Reviews by callimar

Rage Against the Machine surprised me today:
1. I didn’t expect to find their debut album on this list: Sure, it was a commercial success, but as I recall, it was one that the mainstream press was rather hesitant to embrace.
2. The production is extremely polished for the early ’90s: I knew full well that Tom Morello & Co. had put a lot of time into the technical details, but somehow I remembered the result as being more raw.
3. I had massively underestimated their musical influence on later bands: The groove ideas that shaped songs like “Bombtrack,” for example, were not only enthusiastically adopted by the crossover bands of the time but were further developed in nu metal in the 2000s and in metalcore starting in the 2010s—and remain ubiquitous to this day.
4. Rage Against the Machine ultimately remained a singular phenomenon: Despite their huge commercial success and their audibly massive influence on crossover, nu metal, and metalcore, their core messages have, to some extent, fallen by the wayside in the harder rock scene. Instead, these messages are found today more in the visual arts - and most prominently in the work of Banksy.
5. This album has aged incredibly well: Back then, I found it a bit overly political; today, it’s probably more relevant and timely than ever before.
Conclusion: Yes, this album is an absolute must-listen!

I could remember the name “Massive Attack” and that it had absolutely nothing to do with their music. I had completely forgotten what their music sounded like - and that’s hardly surprising, since it’s about as memorable as a pretzel stick. It’s the kind of laid-back electronic beats you’d expect to hear under the narrator’s voice in a medical documentary.
On the plus side, though, Massive Attack pulls off this sound on “Protection” without getting on my nerves in the slightest. You barely notice this recording, and after a few tracks, you start thinking about turning on some music. For me, that’s practically the definition of a 2/5.

Shack was a band from Liverpool, which apparently is reason enough to include them on this list. In any case, their album “H.M.S. Fable” gives little reason to believe it had anything to do with their music. Britpop was one of those 90s genres that was already outdated by the time it emerged. Typically, there was one successful trendsetter (in this case, Oasis) and a slew of imitators that nobody needed. Fortunately, while Britpop is totally boring, it’s not as annoying as, say, Eurodance. In that sense, this album is quite tolerable, but completely irrelevant.

This is probably one of the greatest live albums of all time: Thin Lizzy at their prime, the best recordings from three of their best concerts, comprehensively and expertly (though to an unknown extent) overdubbed and remastered - better than any “best-of” compilation could ever be.
Two of Lizzy’s greatest songs are missing for obvious reasons: “Cold Sweat” wasn’t written until years later, and at the time, Phil Lynott essentially left the vocals for “Whiskey in the Jar” to the audience.
There’s certainly no need to say anything more about Thin Lizzy and Phil Lynott. In that sense, this is one of those albums you really have to hear.

I knew that Paul Simon had recorded several solo albums after his split with Art Garfunkel, but I wasn’t familiar with any of them. My parents told me that back then, many people bought this album on a whim simply because it had “Paul Simon” on the cover, expecting it to be a nearly equal continuation of Simon & Garfunkel. That certainly explains, at least in part, the huge chart success of *Paul Simon* - though it certainly wasn’t because of the songs themselves. Simon tries his hand at both lighthearted folk ballads and world music elements, but none of it works particularly well. Now I understand my parents’ bitter disappointment. Luckily, I don’t have to put that record on my shelf now...

Another album by The Smiths - another so-so listening experience. Since they all sound more or less the same, there isn’t really that much to say about it. The band is tight and well-produced once again, but Morrissey’s voice won’t be interesting even a hundred years from now. You could call it high-class boredom. Why didn’t this band ever get a real singer?

I had recognized a whole range of inspirations in the movie “This Is Spinal Tap,” but I wasn't sure where singer David St. Hubbins' sound came from. I was able to figure that out today by listening closely to Roger McGuinn. My research has shown that this is a “transatlantic accent". It arises when an American tries to sound British.
“Mr. Tambourine Man” actually sums this up quite well: a folk/bluegrass band wants to sound like The Beatles. They pull it off quite well in places, but other passages are just plain funny (“All I Really Want To Do", “It’s No Use”, “Don’t Doubt Yourself”). Of course, there’s also an absolute hit (in the form of the title track), and this one, after all, anticipated and defined the Bay Area sounds of the hippie era.

This is one of the three great R.E.M. albums (the other two are, of course, “Document” and “Out of Time”) and the one I remember best. I don’t think there’s much point in going into detail here - partly because everyone knows “Automatic For The People,” and partly because I haven’t delved deeply enough into R.E.M.’s work to have anything meaningful to add. The latter is because R.E.M. were simply “everybody’s darling” in the early ’90s and didn’t seem particularly exciting to me at the time. But that doesn’t change the fact that they were, quite rightly, global stars back then and that “Automatic For The People” ranks among the top 10 albums of the ’90s.

The “Pictures at an Exhibition” concert by Emerson, Lake & Palmer must have been impressive. I imagine how the band interacted with the audience while Keith Emerson pulled out all the stops on his organ. It’s easy to picture the musicians communicating with each other through glances during the more densely arranged passages. The atmosphere in the hall might have ranged from intense tension at the beginning to euphoria at the end of “Blues Variation” to relaxed excitement before “Nutrocker". The problem is: none of that is truly captured in the recording. So if you weren’t there (e.g., because you were born after 1971), the only basis for evaluation is the audio tracks - and they are spectacular in places. However, there are certainly some taxing passages as well, the worst of which comes right at the beginning with the fairly faithful recitation of the source material. I’d even go so far as to say that the band doesn’t really loosen up until after the aforementioned “Blues Variation” - and from there on, the album is genuinely fun.
How do you rate something like this? On the one hand, the second half is really great; on the other hand, in my view, Emerson, Lake & Palmer actually missed the chance to create an undisputed legend because of the way they structured the setlist. But perhaps that’s also due to the source material, which doesn’t exactly come across as appealing at first glance either. I’ll give it - albeit a very narrow - 5 stars.

This list already included a few albums categorized as “experimental” or “psychedelic". Some of them are true masterpieces - and then there is Animal Collective’s “Merriweather Post Pavilion".
Sound collages can certainly be effective in the right context, but on their own, they tend to get boring after a while. Animal Collective take it even further and simply produce 54 minutes of sonic garbage. The five guys probably aren’t bad musicians at all, but even a few off-key notes would likely have made “Merriweather Post Pavilion” more interesting.
That’s what I call refined boredom - and without ever giving the impression that it might get any better! A technically flawless belly flop!

As a rock ‘n’ roller, Elvis Presley had rocked the world in 1954 (pun not intended). His 1969 comeback album, featuring a soul band as his backing group, sounds, by contrast, as if he had sold his soul (pun intended). This laid-back groove strips his songs of pretty much everything that had once made him great. What’s more, the then-36-year-old sounds like an old man compared to his debut. In a way, “From Elvis In Memphis” shares parallels with The Doors’ “L.A. Woman,” though it doesn’t quite reach that album’s extraordinary caliber.
It’s nice, but in my view, this is exactly the kind of album you don’t really need to listen to - unless you want to correct your overly positive image of an artist. Don’t get me wrong, this isn’t a bad album. But it’s definitely one that serves to limit Elvis’s legendary status to his early work.

I really do try not to completely trash ’90s electronica and hip hop every single time - though the artists from that era often make it really hard for you to do otherwise. It’s nice that this isn’t quite as extreme with the Stereo MC’s (yes, with that ridiculous apostrophe).
Aside from the fact that they wrote actual songs, it’s partly because they hit a pretty good sweet spot between frantic beats (for which you’d actually need amphetamines) and completely psychedelic ambient electro (which, in turn, would be more suited to downers). Or, to put it more historically accurately: imitators who model themselves after this sound generally drift into realms that are barely tolerable without drugs.
In that sense, it’s a nice experience to hear that the original was actually good in a broader sense! And all the more embarrassing, then, what others built on it later...

I do wonder if this album just happens to be coming up the day after Dolly Parton’s death...
While they - just like Emmylou Harris and Linda Ronstadt - can point to impressive solo careers, this “trio” is on the disappointing side of country music: extremely simple and even shallow songs, though at least professionally produced (Leland Sklar on bass!) and sung - it’s by no means unbearable, but it’s not particularly good either, and certainly not innovative. Sure, the three ladies can sing harmonies - but any halfway-talented choir singer can do that.
Why exactly is this an album you must have heard?

Siouxsie and the Banshees have improved considerably from their debut, *The Scream*, to their fourth album, *Juju*. The guitar now carries the songs effectively, and Siouxsie herself has, in the meantime, developed a voice that’s a pleasure to listen to for an entire hour. Added to this are songs with a distinct identity of their own and, as a result, high recognizability.
I would even agree with those who already recognize the blueprints for later gothic rock here. Very nice - not quite top-tier, but well above average and rightfully on the list.

Right from the start, the first song, “That Lady,” on the Isley Brothers’ album *3+3* drills its way into your ears with an absolutely jarring melody. According to Wikipedia, it’s supposed to be a lead guitar part inspired by Jimi Hendrix. I’d say it sounds more like someone tried to imitate Hendrix’s characteristic sustain using the wrong effects. It’s somewhat reminiscent of “Crosstown Traffic” - but there, Hendrix deliberately aimed for a “horn concert” sound (and achieved it technically in a completely different and far more organic way) …
It took me a few songs to realize that what follows isn’t all just elevator music, but actually also some quite appealing funk-rock (e.g., “Summer Breeze”). Unfortunately, Ernie Isley keeps bringing that botched guitar sound to the forefront. Where’s the producer when you need him…
Overall, the impression here is of an experiment that can only be considered partially successful. From a music-historical perspective, it’s certainly quite interesting, but it’s not a pleasure to listen to from start to finish. Too bad.

Largely uninspired hip-hop with soul interludes - Common’s “Like Water For Chocolate” is a clear two-star case: not really bad, but at best unremarkable among the 1,001 best albums.
Next, please

“The Slider” is the follow-up to the successful album “Electric Warrior.” I haven’t listened to the latter in its entirety yet (but I will - it’s on this list), but “The Slider” is certainly no step forward.
Setting aside comparisons to its predecessor, “The Slider” is definitely a good album. Marc Bolan was a great songwriter, singer, and guitarist, and he carries this album effortlessly. Plus, I just really like the hard rock style infused with folk, jazz, and rock ’n’ roll influences.
The only question I have is whether you really need to listen to this album if you’re already familiar with its far more famous predecessor...

I’d already listened to Queens of the Stone Age a few times, but I always found their songs more “okay” than “great.”
In this context, however, things look a little different, because compared to the various pop milestones spanning seven decades, the Queens’ sound is quite distinctive and—considering that the album was released in 1998—even remarkably original. On top of that, the album as a whole is absolutely cohesive, even if, in my opinion, none of the songs is strong enough to be singled out for special mention.
This is already the second really good album from the late ’90s (the other one being “Celebrity Skin” by Hole) that I missed back then. In a way, that’s reassuring, because I actually had no explanation for why that decade was so extremely disappointing musically in my memory.

I still find it difficult to evaluate early hip-hop fairly, because ultimately the artists reject two of the three dimensions relevant to music: melody, harmony, and rhythm. The statement “that’s not real music” is therefore by no means polemical, but rather an objective observation.
Of course, there are exceptions, and also the Jungle Brothers occasionally go beyond simple “beats & rap” on *Done By The Forces Of Nature*. However, they generally don’t reach a creative level that can compete with the majority of the albums on this list.
At least they come across as likable.

I had already praised Adele’s voice in my review of “21,” but I noted room for improvement in her songwriting. Instead of improving in this area or seeking professional help, things have gotten significantly worse on “25.” Her voice is still impressive, but the album doesn’t contain a single song worthy of special mention. Instead, one must even criticize her tentative attempts at more elaborate instrumentation, which push “Send My Love” and “I Miss You” squarely into the realm of kitsch.
Of course, it’s not realistic to expect an entire LP full of “Rolling In The Deep.” However, some improvement over “21” - or at least a consistent level of quality - wouldn’t have been too much to ask. In that sense, I can’t understand all the hype surrounding “25.” Of course, it’s not a bad album (you’d have to deliberately sabotage it to make it bad, given Adele’s voice), but from my perspective, it’s nothing special at all.