Reviews by infidsp90

Van Morrison’s Moondance was an enjoyable enough listen, though it didn’t quite leave a lasting impression on me. There’s a relaxed, warm quality to the album that makes it particularly well suited to listening at night, especially at the end of a long work day when you’re looking for something calming rather than demanding.
The mix of jazz, folk, soul, and blues gives the album a loose, lived-in feel, and Morrison’s distinctive voice fits naturally into that atmosphere. The title track is obviously the standout, but songs like “Into the Mystic” and “Caravan” add to the album’s mellow, slightly dreamy character.
For me, Moondance was less an album that demanded my attention and more one that provided pleasant company in the background. It’s easygoing, warm, and atmospheric without being particularly challenging. Maybe not something I’d reach for every time, but a nice record to put on when the day is winding down.

Beauty and the Beat is one of those albums where I can understand the appeal without necessarily enjoying it very much myself. The Go-Go’s have a fun, energetic sound, and there’s no denying that the album has plenty of catchy hooks and a strong sense of personality. “We Got the Beat” and “Our Lips Are Sealed” are especially memorable, and it’s easy to see why the band became such an important part of the early-’80s pop and new wave scene.
That said, the album was pretty mediocre for me overall. I never really found myself getting into the bright, polished production or the particular combination of punk, pop, and new wave that defines the record. Some of the songs are enjoyable enough, but as a whole it didn’t leave much of an impression on me.
I think part of the problem may simply be that I’m discovering that I don’t particularly enjoy a lot of ’80s music. The production style, vocal sounds, and overall aesthetic of the decade often feel a little too dated for my taste, and Beauty and the Beat definitely falls into that category.
Still, I can appreciate what the album represents. The Go-Go’s were a hugely successful all-female band who helped bring a punk-influenced sound into the mainstream, and Beauty and the Beat is an important snapshot of that moment. I just don’t think it’s an album I’ll be coming back to very often.

Norah Jones’ Come Away With Me was a great listen—one of those albums that seems to create its own atmosphere around you. It felt especially perfect for a rainy autumn morning, with a warm cup of coffee and nowhere to be.
There’s something wonderfully understated about the album. Jones’ soft, intimate vocals and the gentle blend of jazz, folk, blues, and country give the songs a timeless, almost dreamlike quality. Nothing feels forced or overly polished; the arrangements leave plenty of space for her voice and the mood of each song to breathe.
What I enjoyed most was how effortlessly the album moves between melancholy and warmth. Songs like “Don’t Know Why,” “Come Away With Me,” and “Turn Me On” have a quiet emotional pull without ever becoming heavy. It’s music that doesn’t demand your attention, but rewards you when you give it.
Overall, Come Away With Me is the kind of album that feels made for slow mornings and reflective moments. It has a cozy, intimate quality that perfectly matched the grey skies and autumn rain. A beautiful, soothing listen that I can easily see myself returning to whenever I want to slow things down.

I went into Oar expecting to like it, especially given its reputation, and the beginning actually worked pretty well for me. There’s something intriguing about the stripped-down sound and the raw, almost fragile quality of the recordings. It also reminded me quite a bit of Nick Drake, at least in the sense of the intimate acoustic arrangements and melancholic atmosphere.
Unfortunately, I found it much harder to stay interested as the album went on. What initially felt haunting and personal gradually became repetitive and, eventually, pretty unbearable. The songs started to blur together, and the lo-fi quality that was interesting at first began to feel more exhausting than affecting.
I can understand why Oar has become such a cult record, and there are definitely moments where you can hear the appeal. But for me, it felt like a much rougher and less compelling version of what I like about Nick Drake. Interesting in small doses, but by the end I was mostly waiting for it to be over.

I went into In Utero with pretty high expectations. After really enjoying Nevermind, I was expecting another Nirvana album that would immediately click with me. Unfortunately, that wasn't really the case.
There are definitely things I appreciate about In Utero. The album feels much rougher and more abrasive than Nevermind, with a rawer production style and a darker, more uncomfortable atmosphere. Songs like “Heart-Shaped Box” and “All Apologies” are memorable, and I can understand why the album is so highly regarded. There’s also something interesting about how deliberately unpolished and confrontational it can sound.
But personally, I just didn't enjoy listening to it as much as I expected to. A lot of the harsher guitar tones and more chaotic moments didn't connect with me, and I found myself missing the more immediate melodies and accessible songwriting of Nevermind. In Utero seems like an album that rewards repeated listens, but even after giving it a fair chance, it didn't leave the same impression on me.
For me, Nevermind is still the Nirvana album I prefer. It feels more consistent and has more songs that I genuinely want to go back to. I can recognize what makes In Utero important and respected, but being able to appreciate an album's qualities doesn't necessarily mean enjoying it.
Overall, In Utero wasn't a bad album at all — it just wasn't the Nirvana experience I was hoping for. Maybe I'll appreciate it more with time, but for now, Nevermind remains my favorite.

I really wanted to get into Third/Sister Lovers, especially given how much love Big Star gets, but it just didn’t click for me. I listened to a couple of songs, hoping it would eventually pull me in, but I found myself losing interest pretty quickly and ended up skipping the album.
I can appreciate that there’s something deliberately messy and unconventional about it. The rough production, strange arrangements, and generally downbeat atmosphere give it a very distinct character, and I can see why some people consider it a cult classic. But for me, it felt more uneven and disjointed than compelling.
Maybe it’s one of those albums that needs the right mood or a few more listens, but on this first attempt, there just wasn’t enough there to make me want to stick around. Definitely not for me.

Younger Than Yesterday is one of those albums where I can understand why people love it without really understanding why I should love it myself. The Byrds were clearly moving beyond their earlier folk-rock sound here, bringing in more psychedelic, country, and experimental elements, and there are some genuinely interesting ideas throughout. Unfortunately, for me, the album never really comes together as an enjoyable listen.
A few songs work well enough, particularly when the band leans into their melodic side, but I found a lot of the record surprisingly uneven. The biggest problem for me was “C.T.A.-102,” which I found almost completely unbearable. The psychedelic effects and strange vocal treatment might be appealing if you're already on the album's wavelength, but to my ears they just make the song irritating rather than interesting. Some of the other more experimental moments have the same problem: they feel more like an experiment I am observing than music I actually want to listen to.
There are certainly things to admire here. The Byrds' harmonies are still great, and Roger McGuinn's guitar work gives the album plenty of character. David Crosby's songwriting also adds a more reflective and unusual dimension to the band's sound, while songs like “So You Want to Be a Rock 'n' Roll Star” have a much more immediate energy.
Still, appreciating what an album is trying to do and actually enjoying it are two different things. Younger Than Yesterday feels like an important record in The Byrds' development, but personally, I found it too inconsistent and occasionally too irritating to get much out of it. There are some good moments buried in here, but overall, it simply wasn't for me.

Shake Your Money Maker is a solid debut from The Black Crowes, and you can immediately hear the band’s love for classic rock, blues, and Southern rock. There’s plenty of swagger here, with crunchy guitars, bluesy riffs, and Chris Robinson’s raspy, soulful vocals giving the album its unmistakable character.
That said, for me, it was more of a “good” than a “great” listen. The album has all the right ingredients, but it never quite blew me away. Tracks like “Jealous Again,” “Hard to Handle,” and “She Talks to Angels” are undoubtedly strong, and the band clearly had the talent and attitude to stand out from the crowd. At times, though, the record feels like a very polished throwback to the classic-rock sound rather than something that completely makes its own mark.
The performances are energetic, the guitars sound great, and there’s a loose, bluesy feel running through the whole thing. Still, I found myself appreciating the album more than being genuinely excited by it. Maybe some of that comes down to expectations: considering how highly regarded the record is, I was expecting something that would really grab me from beginning to end.
Overall, Shake Your Money Maker is a good, straightforward rock album with some genuinely memorable songs. I can understand why it became such a successful debut and why The Black Crowes developed such a strong following. For me, though, it’s more of a respectable classic than a personal favorite — enjoyable, but not exactly a mind-blowing experience.

Marvin Gaye’s Let’s Get It On is one of those albums where I can definitely appreciate the quality without being completely blown away by it. The production is smooth, the vocals are great, and the whole thing has that warm, laid-back soul sound that Gaye is known for. The title track is obviously the standout, and there are some really nice moments throughout.
That said, I found the album a little boring at times. A lot of the songs have a similar slow, mellow feel, so it can start to blend together if you’re not really in the mood for it. I think it works better as something to put on in the background rather than an album that constantly grabs your attention.
Overall, I’d say it’s a solid record with some genuinely great moments, but it didn’t quite click with me as much as I expected. Definitely worth hearing for its place in soul music, just not something I’d rush back to.

Metallica’s self-titled 1991 album is one of those records that feels huge from the very first track. It’s heavy, sharp, and incredibly well-produced, but it also has a sense of melody and songwriting that makes it much more than just a collection of hard-hitting metal songs.
What really stands out is how strong the tracklist is. “Enter Sandman” is an obvious classic, but songs like “Sad but True,” “The Unforgiven,” “Wherever I May Roam,” and “Nothing Else Matters” show just how much range the band had at this point. They could go from crushing riffs to quieter, more emotional moments without it feeling out of place. “Through the Never” and “Holier Than Thou” bring plenty of speed and aggression too.
The production is a big part of the album’s appeal. The guitars sound massive, the drums hit hard, and everything feels polished without completely losing Metallica’s edge. It’s easy to see why the album became such a major crossover moment for the band and for heavy metal in general.
Even after all these years, Metallica still sounds powerful and surprisingly accessible. Whether you’re already a metal fan or just getting into the genre, there’s a lot to enjoy here. A great album from start to finish and probably one of Metallica’s most important records.

I’ll be honest: I wasn’t expecting to like Van Halen that much. Hard rock isn’t really my favourite genre, and I was pretty reluctant to give this album a proper chance at first. But sometimes an album just catches you off guard, and that’s exactly what happened here.
What immediately stands out is how much energy this record has. It’s loud, confident and incredibly fun without feeling like it’s trying too hard. Eddie Van Halen’s guitar playing is obviously a huge part of that. Even if you’re not particularly into guitar-heavy music, it’s hard not to appreciate how creative and exciting his playing sounds, especially on tracks like “Eruption” and “I’m the One.” There’s a real sense that the band is having a great time playing these songs.
David Lee Roth’s vocals and personality also give the album a lot of character. His style can be a bit much depending on your taste, but here it fits the music perfectly. The whole album has this carefree, almost reckless feeling that makes it surprisingly easy to get into.
I think what impressed me most is that the album managed to win me over despite not being my usual kind of music. It doesn’t feel like a record you have to study or force yourself to appreciate. You just put it on and, before you know it, you’re nodding along.
For a debut album from 1978, Van Halen still feels remarkably alive. It’s energetic, catchy, technically impressive and, most importantly, a lot of fun. I went into it with low expectations and quite a bit of hesitation, and ended up understanding why this album has such a strong reputation. Definitely not the genre I usually reach for, but this one was a very pleasant surprise.

Nilsson Schmilsson is one of those albums I really wanted to love, but it just didn’t click with me. Some of the songs felt more like a parody than something I could take seriously, and the eccentric production didn’t always work for me. That said, “Without You” is absolutely the standout—powerful, emotional, and easily my favorite track here. Overall, an interesting album, but not quite my thing.

It wasn’t my cup of tea… couldn’t get past the first songs.

I bought Back to Basics when I was a teenager, and I remember really liking it back then. At the time, the whole retro concept felt really cool and different. Christina Aguilera was mixing pop with jazz, soul, blues, and old-school influences, and as a younger listener I found the whole thing pretty impressive.
Revisiting it years later has been interesting, because my taste has changed quite a bit since then. I've listened to a lot more music and explored more genres, so I think I hear this album differently now. There are definitely songs I still enjoy, but overall I don't find the album nearly as exciting as I once did.
“Ain't No Other Man” is still easily my favorite. It has so much energy, the horns work perfectly, and Christina sounds fantastic. It's one of those songs where all the retro influences actually come together really naturally with modern pop production. “Candyman” is another one that still works for me, mainly because it's fun and doesn't take itself too seriously.
My main issue is that the album starts to feel repetitive after a while. The vintage samples, horns, strings, big vocal performances, and overall retro sound are interesting at first, but they don't evolve enough throughout the album. Eventually, a lot of the songs start blending together. I think the album would have benefited from being shorter and having a little more variety.
The retro influences are also more interesting to me in theory than in practice. Having listened to more jazz, soul, blues, and R&B over the years, I can hear that the album is really filtering those genres through a very polished 2000s pop lens. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it makes the “back to basics” concept feel more like an aesthetic than a genuine exploration of those musical styles.
Still, I can't deny that there's a lot of personality here. Christina clearly had a vision for this album and committed to it completely. The production is ambitious, the arrangements are often gorgeous, and there are enough great songs to make the album worth revisiting. Even when it doesn't work for me, I can appreciate that she was trying to do something more interesting than simply making another straightforward pop album.
So, while I don't love Back to Basics the way I did as a teenager, I'm glad I came back to it. It was actually pretty interesting to hear an album I once knew well through the ears of a more experienced listener. Some of the magic is still there, especially on the standout tracks, but I also notice the repetition and excess much more now.
In the end, Back to Basics is an ambitious, stylish, and very well-produced album that probably could have been much better with a little editing. Listening to the entire album can feel like a bit of a chore. I still have a soft spot for a few tracks yet I wouldn’t sit down and listen to the whole thing from start to finish.
Maybe that's the funny thing about revisiting music from your teenage years: sometimes the album hasn't changed at all—you've just become a different listener.

I really enjoyed Frank. It’s a great debut and you can immediately hear how unique Amy Winehouse was as an artist. Her voice is incredible, but what stood out to me even more was her songwriting. There’s a lot of honesty and personality in the lyrics, and she has this way of talking about relationships, heartbreak, and her own flaws that feels both funny and painfully genuine.
I especially liked songs like “Stronger Than Me,” “You Sent Me Flying,” and “Take the Box.” They have that jazzy, soulful sound that became such an important part of her identity, while still feeling quite different from what she would do later in her career. Frank also feels more raw and playful compared to Back to Black, which I think gives it its own charm.
That being said, I still think Back to Black is the better album. Frank sometimes feels like Amy was still figuring out exactly what she wanted her sound to be, whereas Back to Black feels much more confident and cohesive. The songwriting, production, and overall atmosphere on Back to Black are just on another level, and it has some of her most unforgettable songs.
Still, Frank is impressive considering it was her debut. You can already hear the talent, personality, and emotional honesty that would eventually make Amy Winehouse so special. It feels like a glimpse of an artist who was only going to get better.
Overall, I really liked Frank, but Back to Black remains the clear winner for me. Frank is the beginning of the story, while Back to Black is where everything comes together.

Ramones is a short, loud, and ridiculously energetic album. The songs are simple and catchy, with that raw, no-frills punk sound that made them so influential. It’s not perfect, but it’s a fun listen and definitely gets the job done. There’s a lot of repetition, but that’s also part of its charm. The whole thing feels spontaneous and almost effortless. “Blitzkrieg Bop” is obviously a standout, but there are plenty of other fun tracks here too. Overall, it’s a solid punk album that’s easy to throw on and enjoy.

Not really for me. I can appreciate the creativity and the unique sound, but the theatrical style and vocals just didn’t click with me. A few interesting moments, but overall it wasn’t my thing.

I really wanted to get into Red Dirt Girl, but unfortunately it just didn’t do much for me. It’s a very slow, quiet, and understated album, and after a while I found myself losing interest. The songs all seem to live in a similar mellow, melancholic space, so the album started to feel a bit flat and repetitive.
There’s no denying that Emmylou Harris is a great singer, and there are some nice melodies and thoughtful lyrics here. I can also appreciate that the album is clearly very personal and emotional. But for me, the emotional impact just wasn’t there. I never really felt pulled into the stories or connected strongly with the songs.
The biggest problem was probably the pacing. Everything moves along at such a measured pace that I kept waiting for something to change—a little more energy, a different arrangement, or a song that would really grab me. Those moments never really came. Instead, the album maintained pretty much the same mood from beginning to end.
I don't think it’s a bad album at all. It’s well made, sincere, and Harris sounds great. I can definitely understand why people who enjoy slow, intimate country and folk music would love it. It just wasn’t particularly engaging for me.
Overall, Red Dirt Girl felt more like an album I appreciated in theory than one I actually enjoyed listening to. There are some good songs and performances, but the overall experience was just too slow and subdued for my taste. By the end, I was mostly ready to move on to something else.

Led Zeppelin III is an album I ended up liking, although I’ll admit it took me a little while to figure out what I was listening to. Coming into it expecting the heavy, blues-driven sound that Led Zeppelin had established on their earlier records, I was pretty perplexed by how often the album seemed to change direction. At times, it genuinely felt like I had accidentally started listening to a completely different album.
That unpredictability is probably the most interesting thing about Led Zeppelin III. Songs like “Immigrant Song” immediately bring back the aggressive, larger-than-life Led Zeppelin sound, with its pounding drums and Robert Plant’s unmistakable vocals. But then the album suddenly moves into much softer and more acoustic territory. “That’s the Way” and “Tangerine,” for example, have a warmth and almost pastoral quality that feels worlds apart from the heavier songs. Instead of sticking to one style, the band explores folk, acoustic rock, blues, and hard rock, sometimes within the same album.
At first, I found those shifts a little confusing. The transitions can make the album feel inconsistent, especially if you’re expecting something that builds on the heavier sound of Led Zeppelin II. But the more I listened, the more I started to appreciate that this contrast is really the point. Jimmy Page and Robert Plant were becoming increasingly interested in British folk music and acoustic instrumentation, and Led Zeppelin III gives them the freedom to experiment with that side of their sound.
The centerpiece of the album for me is “Since I’ve Been Loving You.” It brings together a lot of what Led Zeppelin did best: slow-burning blues, incredible musicianship, and a huge emotional performance from Plant. It also feels like a bridge between the heavier and softer sides of the record. On the other hand, “Gallows Pole” is probably one of the clearest examples of the band refusing to stay in one lane. It begins relatively quietly before gradually building into something much more energetic and chaotic.
The album does have moments where the experimentation doesn’t completely work for me. Some of the softer tracks can feel almost disconnected from the heavier material surrounding them. But at the same time, I think that sense of disconnection is part of what makes Led Zeppelin III memorable. It isn't necessarily the most cohesive Led Zeppelin album, but it shows a band that was willing to take risks rather than simply repeat what had already worked.
Overall, I’d say I like Led Zeppelin III, even if I’m still somewhat perplexed by it. It’s an album that constantly makes you adjust your expectations. One minute you’re listening to a heavy rock song, and the next you’re somewhere completely different. That can be confusing, but it also makes the album feel adventurous. Rather than being a straightforward continuation of Led Zeppelin’s earlier work, Led Zeppelin III feels like the band testing how far they could stretch their sound — and even when those experiments don’t completely land, they make the album interesting.

I really wanted to like this more, but honestly, I found it pretty boring.
There are definitely some good songs here — “Miss You Much,” “Escapade,” and “Black Cat” are probably the highlights for me — but as an album, it felt so long. The production started to feel repetitive after a while, and I kept checking how many songs were left. Every time I thought I was getting close to the end, there was somehow still more.
I do appreciate what Janet was going for. The social and political themes are pretty ambitious for a mainstream pop album, and I can understand why this is considered such an important record. But for me, being ambitious and being enjoyable are two different things.
The weirdest part is that I never really felt like the album was building toward an ending. It just kept going and going until eventually it stopped. There are some great individual tracks, but I didn't particularly enjoy listening to the whole thing front to back.
Maybe this is one of those albums where I can appreciate the legacy more than the actual music. Not really for me.