The Album Review Club - Week #147 - (page 1942) - Blonde On Blonde - Bob Dylan

[crublue1]

Gotta disagree on the test of time bit.
I think if you can forget about all the shit that surrounds the band and the brothers and the hands in the air karaoke hordes and, like georgie boy said, listen without prejudice, then at least half the album is still very listenable.
Was belting out Slide Away in the car this affy and it still works

I think maybe that the reason I mentioned the test of time thing is because I've enjoyed all noels (and to some extent, liams) output since this was released.
Most of which is an improvement on this, the album we're reviewing.
As a debut it's pretty good as I said, but it's fairly forgettable as a whole.
A springboard album.
You're right about slide away mind.

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

Pj Harvey at 49 fuck me.
Now I like polly, and she's a bloody good singer/songwriter and live performer. I respect her.
But she's not anyway near a top 50 guitarist. I've got mates who can play better than her.

IMHO they're selectively using the criteria (which hasn't been defined as far as I am aware) of say 'guitarist', 'musician / song writer' and 'influencer' or similar. This makes the list really inconsistent.

For instance in my head as stand alone 'technical' players of the guitar, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell and Keith Richards don't make the list and don't hold a candle to say someone like James Hetfield for example.

Broaden it slightly and their outputs, understanding of the instrument, contributions to music and influence are off the scale putting them all very high up in the list.

Almost everyone on the list will have to refer influence to Robert Johnson at some point.

In short, the list is inconsistent and bollocks.............

 

[Coatigan]

I never said you hated them.

True, but in saying you either love or hate them, that's how I took it. All good.

 

[Coatigan]

I think maybe that the reason I mentioned the test of time thing is because I've enjoyed all noels (and to some extent, liams) output since this was released.
Most of which is an improvement on this, the album we're reviewing.
As a debut it's pretty good as I said, but it's fairly forgettable as a whole.
A springboard album.
You're right about slide away mind.

Debut albums, generally, tend to age better amongst the 'real' fans, but fall further behind amongst wider rating. Particularly where the following albums are more commercially successful. People coming to it new will be drawn, or pushed, to the more known ones, and the debuts will tend be seen as a good effort but not given the same weight.

 

[OB1]

IMHO they're selectively using the criteria (which hasn't been defined as far as I am aware) of say 'guitarist', 'musician / song writer' and 'influencer' or similar. This makes the list really inconsistent.

For instance in my head as stand alone 'technical' players of the guitar, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell and Keith Richards don't make the list and don't hold a candle to say someone like James Hetfield for example.

Broaden it slightly and their outputs, understanding of the instrument, contributions to music and influence are off the scale putting them all very high up in the list.

Almost everyone on the list will have to refer influence to Robert Johnson at some point.

In short, the list is inconsistent and bollocks.............

Never noticed Hatfield being that special but his team mate is a very fine technician. He really impressed me at a Peter Green Tribute Show I went to just before the first lockdown.

There’s no doubt though that the RS list is about more than technical ability, which is fine, up to a point but that R/S list borders on perverse in places. I don’t mind admitting there’s two or three names on there I don’t recognise and I would have expected to know all the names in a top 50 greatest guitarists even if not familiar with their work, but every day is a school day.

 

[OB1]

Debut albums, generally, tend to age better amongst the 'real' fans, but fall further behind amongst wider rating. Particularly where the following albums are more commercially successful. People coming to it new will be drawn, or pushed, to the more known ones, and the debuts will tend be seen as a good effort but not given the same weight.

Maybe, but some debut albums are astonishingly good - and widely accepted as classics in their genres.

 

[threespires]

Maybe, but some debut albums are astonishingly good - and widely accepted as classics in their genres.

Yes and there's plenty of bands who spend the rest of their careers never quite hitting the heights of their debut album that ends up as a millstone round their necks.

 

[Coatigan]

Maybe, but some debut albums are astonishingly good - and widely accepted as classics in their genres.

True and the two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Coatigan]

Yes and there's plenty of bands who spend the rest of their careers never quite hitting the heights of their debut album that ends up as a millstone round their necks.

True and the two are mutually exclusive ;)

 

[bennyboy]

Debut albums, generally, tend to age better amongst the 'real' fans, but fall further behind amongst wider rating. Particularly where the following albums are more commercially successful. People coming to it new will be drawn, or pushed, to the more known ones, and the debuts will tend be seen as a good effort but not given the same weight.

I would say it was all downhill after Definitely Maybe.
Oasis became more of a singles group to me after their debut
After Definitely Maybe I found the singles and b sides far better than What's the Story..