R.E.M.'s Peter Buck said, "We've sort of flirted with greatness, but we've yet to make a record as good as Revolver or Highway 61 Revisited or Exile on Main Street or Big Star's Third. I don't know what it'll take to push us on to that level...".

Question is...was this before or after the release of Automatic for the People? What's your guess? No cheating. And don't give it away if you aready know the answer.

I'm going to have to say after Automatic. R.E.M don't seem like the self-aggrandizers that some other musicians are.

While it's obvious that they were influenced by them, I find it odd that Buck considers Big Star on the same level as The Beatles, Dylan, and the Stones. They're good, but are they THAT good?

Also I'm going to have to agree with Buck. They've made some good records, but they just aren't on par with the all time great pieces. For me R.E.M's claim to critical acclaim has been the consistency by which they put out good records.

I'd say after because I highly doubt that REM considers Automatic For the People their masterpiece.

In my opinion, Automatic for the people truly is a masterpiece, on the level of the best albums by the beatles, stones, and dylan. Like SR, I can't see how Big Star is in the same league as these 4, but whatever.

But R.E.M. seems humble, so that comment could have come from anywhere in their career.

It is probably simply a matter of perspective, but my whole life I've always viewed the 1960's classics from the Stones, Beatles, Dylan, and others as being just "greater" than anything before or since. I'm just a little younger than Peter Buck, so I imagine he grew up thinking the same thing. Also, I can't imagine any musician (perhaps other than McCartney or Dylan) call their own work a masterpiece (which is a different kind of perspective issue).

Technicaly, even if he said it before Automatic for the People, it doesn't mean that he thinks Automatic is on that level either. When I read the quote, I was curious though. Of course, it was almost certainly said after Murmur. So, other than Automatic, what would come close?

Guess the R.E.M. guy should weigh in.

I know Buck's comment was before Automatic, but not too much before; I think it appeared in an interview around the release of Out of Time.

I'll agree with the conclusion that R.E.M.'s greatness has more to do with their body of work from 1981 to 1996 than with any album in particular--although I'd put Murmur or Automatic up against almost anything else.

Oh, and the seeming incongruity of Big Star being on the list? Well, Big Star IS great, but that's just Peter being the former record store employee showing off a bit. One of my favorite things about the band is the fact that their lead guitarist is a music geek rather than an axe hero.

Big Star is one of those acts that has had tons of impact. Maybe more impact than actual greatness. The Replacements, R.E.M., Elliott Smith, Wilco and others just would not have been the same without the work of Chilton and Bell. That said, I think just about all of those artists have made better albums than Big Star.

I was just listening to Murmur a few days ago for the 328543th time and it is such a damn great, perfect masterpiece, but it's a totally different kind of record. It, along with some other albums from the early '80s, was the genesis of modern alternative/indie rock, while Dylan, the Beatles, the Stones, are classic rock. I mean, just totally different kind of music. It's like Androw Lloyd Webber or Stephen Sondheim saying that none of their musicals are as good as 1800s opera. You can't analyze it.

The fact of the matter is, I listen to Murmur as much as Exile On Main Street, Revolver, and John Wesley Harding.