Go to the NEW FORUM
I always thought that Simon and Garfunkel's most critically acclaimed album was Bookends and in turn, I thought that Bridge Over Troubled Water was their underrated classic. It seems like Bookends gets all the hype but critics know their stuff!
definitely the Darkness ranking so high and how each Bjork record keeps ranking lower and lower dispite the fact the three follow ups to Debut were much better than Debut. Also not seeing Neutral Milk Hotel higher on the list since Aeroplane seems to be in every top 10 list in every alternative rock publication nowadays
Yeah, I was also surprised at how high The Darkness was ranked. Usually I can find some redeeming quality in an acclaimed album even if I don't personally care for it. Or I can understand why it was praised. But I deplore Permission To Land.
In general, I'm surprised at how much weight EOY lists have relative to all-time lists. I personally don't think that an album that just came out in 2007, being on no all-time lists, should be able to break the top 200 just on the strength of EOY lists. I still love this site though. What I do is I just think of the 2000s rankings as separate from the other time periods.
Ideally things would be closer to theyshootpictures.com, where the all-time rankings only make use of all-time lists, and the 21st century rankings make use of both EOY and all-time lists. It forces new movies to have a lot of catching up to do to be up in the all-time top 500, meanwhile they can still get their due on the 21st century list.
Again, this isn't criticism.
Totally agree about Debut not being as good as Post, Homogenic or Vespertine.
Sean, the problem with putting albums that just came out on an all time list is that you really need about 10 years to judge them accurately with everything else that came before them. What I bet Henrik's formula does is lessen the impact of EOY lists the farther away from the present they get, as more best of decade and all time lists include those albums. What the EOY lists do is try to even out the bias many albums get as many publications have created their canon, and it gets harder and harder for modern albums to break in.
The only thing that surprises me, is that Radiohead doesnt have all of their albums in the top 10. Except pablo honey
It surprises me that for Sleater-Kinney albums, Dig Me Out rates higher than One Beat and Woods. Their last two albums, in my opinion, are by far their best.
I'm also surprised the Drive By Truckers don't rate higher. Maybe it's an issue of 'Anything with a southern accent will be ignored outside the US thanks to a certain unpopular president'.
Also, as far as Neil Young albums, it shocks me to see Harvest higher than Rust Never Sleeps, Tonight's the Night, and Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere. I know it was his most commercially successful, but that shouldn't help you with critics.
Another thing is the fact that Elastica's s/t keeps lowering in the ranking every time the site is updated. This album got great reception in both Europe AND the US and made a lot of top 10 lists in the US and to this day is making many best of lists. I notice a lot of british bands from the 90s who ranked higher than Elastica don't get the great reception in the States that they got in the UK like Suede, Spiritualized, Happy Mondays, Manic Street Preachers, Travis and even Primal Scream. None of them ranked very high in America's year end lists but Elastic ranked in Village Voice's top 5 and seems to make to still rank high in American magazine's like Spin's top 100 of the last 25 years despite the fact that it's out of print in America.
Mine would be the rankings of Village Green Preservation Society and Odessey and Oracle.
How about Prodigy's Firestarter at #159 on the songs list? Looking at the sources, it seems like it's being propped up entirely by Q magazine.