Bands who had a "classic" / acclaimed album late in their carrer?

[MirrorMask]

Generally a band, either because of the hunger in their youth or more generally because we all love what came before and therefore nothing can beat an album that has 10-15 years worth of fond memories about, has their classic album or albums in the early stages of their carrer.
It's not an iron rule of course, but generally between the third and the fifth album you can find most of what are considered "classic albums" by bands.

Do you know of bands who had an album that can either be considered classic or a landmark in their discography? an album with overwhelming positive acclaim and that spawned one or more staples of the live show?

First big example that comes into mind is Judas Priest - first album in 1974, and Painkiller came out in 1990. Their TWELFTH studio album, 16 years after the debut, had one of the ultimate classic songs of the entire genre, the title track, and while maybe it's not the album that everyone agree is their best, was surely an important album that was liked by the majority.

Can you come up with more examples? I don't know if we should count also songs, opposed to whole albums - for example 12 years after their debut and with the 9th album, Iron Maiden had Fear of the Dark, which is one of their main live staples, but I wouldn't call the whole Fear of the Dark album a classic one.

[Zydar]

Well, speaking of Iron Maiden I know there are many here on DTF who considers their reunion albums to be among their very best (not me though). A Matter Of Life And Death seems to be very highly regarded, and probably considered a "classic" in their discography, released 26 years into their career.

[MirrorMask]

Also - apologies for my failing to realize the section I was posting in.

Please mods move it to the general music discussion and forgive my eyesight 

[Max Kuehnau]

Forgive me for saying so, but: DT releasing D/T can be considered an acclaimed album (see the album's wikipedia page for chart statistics, top 10 positions in 19 countries, 2 number ones) Might be their most successful album to date in that respect. I personally consider ADTOE a classic album of theirs as well.

[Lonk]

I think Pink Floyd’s Division Bell falls on that category. After what happened with Roger Waters, Division Bell was pretty successful being their only album to rank #1 in 13 different countries.

Oh, and Division Bell was released 27 years after their debut album.

[hefdaddy42]

Also - apologies for my failing to realize the section I was posting in.

Please mods move it to the general music discussion and forgive my eyesight 

Okey dokey

[Zantera]

Swans is the first band that comes to mind. They had several amazing albums in the 80s and 90s and 'finished' (at least we thought so) their career in 1996 with what many consider to be their best album, yet 14 years later they dropped a pretty decent return album and the band was back. They followed that album up with 3 highly critically acclaimed albums in a row - all 3 of them clocking in at 2 hours and considered by many fans to be 3 of their best albums. Just a quick glance at RYM (for reference) tells you that 2 of those 3 albums are in the top3 of their albums on there. They just released a new album last week that's also really strong, so with band leader Michael Gira now at 65 years old - the band has probably their strongest 4-album run of their whole career.

Anathema dropped for me (and many others) their best album in 2010 with We're Here Because We're Here - almost 20 years after they started out. They have continued putting out great albums since.

Nick Cave is another one who is still going strong. He's changed styles a bit over the years but his last two albums have been really strong and shows that he still has it. His last few albums have been getting great reviews too.

These 3 just at the top of my head

[DTA]

Rush ended their career on their best album since the 80's with Clockwork Angels. And I love how they played basically the whole thing live too. Most old bands never play a lot of their new shit.

U2 and Songs Of Innocence. After a bleak 2000's, this one came out really strong.

[Zydar]

Good call on Rush. Clockwork Angels is probably a Top 5 Rush album for me.

[romdrums]

Marillion with Marbles and FEAR, though I think the praise for FEAR is misplaced. 

[Stadler]

Bruce Springsteen, "The Rising".   29 years after his debut, and following the tragedy that was September 11, as a general proposition, we* were waiting to hear what the reaction would be from the artistic community, and Bruce delivered.   Several of those songs - the title track, "Mary's PLace", "My City Of Ruins" - have a place in his setlists today.

Van Halen, "A Different Kind Of Truth".  34 years after their debut, and their first new work with Roth in 28 years.  That's a favorite of mine and while I wish the best for EVH and crew, I have a feeling in my bones that that will be their last full-length original work. 

Gonna get some flack here, but Kiss' Sonic Boom (2009) and Monster (2012).  Are they "Destroyer"?  Nah, but for a band that is 35 and 38 years in, they are solid quintessential Kiss records, and while the sound leaves something to be desired (and on Monster, you can start to hear the edges of Paul's voice fraying) they are solid hard rock records that fit, in my view, nicely in the catalogue.   I know others balk at the "Thayer/Singer" thing, and love "Revenge", but I listen to these two FAR more than I do Revenge.

[RoeDent]

Porcupine Tree's most acclaimed albums were from the latter half of their career: In Absentia, Deadwing and Fear of a Blank Planet.

[Setlist Scotty]

Rush ended their career on their best album since the 80's with Clockwork Angels. And I love how they played basically the whole thing live too. Most old bands never play a lot of their new shit.

Nevermind that their 2 most popular albums are albums #7 and 8 in their catalog.

Another band that comes to mind is Aerosmith with their Permanent Vacation and Pump albums.

edit: here's some others I was thinking of:
Fates Warning and A Pleasant Shade of Gray (album #8).

Perhaps Genesis and their last 3 albums with Phil Collins (albums #12-14), though not necessarily by the diehard older fans.

Heart with their self titled album (album #8).

Journey with their Escape and Frontiers albums (albums #7 and 8).

Maybe Queen with their Innuendo album (album #13).

Yes with 90125 (album #11)

[TheSoylentMan]

Fleetwood Mac's Rumours was their 11th album.

Not bands, but quite a few solo artists have released huge albums late in life:

Johnny Cash - American Recordings
David Bowie - Blackstar
Leonard Cohen - You Want It Darker
Loretta Lynn - Van Lear Rose

[WildRanger]

Deep Purple - Purpendicular (their first album featuring Steve Morse on guitar and the best by far in the post-Perfect Strangers discography).

[bosk1]

Respectfully, I think a few posts are missing this important qualifier:

Do you know of bands who had an album that can either be considered classic or a landmark in their discography? an album with overwhelming positive acclaim and that spawned one or more staples of the live show?

I don't think the thread is asking about a band late in their career putting out an album that is a great return to form or of a superior quality that arguably puts it up there with their "classic" albums.  It's more than that.  I immediately thought of Scorpions with Humanity Hour I or Tesla with Into the Now.  Both of those albums are undoubtedly a return to form that show a maturity of songwriting that puts them up there with the classic albums by those bands.  But they don't have the critical acclaim or that lightning-in-a-bottle song that has become a mainstay in the live sets long after those albums are forgotten.  I think some of the albums listed so far also fall into a similar category.

[Max Kuehnau]

Respectfully, I think a few posts are missing this important qualifier:

Do you know of bands who had an album that can either be considered classic or a landmark in their discography? an album with overwhelming positive acclaim and that spawned one or more staples of the live show?

I don't think the thread is asking about a band late in their career putting out an album that is a great return to form or of a superior quality that arguably puts it up there with their "classic" albums.  It's more than that.  I immediately thought of Scorpions with Humanity Hour I or Tesla with Into the Now.  Both of those albums are undoubtedly a return to form that show a maturity of songwriting that puts them up there with the classic albums by those bands.  But they don't have the critical acclaim or that lightning-in-a-bottle song that has become a mainstay in the live sets long after those albums are forgotten.  I think some of the albums listed so far also fall into a similar category.

thanks for mentioning Humanity: Hour I

[Stadler]

Johnny Cash - American Recordings
Loretta Lynn - Van Lear Rose

Goddammit.  Nice calls. 

[SoundscapeMN]

Marillion - Marbles
The Monkees - Good Times!
The Beatles - Abbey Road
Fates Warning - Theories of Flight
The Police - Synchronicity
The Tea Party - The Ocean at the End

[WildRanger]

Yep, Bowie's Blackstar definitely. It's critically very acclaimed.

[Learning2Live]

Neal Morse (I know technically NMB but still....) with Similitude came first to my mind.

[pg1067]

Given the criteria, this is tough.

In 1988, Heart's self-titled release might have qualified, but that album is not now "later in their career" (it was the 8th of 16 studio albums and was released only 10 years into a 40+ year career)  Same thing with Painkiller, which could be said to have been released relatively early in Priest's career (12th of 18 studio albums, but released 16 years into a nearly 45 year career).

Given the criteria, probably the best answer is Abbey Road.

Clockwork Angels and Synchronicity are also good answers (although I don't care too much for the former).

[Stadler]

Given the criteria, this is tough.

In 1988, Heart's self-titled release might have qualified, but that album is not now "later in their career" (it was the 8th of 16 studio albums and was released only 10 years into a 40+ year career)  Same thing with Painkiller, which could be said to have been released relatively early in Priest's career (12th of 18 studio albums, but released 16 years into a nearly 45 year career).

Given the criteria, probably the best answer is Abbey Road.

Clockwork Angels and Synchronicity are also good answers (although I don't care too much for the former).

I would kind of push  back on Synchronicity for similar reasons.  The debut came out in '78, they put out three progressively more popular (and less punkish) records, and culminated their career, five years into it, with their most successful record.   Sting, tired of the "democracy", bailed.  Five records in five years...

Does that really qualify?   

[Samsara]

It's not impossible to come up with an objective definition of "classic/acclaimed album," but honestly, it's pretty damn hard.

To figure it out, not only does the album have to *most* of a band's fanbase fawn over it as "the best," or "one of the best," but it also needs critical acclaim, and financial success to a degree (harder to diagnose in this current era).

Add me as another supporter of Rush's Clockwork Angels. But how many TRULY think that's a classic record from them? I mean, it's not like you say Dream Theater. Most people immediately say SFAM or I&W. Queensryche, almost everyone says Mindcrime. Pink Floyd - Dark Side of the Moon.

To me, those are "classics." Does Clockwork Angels, FOR RUSH, fall into that high point as the tip top of their catalog? I'm not sure. It's one of my favorites, but I'd probably put three or four Rush records over Clockwork. So that far down in a 20 album discography, is it a "classic?"

Sorry, I know this makes it more difficult. I just don't know how you objectively answer something like this. 

[Stadler]

Clockwork Angels isn't a classic for me.  It's a very good record, among other very good records.  I personally prefer Snakes and Arrows.  But I don't say this to be "definitive", I just say it to point out the subjectivity. 

[pg1067]

Given the criteria, this is tough.

In 1988, Heart's self-titled release might have qualified, but that album is not now "later in their career" (it was the 8th of 16 studio albums and was released only 10 years into a 40+ year career)  Same thing with Painkiller, which could be said to have been released relatively early in Priest's career (12th of 18 studio albums, but released 16 years into a nearly 45 year career).

Given the criteria, probably the best answer is Abbey Road.

Clockwork Angels and Synchronicity are also good answers (although I don't care too much for the former).

I would kind of push  back on Synchronicity for similar reasons.  The debut came out in '78, they put out three progressively more popular (and less punkish) records, and culminated their career, five years into it, with their most successful record.   Sting, tired of the "democracy", bailed.  Five records in five years...

Does that really qualify?

Well...I get your point, but it's the last studio album released in the last or second to last year of the band's career (a few isolated live appearances notwithstanding).  That it was a very short career doesn't change that (and it's really not much different than Abbey Road (9 year career versus 5-6 year career).

Clockwork Angels isn't a classic for me.  It's a very good record, among other very good records.  I personally prefer Snakes and Arrows.  But I don't say this to be "definitive", I just say it to point out the subjectivity. 

Was CA really "successful"?  It didn't even go Gold in the U.S. (none of Rush's 3 21st Century albums did).  It spawned what was probably a highly successful tour, but I don't know.  Some very vocal Rush fans goo over it, but it wouldn't be any higher than 8th or 9th on my Rush album ranking (and somewhere in the 10-14 range is probably more realistic).

[WildRanger]

Was CA really "successful"?  It didn't even go Gold in the U.S. (none of Rush's 3 21st Century albums did).  It spawned what was probably a highly successful tour, but I don't know.  Some very vocal Rush fans goo over it, but it wouldn't be any higher than 8th or 9th on my Rush album ranking (and somewhere in the 10-14 range is probably more realistic).

I really doubt whether RIAA certifications are accurate or not. It's highly questionable. RIAA says Maiden's Number of the Beast has only one Platinum, Motorhead's Ace of Spades didn't even go Gold, but I don't believe it.

[MirrorMask]

I don't think the eventual passage of time should be a factor. Yes, Painkiller will soon be 30 years old, but at the time it was the twelfth album of a carrer that was 4 years short of hitting the 20th anniversary. It's still an album that was important and that gave a classic staple to their setlist many years and many albums after they started.

If the thread was about single songs, I would still count Fear of the Dark as a late addition to the Maiden list of classic songs. We're 3 months away from the 21th anniversary of the reunion that spawned the 6 pieces lineup, while the recording history of Iron Maiden since the debut and until the reunion lasted 19 years, so technically everything before the reunion qualifies as "(less than) the first half of Maiden's carreer". Still, the band was a household name for many years and many tours, and had many live staples, before Fear of the Dark eventually was recorded.

I'm not an active fan of AC/DC but to make another song example, I believe that Thunderstruck is from 1990, and came way, way after they wrote all their major hits. That would still count to me as a live staple that originated "later" in their carrer, even though by now it's 30 years old.

[Samsara]

How about Fates Warning's Theories of Flight?

Throw the financial/certifications out the window, since its a different era.

It was regarded by the majority of fans and critics as one of their finest albums. Well represented in the live shows, and fans (I saw five shows on their support tours for the records) were just as bonkers for the new stuff as they did the old.

Is that a classic for Fates? *I* think so, but I still think most people would say no. And honestly, I couldn't blame them.

Awaken the Guardian, Parallels, and APSOG are probably the "fan classics" if you would.

But again, assuming that (and those aren't my personal classics for Fates, just trying to think of the ones that would be for most fans) is accurate, that's just "classic" "FOR FATES WARNING." An "all-time classic" should represent across the genre.

This is almost an impossible discussion because of all the very subjective factors.

[Stadler]

I really doubt whether RIAA certifications are accurate or not. It's highly questionable. RIAA says Maiden's Number of the Beast has only one Platinum, Motorhead's Ace of Spades didn't even go Gold, but I don't believe it.

It's my understanding that RIAA certs are not automatic.  Meaning, there's not a database somewhere that when the "1,000,001th" record is sold, they dispatch out platinum record plaques to the band and management.  It's my undertanding that the artist (or her representative) have to petition for an accounting and go from there.  Some bands (we can all name one obvious one) have opted not to push it past say gold or a single platinum, because depending on who played on it/who wrote the songs, it might result in greater royalties paid out to others.

That doesn't necessarily explain those two examples but it could (would that recert of Ace Of Spades result in more cash for Lemmy, or the record company?). 

[pg1067]

Some bands (we can all name one obvious one) have opted not to push it past say gold or a single platinum, because depending on who played on it/who wrote the songs, it might result in greater royalties paid out to others.

We can?

How about Fates Warning's Theories of Flight?

Throw the financial/certifications out the window, since its a different era.

It was regarded by the majority of fans and critics as one of their finest albums. Well represented in the live shows, and fans (I saw five shows on their support tours for the records) were just as bonkers for the new stuff as they did the old.

Is that a classic for Fates? *I* think so, but I still think most people would say no. And honestly, I couldn't blame them.

Was it?  I only really know the reactions here, but I think DIADL was significantly better.

But yeah, context is necessary.  Otherwise, bands like FW couldn't possibly qualify here.

I don't think the eventual passage of time should be a factor. Yes, Painkiller will soon be 30 years old, but at the time it was the twelfth album of a carrer that was 4 years short of hitting the 20th anniversary. It's still an album that was important and that gave a classic staple to their setlist many years and many albums after they started.

By that logic, stuff like Exile on Main Street would count.

[Stadler]

Some bands (we can all name one obvious one) have opted not to push it past say gold or a single platinum, because depending on who played on it/who wrote the songs, it might result in greater royalties paid out to others.

We can?

I thought with the "not paying other members" would give it away.  Do you think Paul Stanley is eager to shell out more cash to Vinnie Vincent? 

[pg1067]

Some bands (we can all name one obvious one) have opted not to push it past say gold or a single platinum, because depending on who played on it/who wrote the songs, it might result in greater royalties paid out to others.

We can?

I thought with the "not paying other members" would give it away.  Do you think Paul Stanley is eager to shell out more cash to Vinnie Vincent?

I assume not, but your Kiss knowledge is light years beyond mine (which is basically, that band that wore makeup in the 70s and then took it off and then put it back on and who had maybe half a dozen songs I think are worth listening to).  My sister-in-law and her husband might have gotten the reference, but not me.

[Max Kuehnau]

I'd like to add some more bands that came to mind just now:

Yes: Drama and 90125
Deep Purple: Perfect Strangers, Purpendicular, Rapture Of The Deep and infinite
The Gavin Harrison era of Porcupine Tree