Reviews by james_mir

Bland rock is good compared to this album. I disliked this one with all my rock soul!

I think I didn't understand the hype about the new wave. Is this a so broad style that I can't recognize it anywhere? Sometimes, I think it is much more on the rock side (like this album), and other times, it looks much more like electronic stuff.

I'll never get it, but this album is amusing but not remarkable.

I don't understand why Doves has 2 albums on the list. I kind of enjoyed the other one, but this one here is just annoying, and indeed, it is not something anyone should listen to before dying.

I usually like to hear non-obvious albums around here, but when this is the best option, I prefer to go back to the recommendations of the Beatles and Beach Boys!

Thanks to the 1001 list, I think I've already listened to enough Neil Young to see that his styles and production vary a lot. I think this album is the most well-produced one from him on the list since his voice is clear (for the good and the bad), and the instruments are all so clear that I think I was listening to some HI-FI stuff on my streaming service (even without a subscription).

However, this is by far the worst of his albums on the list. Sadly, the best production was used in the worst music.

I think another 3-star rating for another Neil Young album will not hurt anyone.

I listened to 880 albums on the list before discovering the "Americana" music style, just to discover that I don't like it. Based on it, I think I'll not get all the hype about Lana del Rey, so I'll not try so hard.

I was not enjoying the other "The cure" albums from the list so much since they are too strange for me, but this one was wow! I think I finally got it, and now I should re-listen the two other ones that I rated with 3 stars. 5 stars to compensate.

The essence of what I can understand as post-punk.

This is not a bad album, and I can almost understand its inclusion on the list, but after 5 The Who's albums on it, I noted that I'm indeed a fan of their greatest hits and not much more.

It's a good blues/rock album from the '60s, but it's not exactly the Rolling Stones. Indeed, checking the Wikipedia page, we can see that it is basically a cover album with songs by some famous bluesists.

I understand its inclusion on the list. It is, of course, historically important, and I enjoyed it, but being the Rolling Stones and with so many albums in their career, I'm unsure if being historically important is enough to be among their best albums.

I thought I would like this one, but in the end, I didn't enjoy it so much. Maybe another day with another mood, but it's not a bad album; it is consistent with what is expected from a 1989 album.

The Byrds were good until now, and I understood that Gene Clark was the guy behind them, but this album is very annoying and never-ending. "For A Spanish Guitar" is a good highlight, but it doesn't save the album.

I discovered and started to like (as much as possible) Elvis Costello on the 1001 list. After five (5!) albums, I feel he can achieve the impossible. He can sound very repetitive, and very repetitive, even though it has one of the widest ranges of styles on the list.

How is it possible?

I don't know.

I prefer his work with "The Attractions," but I didn't dislike this debut. The rawness that is only possible in a debut album saves it from being just "another (but different)" Elvis Costello album.

The authors of the 1001 book really love "Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds". Even though I do not consider all their work among my favorites, I can understand why they have so many albums on the list.

Each of these albums is so different but also so aligned with each other that it is hard to select just one to represent the whole work of the band. This also creates a problem: wrong choices like this one. I still like the final result of the album with all this speech poetry, but it's far from the best found on the list.

I liked it for today. It's far from what I consider an excellent album, but it's honest, fun, and easygoing rock. Besides "Message in a Bottle," I was unaware of this "The Police" release, so it was a good experience.

Compared with other albums from them here on the 1001 list, "Synchronicity" impressed me more.

Comparing this album with "Back to Black" sounds a bit unfair, but I can't see how much evolution is palpable when listening to this one after listening to "Back to Black" some months ago. It's still easy to see Amy's powerful voice and qualities along this release, but the production is so over that sometimes it masks her quality behind a wall of synthetic sounds.

It's a great album, but it looks like what it is: a debut from a potential star (later confirmed).

I'm a bit tired of this post-punk. Maybe it's just my mood today, but this list is so full of this kind of music that I like the style, but I dislike how much I got here.

I never heard about them before. It's a good album in the most standard way to be a good album.

I can see their influence somehow when I listen to Coldplay or Imagine Dragons, so I guess they should provide a very nice live concert. It would look like something very ahead of their time for 1978.

"Ragged Glory" is a way better album from them, but this album confirms that Crazy Horse helps Neil Young achieve his finest.

I liked it a lot, and I'm becoming a fan of Neil's rock-like work. I'll rate it with a 3, regretting a bit that I also rated "Ragged Glory" with a 3 in the past.

Good but not so remarkable for me

I know that the 1001 list is very USA/UK-centered, but I must say that for each pair of country albums on the list, we can replace one of them (like this one) with almost ANY album by almost ANY artist from India, Nigeria, or South Africa, for example. I am keeping the list only of native-English speakers rather than thinking about other world music.

I know the original book was unavoidably focused on the USA and UK since these countries gave us the majority of good albums worldwide, but the book was updated. The list includes even albums from 2022, so finding suitable replacements for hidden country albums should not be a real challenge.

Despite the rant, this album is like any other country album that doesn't have any highlights or something to say anymore, and that was not as influential as any other country album (I must say that there are some excellent and influential country albums that I reaffirm, it's not the case here).

The album is very outdated, even for 1965.

It's good jazz, but I didn't see too many novelty or highlights for this one.