Put a Pin on the Map View my Forum Guestmap
Free Guestmaps by Bravenet.com

The Old Acclaimed Music Forum

Go to the NEW FORUM

Music, music, music...
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that are p

What do people think?

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

I meant to finish by asking people if they could distinguish between the albums that are overplayed cliches and those that are genuine works of musical genius.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Sure. Most are of "pop genius," even the ones where that is not apparent (i.e. Led Zeppelin's "II", Guns N' Roses' "Appetite for Destruction", and a few others), otherwise they feasibly wouldn't be there.

Is something like "Appetite for Destruction" an overplayed cliche? Maybe. It's the top of that class of cliches, though, akin to how Sex Pistols and The Clash and Ramones are for punk, and Nirvana is for grunge, and "Kind of Blue" is for jazz. Basically every cliche is based on something pleasant, or that could have been pleasant, and the paragons of cliches are their rarified versions that emerge unscathed from scrutiny.

Of course, then, are any of musical genius? Depends - how do you define it? Overall we appreciate music according to the beauty and depth of the sounds, or the energy and passion (which themselves are a form of beauty), which can yet easily enough be faked (at least a bunch of times).

Me, I'm tempted (as I assume any would be) to say that the ones of musical genius are the ones that base their beauty on a formal shape and concept of beauty, like you say that a flower is beautiful.

And so, Pet Sounds seems like the obvious choice above others, as nearly anyone could see it as beautiful; the main lowest denominator criticisms one could raise against it would be that some of the voices sound "slightly idiotic" (the bad doo-woop groans, I mean) - a nitpick which is easily dealt with eventually by virtue of gained familiarity.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Here are three common clichés of the English language:

“to thine own self be true”
“that it should come to this”
“in my mind’s eye”

And they’re all from the greatest play ever written in English, Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

My point, of course, is that being an overplayed cliché and being a work of genius are not mutually exclusive categories. So I agree with mismaiome in this. Chuck Berry and Jimi Hendrix are the ultimate guitar clichés in rock. Anybody here want to claim they’re not geniuses?

I’m slightly uncomfortable with the idea of musical genius, anyway—even though I’ve used it myself often, and recently. The term suggests that there’s something like a “musical quotient” (like intelligence quotient—IQ—which is used to try to quantify geniuses in general). Maybe on the MQ scale, Quincy Jones and Thom Yorke get a 170, while Linda McCartney and Violent J get a 30? If that makes sense to you, now try to rate Ringo Starr. Or Damon Albarn. Or Exene Cervenka, or Freddie Mercury, or Timbaland, or Bootsy Collins, or Gene Vincent, or Trent Reznor, or Dwight Yoakam, or Spike Jones, or Pat Benatar, or LCD Soundsystem, or Grandmaster Flash…

I’m sure you see my point: calling an album or a song (or a movie or a novel or a building) a “work of genius” proves nothing. It's not specific, and it assumes more than it explains.

Let me not be intentionally obtuse: RR, I think you’re asking about the difference between albums that are really good and albums that are “merely” influential. But those categories overlap so much that, no, I can’t usefully distinguish them.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Great albums (usually) get overplayed eventually, just because they're great. I personally don't think great albums can get overplayed in the first place, but then I'm the crazy fool who listened to the same song for 18 hours..

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

I'll nominate a few for works of musical genius since everyone else is on their high horse: Doolittle; OK Computer; Odessey and Oracle. Cliches: Nevermind the Bollocks; Horses; Trout Mask Replica.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

I'd switch around Horses and OK Computer, but agreeable.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Could we call that the most useless thread of the week ?

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

yes

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Odessey and Oracle is hardly a work of genius...

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

IQ, MQ, I don't think either make sense. I'd say that, to establish musical genius, you'd take the albums in the Top 100 and compare them to something you know for sure to be musical genius, like Bach's body of work say.

Of course, a more in-depth classification of some of them, the way I see it:

001. "Pet Sounds" by The Beach Boys - melodic genius, harmonic genius, genius of counterpoint

(Not "pop genius" as well because the album is, I believe, an elevation of pop, and by "pop genius" we understand a sort of catchiness.)

002. "Revolver" by The Beatles - some melodic genius, varietal genius, a bit of harmonic genius (at points, the instrumental backing sounds dull/generic divorced from the voices), pop genius

003. "Nevermind" by Nirvana - a bit of melodic genius (sweet melodies masked), attitudinal/nihilistic genius, some pop genius

004. "The Velvet Underground & Nico" by The Velvet Underground - a bit of melodic genius, varietal genius, some attitudinal/nihilistic genius

005. "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" by The Beatles - some melodic genius, some harmonic genius, some varietal genius, pop genius

006. "Blonde on Blonde" by Bob Dylan - poetic genius, atmospheric genius

007. "Exile on Main St" by The Rolling Stones - some varietal genius, some attitudinal/nihilistic genius, assimilative genius, some atmospheric genius

008. "What's Going On" by Marvin Gaye - some harmonic genius, spiritual genius

009. "Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols" by Sex Pistols - attitudinal/nihilistic genius, some visceral genius

010. "London Calling" by The Clash - some attitudinal/nihilistic genius, a bit of atmospheric genius, a bit of pop genius

011. "Highway 61 Revisited" by Bob Dylan - some poetic genius, some atmospheric genius

012. "Are You Experienced?" by The Jimi Hendrix Experience - visceral genius, some atmospheric genius

013. "Astral Weeks" by Van Morrison - a bit of poetic genius, some spiritual genius

014. "OK Computer" by Radiohead - attitudinal/nihilistic genius, a bit of varietal genius, some atmospheric genius, a bit of genius of counterpoint

015. "The Beatles" by The Beatles - varietal genius, some attitudinal/nihilistic genius, some assimilative genius, a bit of pop genius (interruptions in it)

016. "The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars" by David Bowie - a bit of melodic genius, some attitudinal/fanciful genius

017. "Born to Run" by Bruce Springsteen - some attitudinal genius (of perseverance), a bit of spiritual genius

018. "It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back" by Public Enemy - some attitudinal/nihilistic genius, some atmospheric genius

And so forth.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Joshua Tree: Overplayed cliche. U2 actually display genuine talent in their previous works like War. Joshua Tree is the album where they bought into their own hype and started self consciously trying to be 'great', and it comes through via overemoted lyrics and tacky pandering half-understandings of politics.

Sex Pistols: Overplayed cliche. One of those albums that gets extra credit for 'first of it's sort to become popular'.

Most of the top 100 are genuinely good albums, or at least genuinely good pop albums.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Sex Pistols: Overplayed cliche. One of those albums that gets extra credit for 'first of it's sort to become popular'.

Not really. Related more to its unmatched fury and attitude.

One of its singles even starts with "I am an anti-Christ, I am an anarchist"... And manages to sound convincing too, even despite retrospective.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

I mean, does anything more vitriolic than that album cross your mind?

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

I disagree with the apparently prevailing view that there is no such thing as a musical I.Q.

I think that both the ability to create musical compositions and the ability to perform music come more naturally and easily to some people than to others. This, I suspect, would be a result of the brain's ability (or inability) to compose and/or perform music.

Examples of musical geniuses, i.e., folks with high musical I.Q.s, would be: Bach, Motzart, Paul McCartney, Brian Wilson, Prince, Miles Davis, Duke Ellington, and--to varying degrees--almost everybody whose work appears on this site. They didn't get where they were based solely on elbow grease and luck. There was something special about how their brains were "wired," in my opinion.

One more thought, that would explain different levels of "genius" among the AM top 100. Music that relies on musical conventions for its appeal probably requires more innate musical intelligence to produce than music that that relies on its emotional impact (or sheer attitude) for its appeal. But both kinds of music appeal to critics and fans.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Absolutely.

(Except for McCartney. Even his great albums like "Flaming Pie" are dull!)

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

A fair point, Paul. I certainly didn’t mean to claim that there’s no such thing as inherent musical ability (that would be a silly claim, especially since I’m living proof that it’s possible to have very little inherent musical ability). I don’t deny that musical genius exists—and I think your examples are good ones. And if you’re willing to operationally define a high musical IQ as “having music on this site,” fine by me.

Re: albums generally among the top 100 of all time that are works of musical genius vs. those that a

Well, I guess this thread wasn't useless afterall! As I listen to A Love Supreme.