-out-of-ten songs, real highlights.

[pauses, shuffles a bit, blushes, exits swiftly]

I don't think the analogies to books or films are necessarily spot on, because for me the *basic unit* of pop / rock is the song, not the LP. "Sloop John B" (ugh) is a discrete work in the way that a scene from a film or a chapter from a novel isn't.

I've no objection to your thinking the 'work' is the LP, but I've very great objections to you calling my pov 'beyond retarded'.

Also: The Best Dressed Chicken in Town, whilst it is certainly very fantastic, was surely *not* made as a single LP work, but a collection of the best of the good Doctor's stuff up to that point? (I stand correction on this but I think I'm right), so it falls outside the question.

I say LP not album because Kevin Rowland told me to on the back of "Show Me".

yes, but we're NOW discussing 'full lengthers' (?), 'el-peees', '33's' ad infinitum. so by using mark's terminologies ANYTHING that fills those criteria are incl. i actually think 7" singles rule, but i still say ILLMATIC is spasticly the most complete album evah made. 10 trax, no filler, every song is better than the last, and bcuz there's no standout trax as such it means u hav 2 listen 2 it all the way thru'.

the concept of albums is a shit one becuz it creates a snobbery towards what 1 SHOULD own to be a TRUE music fan. like if u don't kno' 'revolver' den u don't kno' music, and i suspect that ian is attacking that kind of schmojo schmockism.

o-nate i thought of a better way to respond to the "books" counter last night, but went to bed instead of writing it down and now cannot remember it!!

I say that there are countless full-lengths that are 5-stars throughout. The album is dead - long live the full-length collective of aural-frequency based variable creative statements rooted in the rockist tendency.

(That's meant to be somewhat humorous and somewhat confessional.)

i'd always assumed that it was transparently a good thing.

Tom - you should give yr 'astral weeks' to a deserving charity shop, or better yet a hairdressers. (er, bizarrely i got my copy from a hairdressers in leeds which as well as a quick trim offered a selection of secondhand reflective sixties/seventies vinyl 'blue', 'harvest', 'tapestry' that kind of thing.)

Unless mark s is deleting all the hordes of curious wannabe van-fans to prolong my agony...

...how's about "Release"; i.e. the Revolver release.

Indelible releases for submission:

Miles Davis — Kind Of Blue

Horace Silver Quintet — Songs For My Father

Modern Jazz Quartet — The Last Concert [live]

Bill Evans Trio — Sunday at the Village Vanguard [live]

Keith Jarrett — Köln Concert

Pink Floyd — Meddle

Nick Drake — Bryter Layter

Ernest Tubb — The Legend and the Legacy

Waylon Jennings — Honky Tonk Heroes

Fela Anikulapo Kuti — take your pick from any of his 1970s releases.

Ry Cooder & V.M. Bhatt — A Meeting By The River

Thoughts?

Also, there's not a single dud on VH's 1984.

When usually peoples favourite songs are singles.

Not in the conventional sense of the word, I don't think- my personal all time favourite is "In My Life", which was never released as a single. Then there's the hordes of Metal fans whose fave song is "Stairway To Heaven", "One", etc.

Of course, I'm of the opinion that, in these days of file sharing, every song is a "single"- tho it doesn't posess the universality of the old fashioned one (meaning, say, my fav downloaded track from J-Live's "All Of The Above" is "One For The Griot", yours is "Stirs Of Echoes", etc.)

At least have 'Best Singles Of All Time' polls. And not the one that Mojo had,where there was no pop in it at all!

So is your point "singles are better than albums", or "Pop is better than/as good as Rock/Soul/Metal/Funk/Jazz"? Because those are two diferent arguments, as according to Tom there have actually been a great deal of great Pop albums these past few years.

But to me POP is the actual moment. Its great for a few weeks or months then you move on. I dont see why anyone has to listen albums for 30 years etc just because old farts still value Beatles or Dylan etc.

You sound like you've been tied to a chair by the MOJO staff and forced to listen to "Blonde On Blonde" infinitively. No one's forcing you to do anything- I mean, I don't care for Teenpop, so I don't listen to the radio; you don't care for Album Rock, so just don't buy the magazines that focus on it! Me, I'm seventeen and I love both Dylan and The Beatles, as do many of my friends; not because some "old farts" value them (most old farts 'round here listen to the Stranglers, actually), but because I love and can identify with this music. Whether this will still be the case in 30 years- who knows?

But pop songs still can sound great 20 years later

But I thought they were about the actual moment and then you move on! Why should I listen to singles for 20 years just because some old fart still values ABBA and Duran Duran? Either you think Pop is all about the moment and we should just move on to something new every few months, in which case there's no need to listen to singles 20 years later, or you admit that music (be it singles or albums) has lasting value, in which case why are you so annoyed with someone stil listening to Dylan?

It doesnt get the same criticism.

True. For a good analysis of the singles medium in the Rock & Soul era (circa 1953-1989), check out Dave Marsh's "The Heart Of Rock & Soul: The 1001 Greatest Singles Ever Recorded". You won't find "pop" (cuz Pop ain't the only genre that relies on singles more than albums, you know), but you'll find lots of album rock dissing and wonderful celebrations of singles artists like Wilson Pickett, Grandmaster Flash, Dionne Warwick, etc.

I'm not a big enough fan of Tommy or The Wall to make a big deal out of either, but all three seem like pretty obvious examples of things which really need to be albums. Sure, there are songs on all which are listenable as singles, but the albums are designed as more than collections-of-discrete-songs, and are listened to as such by their fans.

The same goes for live albums, but I assume they're disqualified for the same reason greatest hits collections are -- I can't think of any that regularly show up on best-of lists.

Sure, most of the stuff that's pushed by MTV etc. is going to be a few singles and a lot of filler material, just to sell units, but a barrel full of rotten apples doesn't mean that apples are inherently wormy.

Stuff I listen to without hitting the skip button, aside from the album type above (call it "concept album" or whatever you like - albums in which the songs are designed to be interdependent): several Bowie albums, although not the Ryko rereleases (Ziggy Stardust and Hunky Dory, to name two) -- but I'm a Bowie fan; the previously mentioned Pet Sounds and The Dreaming; Nirvana's Nevermind; Poe's Hello (Haunted would fit the concept album bit, although I don't like it as much); Live's Throwing Copper; Tori Amos's Winter (an EP, granted) and maybe Little Earthquakes; REM's Document; Springsteen's Born to Run.

And I think "people's favorite songs are singles" applies more to casual listeners, since I can't think of anyone I know for whom it applies when you're talking about the artists they're actually into. I've yet to meet a Bowie fan whose favorite song was "Let's Dance," "Space Oddity," etc.

a few not mentioned that i would rock nonstop:

the undertones' s/t
dwight twilley band's "sincerely"
built to spill's "perfect from now on"
gang of four's "entertainment!"
modern lovers' s/t
three mile pilot's "chief assassin to the sinister"
shellac "at action park"
big black "atomizer"
iggy pop & james williamson's "kill city"
the knack "get the knack"
t. rex "electric warrior"
wire's "pink flag"

you can debate whether or not some songs are weaker than the singles but i'd sure as shit rather have the lesser tracks in one place than on six or seven 45s with all the songs in a jukebox or something. or not have them at all. straight up.

on the other hand, i go days listening to singles as well. tonight's been a real "academy fight song/max ernst" night, so, er, why can't we all just get along?

ps. bowie's "outside" all day. i love it. i've had some great, uhhh, cyberpunk nightmares listening to it while i slept too...

And poo on anyone who thinks otherwise.

The reason for the existence of albums is essentially economic: the logistics of retailing are not suited to the individual track (though the internet may be in the process of changing that). I have always been baffled by the willingness of 95%+ of pop critics to swallow the industry's myth that the album (and not the album track) is the work of art that needs to be evaluated.

In other words, it's not going to affect my desire to buy an album if there are four great songs on it but they don't "fit together" -- I'd rather have that than ten mediocre songs which complement each other.

Writing online for an audience with download access I entirely think reviewing individual tracks is the way to go - but I can see why whole-album reviews serve a purpose.

Tom your argument assumes a good faith, which I think is often absent. Frequently the reviewer no more believes in the coherence he is imposing than I do, he is just parading an ability to make "clever" (ie facile) EngLit-type connections. (Possibly without CONSCIOUS bad faith since he/she believes is this is part of his job description - hey, it's what reviewers DO!)

"(ie it's still worthwhile)" - hmm, not in my experience once you take probability into account. What I want (and too rarely get) is a reviewer who is more interested in the record than his own ability to generate "interesting" prose about it - avoiding what Swift satirises as "that highly celebrated Talent among the Modern Wits of deducing Similitudes, Allusions, and Applications very Surprising, Agreeable and Apposite".

"And sometimes the coherences are grounded."

Yes I agree but my point is that even where there is some objective substance for arguing "coherence" these factors are given a weighting beyond their true importance because of the myth that the album is the work of art.