Reviews by jaileer5

Two Rundgren albums in one month is going to really fuck up my algorithm, and Todd Rundgren is probably going to make my monthly replay. I'm big mad about this because Todd Rundgren is shit.

I've always thought that maybe Zeppelin were a bit overrated, and albums like Physical Graffiti did nothing to abuse me of that opinion. A decent album with a banger or two, but essentially just a good album for its era.

This album, however, is Led Zeppelin living up to their reputation. It's just banger after banger, nothing sounds old, nothing sounds out of date, just good time rock music. Bonham's drumming on this one is another place where my preconceived ideas were completely shattered. What a monster that guy is!

This is like easy listening, yacht rock and country all wrapped into one. I don't like any of those things.

Hotel California is a bit of a bop, though.

Dude. The first 4 minutes is just background noise and birds chirping and shit. Are we going to actually do music, or is this album solely here to annoy the shit out of me?

This album is too long. I respect that it doesn't sound like typical 80s pop, but some trimming would have been useful.

I don't get it.

This is actually great. It's jazzy, and bouncy, while still sounding true to the African roots. Also, check out the Wikipedia page, this album was the catalyst for some wild, tragic shit.

The instruments are fine. The singing is just stupid. why is this an hour and 13 minutes? It just sounds like one extremely basic song. Why is this band popular? I'm mad I had to listen to this.

I won't go too hard on this, because according to Rolling Stone Germany, it is "one of the outstanding soul albums of the 80s." Now, of all the outlets in the world, why the Wikipedia page would choose to include a quote from a German magazine - about American soul music - is confusing, suspicious, and hilarious.

Speaking of confusing, suspicious and hilarious, the Wikipedia page taught me that Billboard once had a chart called "Hot Black Singles." I promise you that I have googled that phrase more than once in my life and the results have *not* been music charts.

I started out thinking this was pretty ok. Not my cup of tea, but kind of cool to hear another cultures music. But then he just kept counting. Not singing, just counting over the music.

Then each song is like 20 minutes long or something and it just got so repetitive. Then I had to turn it off for a bit and when I turned it back on it was just so grating that I was mad I had to finish it and just said, “nope” out loud and turned it off.

So boring, man. Goddamn. Why is this here? What bridges did this build? Why must I listen to this before I die?

Song 1: This sounds like a slightly better Blur.
Song 3: This sounds like Blur & Gorillaz had a baby.
Song 4: This sounds like Blur and...wait a minute...

*googles*

Ah, of course.

So, I was unaware that Damon Albarn had another band. As I am lukewarm (at best) on Blur, but a huge fan of Gorillaz, I'm super curious about where this is going to go.

This was great. I'm giving it a 4 because I gave both Blur albums a 3, and I liked this miles better than either of those - even if it didn't have an all-timer like Song 2. If we had half stars WHICH WE SHOULD, it's a 3.5

This is dreary and boring and it sounds like the kind of music people listen to if they call their wife "mother." It sounds like the kind of music people listen to if they wear bonnets and ankle-length denim dresses and make their own clothes and have a couple sister wives.

It's not bad, but it is the rare album that needs to be an hour and 11 minutes, and this is not one of them. It's good, don't get me wrong, but it's very basic. I enjoyed my time with it, but I think Moby's Play, which is from the same era, shows more creativity and interesting ideas. Which is to say, I think this is a very good 90s electronic album, but it's not really one of the tentpole electronic albums that made a huge cultural impact, or influenced later generations.

Well shit. This was great. I don't know if I'll ever loop around to listening to this again, but it sounds so timeless that I would have never guess it was from the 70s. It honestly sounds like early 2000s in the vein of Vine and The Strokes.I'm not saying this is my favorite album, or even the best discovery I've made while doing this project. But I *will* say that this is one of the albums that I can 100% understand why it was included because I hear the bones of SO MUCH music that came later. This is one of those albums that influenced bands who've never even heard of them, simply by the fact that they influenced so many other bands.

Top notch, and definitely an album I'm glad I listened to before I died.

Half the album had me tapping my toes and impressed with the blues-y nature of the songs, and half of the album was annoying and sounded like the Beatles and Buddy Holly had a baby. I didn't love it, but I didn't hate it - and I thought I was going to hate it.

Sounds like a 3.

Really pretty good. Probably a 3.5 for me. I’d like to make it 4 stars, but I don’t know if it has the replayability that I’d want it to have to hit those heights. I tend to overrate electronic music a bit to compensate for the boomers that overwhelmingly partake in this project and don’t want to listen to anything but Fleetwood Mac and The Beatles.

I think I’ll go 4 stars here. It’s a bit of a reach, but the album is pretty unique, and a quite pleasant listen.

I quite liked it. Probably a 3.5 star rating is about right, but I'll bump it to a 4 so I seem sophisticated.

I don't know what this is but I PROMISE you a young Les Claypool ate this shit up.

I don't know what I'm supposed to rate this thing. On one hand, it wasn't good and I don't really ever want to listen to it again. On the other hand...I didn't mind it. 2.5 stars

Tedious.

It's really pretty good for what it is. Does that elevate it to 4 stars? It does not.