The last “great” album was.....

[Stadler]

Sorry I wasn’t specific enough in my original post.

Basically what I’m looking for is any album that in 20-25 years will be considered among the best albums ever released.

For that you have to have...

Huge commercial success.
Huge critical success.
A couple of huge singles that will likely still be being played years later.
An album that is accessable to as many people as possible, including music snobs.
A unique sound that others copied.
A story behind it.

So I'm going for Amy Winehouse - Back to Black.

I'm not really a fan, and not really knowledgeable about her career other than the tabloid stuff, but I know that album, and know the impact it's had.  That's a really good answer.

[HOF]

On this note, I would have NEVER imagined that LTE1/2 and those early Transatlantic records would wind up being so adored that people would still be hyped about those projects 20ish years later. I like them at the time too, but never imagined they'd become such fixtures in terms of how people think about the artists involved. TA especially is pretty much bigger than any of the main projects of the guys involved at this point.

For me, both of those albums expanded my interest in prog beyond the prog-metal sphere significantly (TA more than LTE, but LTE pushed some boundaries in terms of fusion and non-heavy stuff as well). I’d go so far as to say the first two Transatlantic albums are possibly the most important prog albums since the 70s in terms revitalizing the genre and pushing it to a bigger audience (even though the individual members were already starting to revitalize things in their own respective bands before that).

But are either of those albums broad enough to qualify here?  My kid knows (and likes) Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours".  She knows "Back In Black" (and likes the single, "You Shook Me...").   She has no idea of LTE or TA.  She MIGHT get it if I said "TA is a band with the guy you went to his songwriting seminar", or maybe "he's the Jesus guy" (I say that with no disrespect whatsoever). 

I don't make it a habit of listening to mid-20's female pop-stars writing songs from their diaries.  But folklore (or 1989) are THAT GOOD.  There's a connection there for this 50+ year old twice-married father of four.   I can RELATE to "Wildest Dreams", maybe even MORE now that I'm older.  folklore too.  That to me is what makes a great - transcendent - album.

No, I wasn’t so much saying those are transcendent albums, just remarking that those albums did have a very big impact on the prog genre (and on many here in particular). I do think there is a lot of value in that though. Along the spectrum of musical accomplishments, just being able to make an album that thousands of people love is great in and of itself, but making an album that revitalizes an entire genre is a really cool thing. 

[Skeever]

On this note, I would have NEVER imagined that LTE1/2 and those early Transatlantic records would wind up being so adored that people would still be hyped about those projects 20ish years later. I like them at the time too, but never imagined they'd become such fixtures in terms of how people think about the artists involved. TA especially is pretty much bigger than any of the main projects of the guys involved at this point.

For me, both of those albums expanded my interest in prog beyond the prog-metal sphere significantly (TA more than LTE, but LTE pushed some boundaries in terms of fusion and non-heavy stuff as well). I’d go so far as to say the first two Transatlantic albums are possibly the most important prog albums since the 70s in terms revitalizing the genre and pushing it to a bigger audience (even though the individual members were already starting to revitalize things in their own respective bands before that).

But are either of those albums broad enough to qualify here?  My kid knows (and likes) Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours".  She knows "Back In Black" (and likes the single, "You Shook Me...").   She has no idea of LTE or TA.  She MIGHT get it if I said "TA is a band with the guy you went to his songwriting seminar", or maybe "he's the Jesus guy" (I say that with no disrespect whatsoever). 

I don't make it a habit of listening to mid-20's female pop-stars writing songs from their diaries.  But folklore (or 1989) are THAT GOOD.  There's a connection there for this 50+ year old twice-married father of four.   I can RELATE to "Wildest Dreams", maybe even MORE now that I'm older.  folklore too.  That to me is what makes a great - transcendent - album.

I may have misunderstood the topic and was just going with what I'd find to be personally great in 20 years. To me that's not as important because it's more like the Grammy's and stuff - if you personally don't care, then why does it matter how "great" something is considered on the wide scale?

There's a lot of stuff I've loved over the years that will probably still be considered great by someone's daughter or grandkids in 20 years. I can imagine my son asking me about Ariana, Bruno, Drake, Kendrick, Jay Z, Kanye, Taylor, Lil Nas X and so many others in a decade while I get to play spokesperson for the music I liked, but did not love, probably not very different from the feeling my own Dad must have had when I started asking him about Rush and Yes (neither of whom he actually loves all that much). Then there's stuff he actually likes (The Boss, Neil Young, John Prine, and so on) and, to be quite honest, I acknowledge that the stuff was considered great then, and still considered great now, but I just don't care about it at all.  Some other albums that have been mentioned here as great, like Back in Black, get a big yawn from me. Even if I don't dispute of them deserving their reputation.

I think I'll still think "To Pimp a Butterfly" is rad in 2035 and I'm pretty sure a lot of people will agree. I'm pretty sure I'll still like dredg- el cielo even better, and no one will care. Then there's stuff like Vai and Satch. Must have had to be part of a niche 20 years ago to like it, and that same niche still care today. The answers I chose are more like that. The general public will never care about Petrucci or Yvette Young, but as long as people are playing guitar and still getting into music around that, someone will still consider it great.

[ariich]

I honestly don’t know how to answer this question.

Yeah, same.

"Great" album as in...? an album I think it's great? an album that will become a classic?  an album that since its release, nothing else came around that was even better? an album that if it was released in another era it would have entered the list of best selling albums of all time we're currently discussing in another topic?

Yeah, all this.

Great albums come out all the time.

Truer words have not been spoken in this thread.

But albums for the ages do not.   That's the real difference in some of the answers here.

Eh, an album can only be identified as "for the ages" once ages have passed. And it's difficult to know what will be seen as a masterpiece in 20+ years. I don't hear anything in Folklore that makes me think it will necessarily have that kind of status.

[Skeever]

So if "still considered broadly appealing 20-25 years later" is the test, we should be looking at albums from the late 90s and early 00s as the first batch of "new" certifiably great albums.

But I think 20-25 years is a bit too long (and also, feels a bit too convenient for "men of a certain age" to discount all the music that came out after they left high school). And yeah, no one knows which albums from 2020-2021 are still going to be considered great in 2045. But I also think that's kind of an extreme way of looking at it. I think generally 5-10 years is enough time to tell if an album still has general appeal or whether it (and the artist) was just a flash in the pan. Once someone's been around for 10 years making relevant music, like it or not, they're probably here to stay.

[Zantera]

King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard - L.W.

Latest album from a band I was already quite into, but this is easily their best album yet IMO.

That's interesting because as someone who has liked them for a few years I find it their weakest. Aside from maybe the final track it's such a slog to get through and if someone told me these were all B-sides that had been laying around for years I would not be surprised. 

[Stadler]

I think the difficulty for some is separating from the personal.   I can't and won't speak for T-Ski, but for me, the question is really "If there's a movie, and in the scene someone is holding a copy of "Born In The USA", is a majority or at least a significant minority going to make the connection even if they aren't a Bruce fan".    Or if someone dies, do they go "hey, I don't know his music, is that the "Purple Rain" guy"?    Or you step into an elevator and there's musak version of "And I Will Always Love You".   Or when you talk to a young British kid in a NWOBHM band talking about their new album and they say "We wanted to make our version of "Thriller"", like Joe Elliott (might have been Phil Collen) did back in '87. 

I can see someone saying "yeah, this is our "folklore"".  Or if she is unfortunately hit by a train, someone COULD say "she really hit her high note with "folklore".   I can see the back shot of her pony tail being held in the hands of some kid in a movie in 2030.   

Haken's Virus doesn't fill any of those squares, even a little bit.  No offense.

[kirksnosehair]

Before I read that post I would not have been able to name a single song on "Folklore" and if you gave me that title and said "whose album is this?" I would have had no clue that it's Taylor Swift without looking it up on Google

[HOF]

I do think it’s hard to judge albums based on cultural impact or transcendence or whatever. People just aren’t exposed to the same things these days. Maybe youth culture is still pretty monolithic, but I know my kids (who are still too young to really be into music) don’t have any exposure to anything popular the way I did at their age.

[MirrorMask]

I wouldn't know what specific album to pinpoint, but in the "here to stay" category, I guess definitively Lady Gaga has a place. Maybe her universally known songs are already written and in future albums she'll never have a widely known song as Bad Romance, but among the last decade or so, she definitively made a mark.

[Stadler]

Before I read that post I would not have been able to name a single song on "Folklore" and if you gave me that title and said "whose album is this?" I would have had no clue that it's Taylor Swift without looking it up on Google

HAHA, but you're old. 

[Skeever]

I like Taylor. I don't know that "folklore" is all that. Certainly she will go down as one of this generation's greats, but I wouldn't be shocked if it's more for everything up until and including 1989. I feel the same way about Beyonce's "Lemonade". Surely Beyonce's place in pop culture history is secure. And certainly "Lemonade" was the most hyped thing ever when it came out. But now that time has passed, do people still care about it more than they do "Single Ladies"? Taylor's the same for me. "folkore" is alright. But she's already got half a dozen songs which will be stuck in the pop culture pysche permanently, and I'm not sure any of them are from "folklore".

[Elite]

Sorry I wasn’t specific enough in my original post.

Basically what I’m looking for is any album that in 20-25 years will be considered among the best albums ever released.

For that you have to have...

Huge commercial success.
Huge critical success.
A couple of huge singles that will likely still be being played years later.
An album that is accessable to as many people as possible, including music snobs.
A unique sound that others copied.
A story behind it.

So I'm going for Amy Winehouse - Back to Black.

This is.. a really good pick for this thread. Wow!

[Mladen]

Prequelle by Ghost. So many good albums have been released since, but Prequelle was just great. Absolutely great.

[Stadler]

I like Taylor. I don't know that "folklore" is all that. Certainly she will go down as one of this generation's greats, but I wouldn't be shocked if it's more for everything up until and including 1989. I feel the same way about Beyonce's "Lemonade". Surely Beyonce's place in pop culture history is secure. And certainly "Lemonade" was the most hyped thing ever when it came out. But now that time has passed, do people still care about it more than they do "Single Ladies"? Taylor's the same for me. "folkore" is alright. But she's already got half a dozen songs which will be stuck in the pop culture pysche permanently, and I'm not sure any of them are from "folklore".

I won't argue that; I've frequently called "1989" the best pop record of the decade.  I just figured "folklore" since it was so different than what came before for her AND had the cultural element of being her "COVID" record.

[KevShmev]

Before I read that post I would not have been able to name a single song on "Folklore" and if you gave me that title and said "whose album is this?" I would have had no clue that it's Taylor Swift without looking it up on Google

HAHA, but you're old. 

Not only that, but the number of people in the world who cannot name a single song from LTE3 or The Absolute Universe is much higher than the number of people who cannot name a single song from Folklore.  The lyric video for Cardigan (Folklore's lone number 1 hit) has over 86 million views, but I am sure no one out there knows it. 

[Skeever]

The thing is, if the conversation parameters only permit stuff with wide cultural and cross generation appeal, it gets pretty boring. Because of course there's not much to talk about, maybe a dozen artists or so at any given point these days who have that level of fame, the likes of which most people here probably only like a handful. Along those lines, I do agree with the below:

I do think it’s hard to judge albums based on cultural impact or transcendence or whatever. People just aren’t exposed to the same things these days. Maybe youth culture is still pretty monolithic, but I know my kids (who are still too young to really be into music) don’t have any exposure to anything popular the way I did at their age.

It seems the record industry at large has really started to lose its grip on the culture, to this point where OF COURSE there are the big names (Taylors, Beyonces, etc., who are only getting bigger) but then the next level down from that is far more niche. Right before the crash the industry would honor N*Sync and Celine Dion while also giving some nods to the alt scene - Pumpkins, Radiohead, and so on.

These days, that "next level down alt scene" is pretty much gone. There is the big top 40, and that's it. Everything below that is more independent, and further splintered from the mainstream than it ever was before. It still exists, but far more fractionally, where a lot of the best alternative music this generatoin has had to offer is so far from the public psyche that I'll feel lucky if a few of my grandkids even know about it at all.

[ariich]

I think the difficulty for some is separating from the personal.   I can't and won't speak for T-Ski, but for me, the question is really "If there's a movie, and in the scene someone is holding a copy of "Born In The USA", is a majority or at least a significant minority going to make the connection even if they aren't a Bruce fan".    Or if someone dies, do they go "hey, I don't know his music, is that the "Purple Rain" guy"?    Or you step into an elevator and there's musak version of "And I Will Always Love You".   Or when you talk to a young British kid in a NWOBHM band talking about their new album and they say "We wanted to make our version of "Thriller"", like Joe Elliott (might have been Phil Collen) did back in '87. 

I can see someone saying "yeah, this is our "folklore"".  Or if she is unfortunately hit by a train, someone COULD say "she really hit her high note with "folklore".   I can see the back shot of her pony tail being held in the hands of some kid in a movie in 2030.   

Haken's Virus doesn't fill any of those squares, even a little bit.  No offense.

Certainly no offense taken, Haken play in a niche genre (prog metal) and so would never have that widespread mainstream appeal and awareness. Dream Theater are the biggest band in the prog metal world and none of their albums wouldn fit in any of those examples either.

I just don't think that's what this thread is about.

[Skeever]

I don't really like Haken, and didn't even listen to Virus. But they must have done something great (relatively speaking) at some point, because 10 years have gone by and dammit, they're still here 

[SoundscapeMN]

20 or 25 years?

2001:

Top Selling Albums from 2001:
https://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2001/top-billboard-200-albums

#1 Selling Albums from 2001:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_2001

1 The Beatles
J. Lo   Jennifer Lopez
Hot Shot   Shaggy
Everyday   Dave Matthews Band
Until the End of Time   2Pac   Amaru
Now That's What I Call Music! 6   Various Artists
All for You   Janet Jackson
Survivor   Destiny's Child
Lateralus   Tool   
Break the Cycle   Staind
Take Off Your Pants and Jacket   Blink-182
Devil's Night   D12   
Songs in A Minor   Alicia Keys   J
Celebrity   NSYNC
Now That's What I Call Music! 7   Various Artists
Now   Maxwell
Aaliyah   Aaliyah
Toxicity   System of a Down
The Blueprint   Jay-Z
Pain Is Love   Ja Rule
God Bless America: For the Benefit of the Twin Towers Fund   Various Artists
The Great Depression   DMX
Invincible   Michael Jackson
Britney   Britney Spears
Scarecrow   Garth Brooks
Weathered Creed

Top Selling Album (in the USA) from 2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_by_year_in_the_United_States
Hybrid Theory Linkin Park   

-------------------------------------

1996:

Top 200 Selling Albums of 1996
https://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/1996/top-billboard-200-albums

Number 1 Albums from 1996:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1996

Daydream   Mariah Carey
Waiting to Exhale   Whitney Houston
Jagged Little Pill    Alanis Morissette
All Eyez on Me   2Pac   Death Row
Anthology 2   The Beatles
Evil Empire   Rage Against the Machine
Fairweather Johnson   Hootie & the Blowfish
The Score   Fugees
Load   Metallica
It Was Written   Nas
Beats, Rhymes and Life   A Tribe Called Quest
No Code   Pearl Jam
Home Again   New Edition
Falling into You   Celine Dion
From the Muddy Banks of the Wishkah   Nirvana
Falling into You   Celine Dion
Recovering the Satellites   Counting Crows
Best Of – Volume I   Van Halen
Anthology 3   The Beatles
The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory
Tha Doggfather   Snoop Doggy Dogg
Razorblade Suitcase   Bush
Tragic Kingdom   No Doubt

---------------------------------

Just using those 2 years as a sample, at least in terms of Billboard CHARTS and SALES, I really don't think there's any new album (exluding Compilations and live albums) that remotely that would be considered a "great" album (or all-time classic) that has crossed demographics and frequently heard in pop-culture today. Maybe Jagged Little Pill in some ways, but that's debateable.

I think only time really tells, but if there is one reasonable observation I and many others have made, popular music has become much less accessible (which sounds like a contradiction in terms) every decade. Not only about the SONGS but the ALBUMS.

If you look at history, each decade since the 90's, music and albums included, have become more niche and had a more fragmented appeal. So much so, Popular music and Popular albums have become less and less recognizable.

Downloading, Streaming, YouTube and the way music is consumed has changed things so dramatically, that has had a lot to do with it. But I also think the BUSINESS of music has played a big part of that. Making music and releasing albums have become more about how to make as much money, or how to avoid losing money, unless you are in a small fraction of artists on a major label that pays for it.

If you think about it, more songs and albums reached more people (and probably just had more creativity) through MTV/Videos and listening to the Radio. Even magazines and going to the Record/Music stores. But now, music consumers and album buyers have their tastes catered to specific algorythms and whatever their friends have on their Spotify Playlists or Tik Tok videos. They don't get exposed to many songs and albums they may have a few decades ago.

In other words, a "great" album may be out there, with many great tunes, but it will never reach the % of people it would have a generation or 2 ago because of the way music is consumed now.

I also think part of it is creativity and how there just may not be enough left to do, given Rock and Pop music as an artform is not new anymore. I.e. most of what can be done, has been done. New music does come out that is well written and creative, but it's nearly impossible to not find it to sound like or be compared to something that came before it.

A good example of that is Billboard and stuff like the WatchMojo Decade Lists for NEW songs and NEW albums (excluding compilations, and live albums). Each Decade from the 90's on, the lists become less and less recognizable (if not just worse), and certainly less iconic at this point. I think that is a product on how the most popular and highest selling music since the 90's has reached less people (and in a lot of ways because it has become that much worse).

[Fritzinger]

I think the difficulty for some is separating from the personal.   I can't and won't speak for T-Ski, but for me, the question is really "If there's a movie, and in the scene someone is holding a copy of "Born In The USA", is a majority or at least a significant minority going to make the connection even if they aren't a Bruce fan".    Or if someone dies, do they go "hey, I don't know his music, is that the "Purple Rain" guy"?    Or you step into an elevator and there's musak version of "And I Will Always Love You".   Or when you talk to a young British kid in a NWOBHM band talking about their new album and they say "We wanted to make our version of "Thriller"", like Joe Elliott (might have been Phil Collen) did back in '87. 

I can see someone saying "yeah, this is our "folklore"".  Or if she is unfortunately hit by a train, someone COULD say "she really hit her high note with "folklore".   I can see the back shot of her pony tail being held in the hands of some kid in a movie in 2030.   

Haken's Virus doesn't fill any of those squares, even a little bit.  No offense.

None taken, but honestly, I don't care about any of this.

"Great" albums don't have to be huge successes anymore. Actually, I think it's very rare nowadays that they are. The business today is just not about new, revolutionary, big masterpieces anymore. It's about things people already know, so they'll buy it again.

Compared to big selling albums from the 70s and 80s you'd call "classics" or "great" albums (like Sgt. Pepper, Seeds Of Love, OK Computer, Led Zeppelin IV etc), albums like Scenes From A Memory, Spirit Of Eden or The Death Defying Unicorn weren't big successes, but I'd consider them all "great albums". Even if they won't be referenced in mainstream movies. Albums are about the music they contain, not about the resonance they cause.

[Skeever]

"Great" albums don't have to be huge successes anymore. Actually, I think it's very rare nowadays that they are. The business today is just not about new, revolutionary, big masterpieces anymore. It's about things people already know, so they'll buy it again.

Totally agree with this, and I wonder if that is why we see the same artists constantly overhyped for their new albums even as they become "old hat". The industry has increasingly little of enduring value to fall back on. One rung down from the "top shelf" artists (like Ariana Grande, Beyonce, Beiber, Jay Z, Taylor Swift, Katy Perry, etc) there is a rotating carousel of also-rans and then a whole lot of flashes in the pan, followed by nothing. The industry still delivers those top-tier icons, but the depth and volume is gone, the culture is just dim and lacks the overall vibrancy that it had even in the 90s. There's great stuff out there, but it will never be enshrined the way things were before the record industry collapsed. Even when what seems like an authentic culture on the outskirts gets some mainstream recognition, it feels less like an organic thing and more like a corporate acquisition (i.e., Taylor working Aaron Dressner for folklore; Disney getting Werner Herzon signed on for a few episodes of "The Mandolorian").

So, what will the mainstream music industry still tell people to care about in 2040? I have no idea, but I'd imagine unless there is some drastic reversal in trends the answer is "even less than they try and get people to care about today".

[Stadler]

All the points about Haken - they're still here, it's a good album, I like it (I don't, personally, but someone else said that) are all valid, but don't go to the original question.  The guy who posted the thread made it clear that HE meant:  "Basically what I’m looking for is any album that in 20-25 years will be considered among the best albums ever released."  I think he WAS asking about "the resonance they cause" (I love that phrase, by the way.  Very well put.)

The Abbey Roads.  The Dark Sides Of The Moons.   The Born In The USAs.   Look, there are plenty of bands that I like that are around for a long time, there are plenty of records I absolutely adore, but I can face facts: they are NEVER, EVER going to be among the consensus of "greatest albums of all time".  They're just not.   I don't know if that's "fair" or "just" or not, but it just is.  It's not personal, and it doesn't impact my enjoyment of them in any way shape or form, because I like what I like.

Marillion; going on a 40 year career and going strong.  To me, their best album (and a top five for me all time) is Clutching At Straws.  Everything I think of when I think of Marillion is on that CD.   Having said that, it's not in the same league as Sgt. Pepper.  It's just not. 

I do think there's some merit to the answer "there is none".   That's a legit point that I think has to be addressed.  But on no level is the answer "Haken". 

[Skeever]

I think the counter argument to that is, at least from my perspective, the industry does not support anywhere near the diversity it once did, nor does it have anywhere near as much patience with its commodities.

As good as those artists and albums are, they wouldn't have the notoriety they do today if the labels behind them didn't continue to invest in those artists and their work across decades and even, as you mentioned, generations.

I think people are right to say that the greatness still exists. What does not exist, is the value.

[Stadler]

I think the counter argument to that is, at least from my perspective, the industry does not support anywhere near the diversity it once did, nor does it have anywhere near as much patience with its commodities.

As good as those artists and albums are, they wouldn't have the notoriety they do today if the labels behind them didn't continue to invest in those artists and their work across decades and even, as you mentioned, generations.

I think people are right to say that the greatness still exists. What does not exist, is the value.

Can't argue that.  I'm old enough to still have that "the cream rises to the top" mentality, though.  I think if there is an album that merits cross-generational, cross-genre appreciation, it will find it's way to the surface.  Could be wrong on that, though.     

[KevShmev]

  Even when what seems like an authentic culture on the outskirts gets some mainstream recognition, it feels less like an organic thing and more like a corporate acquisition (i.e., Taylor working Aaron Dressner for folklore; Disney getting Werner Herzon signed on for a few episodes of "The Mandolorian").

But the thing is, the collaboration between Taylor Swift and Aaron Dessner WAS organic.   They met after a concert like 6-7 years ago, and then last spring, shortly after the shutdown, she texted him and asked him if he'd be interested in writing some songs together.   And the result was Folklore. And their writing chemistry was so good that they kept writing, which is why we then got Evermore as well.

I think what works greatly in the favor of Folklore in this discussion is the number of non-fans who like it.  Many great albums are ones where even people who aren't normally a fan of that particular artist can point to that album and go, "Damn, this is a good album."  I have lost track at how many people I have seen say, "I am not really a Taylor Swift fan, but this is great stuff," or something to that effect. 

[Stadler]

  Even when what seems like an authentic culture on the outskirts gets some mainstream recognition, it feels less like an organic thing and more like a corporate acquisition (i.e., Taylor working Aaron Dressner for folklore; Disney getting Werner Herzon signed on for a few episodes of "The Mandolorian").

But the thing is, the collaboration between Taylor Swift and Aaron Dessner WAS organic.   They met after a concert like 6-7 years ago, and then last spring, shortly after the shutdown, she texted him and asked him if he'd be interested in writing some songs together.   And the result was Folklore. And their writing chemistry was so good that they kept writing, which is why we then got Evermore as well.

I think what works greatly in the favor of Folklore in this discussion is the number of non-fans who like it.  Many great albums are ones where even people who aren't normally a fan of that particular artist can point to that album and go, "Damn, this is a good album."  I have lost track at how many people I have seen say, "I am not really a Taylor Swift fan, but this is great stuff," or something to that effect.

Well, I look at here as a microcosm; after 1989, there were one or two people that pimped it (I was one; I still think that's a phenomenal record; her "Joshua Tree" maybe) but the general consensus here in this prog metal site (and MP.com, and another site I was at for a while) was "whatevs. She still lips synchs and has 1000 writers for each song.".   folklore was the one that sort of also said, "you might not like all of it, but she's really writing these, really singing them, and really means them."   This is her "adult" record in a way.   Her "Scenes From A Memory".  Her "2112".   Where she said "my way, or highway, this is who/what I am."   And that resonates with people, I think.

[Skeever]

I think you know what I mean, though. That specific example might not work, but it's not essential to the general point I'm making. The mainstream media knows that the culture is out there, the parts it wants can be purchased and plugged into the apparatus without being made a core part of it. Why put a bunch of money behind a new indie band when you can just make your flagship artist go indie?

I think the counter argument to that is, at least from my perspective, the industry does not support anywhere near the diversity it once did, nor does it have anywhere near as much patience with its commodities.

As good as those artists and albums are, they wouldn't have the notoriety they do today if the labels behind them didn't continue to invest in those artists and their work across decades and even, as you mentioned, generations.

I think people are right to say that the greatness still exists. What does not exist, is the value.

Can't argue that.  I'm old enough to still have that "the cream rises to the top" mentality, though.  I think if there is an album that merits cross-generational, cross-genre appreciation, it will find it's way to the surface.  Could be wrong on that, though.     

I think it will, too. But where is the top? And is "the top" as big as it used to be before?

When I started listening to Dream Theater, there were still a lot of deniers about Petrucci out there. It was not uncommon to hear people claim that middling guitar players from other heavy metal bands were far superior to him, if not technically, then at least in any other way. This is part of why he wrote "As I Am", after a poor interaction with the guitarist from queensryche who is trying to show him tips in a condescending way. A guy who had been to "the top" before was denying JP recognition, because his version of success was totally different.

Fast forward 20 years, and no one would deny JP. Not only that, but no one would think twice about mentioning him in the same category as Vai and Satriani. He is undeniably one of the guitar greats, even though the way he has experienced being at the top is totally different than it would have been for him had he tasted success even a decade earlier.

That's why it's hard for me to evaluate greatness based on whether I think the albums of today can endure the way the albums of 20 or 30 years ago did. I just can't imagine that far in the future being anything like that far in the past. And when I see people mention lemonades and 1989s, I agree with him them that while those albums are great. But it also feels a little lacking and imagination, like "yeah of course those ones will get it".

[HOF]

I do think 1989 is probably a strong candidate for last great album. It was huge, you’d hear stuff from it everywhere (in stores, at ballgames, etc.) even if you didn’t listen to radio or seek it out. My wife loved it. I eventually loved most of it. It’s the most pop culture thing I’ve personally been fond of this millennium.

[MirrorMask]

I do think 1989 is probably a strong candidate for last great album. It was huge, you’d hear stuff from it everywhere (in stores, at ballgames, etc.) even if you didn’t listen to radio or seek it out. My wife loved it. I eventually loved most of it. It’s the most pop culture thing I’ve personally been fond of this millennium.

I don't remember having ever acknowledged the album's existance. Up until I noticed the thread in this section and wondered "why the hell are people talking about Taylor Swift" and discovered Folklore, Taylor Swift was a name I barely acknowledged, I just knew she existed. Never heard a song knowing it was hers (unlike Lady Gaga), never knew 1989 was a TS album and that it was huge.

I mean, I spent a whole summer not really knowing what song Despacito was, but at least I knew that Despacito was a big hit. Just like I knew of the existance of Beyoncè, that her pregnant pic broke the internet and that she single handedly changed the release date of new album for the industry. And that's still more than I could say about Taylor Swift, who I probably couldn't recognize out of a lineup before I discovered Folklore.

I'm not disputing that 1989 was huge, but I never, ever got the faintest notion about any Taylor Swift song or album, while I can probably mention 10 Lady Gaga songs that are not on the only album I've heard in full, the more laid back Joanne.

[HOF]

I do think 1989 is probably a strong candidate for last great album. It was huge, you’d hear stuff from it everywhere (in stores, at ballgames, etc.) even if you didn’t listen to radio or seek it out. My wife loved it. I eventually loved most of it. It’s the most pop culture thing I’ve personally been fond of this millennium.

I don't remember having ever acknowledged the album's existance. Up until I noticed the thread in this section and wondered "why the hell are people talking about Taylor Swift" and discovered Folklore, Taylor Swift was a name I barely acknowledged, I just knew she existed. Never heard a song knowing it was hers (unlike Lady Gaga), never knew 1989 was a TS album and that it was huge.

I mean, I spent a whole summer not really knowing what song Despacito was, but at least I knew that Despacito was a big hit. Just like I knew of the existance of Beyoncè, that her pregnant pic broke the internet and that she single handedly changed the release date of new album for the industry. And that's still more than I could say about Taylor Swift, who I probably couldn't recognize out of a lineup before I discovered Folklore.

I'm not disputing that 1989 was huge, but I never, ever got the faintest notion about any Taylor Swift song or album, while I can probably mention 10 Lady Gaga songs that are not on the only album I've heard in full, the more laid back Joanne.

What’s funny is that I’ve had no trouble avoiding Lady Gaga. Not sure what song Despacito is, though I may have heard it and just don’t know the title. I’m not saying my experience is definitive, of course, just pointing out that 1989 is a mainstream album that somehow managed to catch my attention where most don’t.

[soupytwist]

  Even when what seems like an authentic culture on the outskirts gets some mainstream recognition, it feels less like an organic thing and more like a corporate acquisition (i.e., Taylor working Aaron Dressner for folklore; Disney getting Werner Herzon signed on for a few episodes of "The Mandolorian").

But the thing is, the collaboration between Taylor Swift and Aaron Dessner WAS organic.   They met after a concert like 6-7 years ago, and then last spring, shortly after the shutdown, she texted him and asked him if he'd be interested in writing some songs together.   And the result was Folklore. And their writing chemistry was so good that they kept writing, which is why we then got Evermore as well.

I think what works greatly in the favor of Folklore in this discussion is the number of non-fans who like it.  Many great albums are ones where even people who aren't normally a fan of that particular artist can point to that album and go, "Damn, this is a good album."  I have lost track at how many people I have seen say, "I am not really a Taylor Swift fan, but this is great stuff," or something to that effect.

I hope at least some Taylor fans who have enjoyed her recent two album will take a little time to go and check out The National's (Dessner's band) output, because to me they have been one of the consistantly brilliant bands of this millenium - The four album run of 'Alligator', 'Boxer', 'High Violet**' and 'Trouble Will Find You' is just plain stellar.

**One of my top 5 albums of all time.

I've not heard 1989 besides the singles - and unfortunately two of them are really annoying for me in 'Blank Space' and 'Bad Blood'.

[EPICVIEW]

The Beatles- Let it Be

[Stadler]

I think you know what I mean, though. That specific example might not work, but it's not essential to the general point I'm making. The mainstream media knows that the culture is out there, the parts it wants can be purchased and plugged into the apparatus without being made a core part of it. Why put a bunch of money behind a new indie band when you can just make your flagship artist go indie?

I think the counter argument to that is, at least from my perspective, the industry does not support anywhere near the diversity it once did, nor does it have anywhere near as much patience with its commodities.

As good as those artists and albums are, they wouldn't have the notoriety they do today if the labels behind them didn't continue to invest in those artists and their work across decades and even, as you mentioned, generations.

I think people are right to say that the greatness still exists. What does not exist, is the value.

Can't argue that.  I'm old enough to still have that "the cream rises to the top" mentality, though.  I think if there is an album that merits cross-generational, cross-genre appreciation, it will find it's way to the surface.  Could be wrong on that, though.     

I think it will, too. But where is the top? And is "the top" as big as it used to be before?

When I started listening to Dream Theater, there were still a lot of deniers about Petrucci out there. It was not uncommon to hear people claim that middling guitar players from other heavy metal bands were far superior to him, if not technically, then at least in any other way. This is part of why he wrote "As I Am", after a poor interaction with the guitarist from queensryche who is trying to show him tips in a condescending way. A guy who had been to "the top" before was denying JP recognition, because his version of success was totally different.

Fast forward 20 years, and no one would deny JP. Not only that, but no one would think twice about mentioning him in the same category as Vai and Satriani. He is undeniably one of the guitar greats, even though the way he has experienced being at the top is totally different than it would have been for him had he tasted success even a decade earlier.

That's why it's hard for me to evaluate greatness based on whether I think the albums of today can endure the way the albums of 20 or 30 years ago did. I just can't imagine that far in the future being anything like that far in the past. And when I see people mention lemonades and 1989s, I agree with him them that while those albums are great. But it also feels a little lacking and imagination, like "yeah of course those ones will get it".

I know you don't like when I push back, but I promise, I'm not arguing with you, just shooting the shit.  Picture a conversation in a bar over a Dr. Pepper or a Tito's.

I think there's a lot right about what you said, but two things I'd point out:  I don't get any sense that Taylor is "her label making their flagship go indie".  She's not re-recording her entire catalogue because the label told her to.   She's in rarified air now, where she CAN call her own shots (whether she does or not is another story).  I made the comparison and I meant it: she's not as old as Bruce, but she's in that category.  Remember when Neil Young did the Blue Note thing (or was it Trans?) and Geffen sued him for not being "Neil Young enough" (when in fact, he was EXACTLY being Neil Fucking Young; that's what you get!)?  Bruce puts out what we wants when we wants, with whom he wants.   Devils & Dust, Western Stars, Wrecking Ball... he follows his muse, and we just sort of hang on for the ride.  I think Taylor is at that point now.


The other is Petrucci.  Now, I'm in a tough spot, because I love the guy's playing, and from what little I know of him, I like HIM too.   He's everything you could hope for in a band you're a fan of.  But he's not widely regarded in the same light as Vai and Satriani.   There's a line that we're talking about here.   You have to know Dream Theater and know this genre to know who John Petrucci is.  The derision you refer to (and I remember it) was amongst the cognicenti, not the casual fan.  He is one of the great guitar players, but he's not a guitar LEGEND, like Jeff Beck or a Jimmy Page or an Eric Clapton.   He doesn't have anything that is of a level that causes him to be cross-generational, cross-genre.  He has no Woodstock.  He has no "Tears In Heaven" (a song that because of it's tabloid connections, reached well beyond his traditional fanbase).   He doesn't have that association with a Rod Stewart.  I'm not sure that Vai and Satriani do, for that matter.   I don't know.  There's no ARGUMENT here, I'm just searching for a distinction that I can feel but can't put into words.

And so you know where I'm coming from, when John Lennon died, my mom ran down to Woolworth's and bought be the red and blue Capital compilations by the Beatles, because she knew I liked music (Kiss!) and kind of thought I needed to know who that guy was (this was before social media and stuff; I don't know if she thought we'd forget Lennon?).  It went beyond just the simple quality of their work.   It went to something bigger than that.

[ariich]

Personally, I think it's a lot simpler than a lot of what we're discussing.

I think the biggest factor is simply that, 25+ years ago, there was much much less music that was created and made widely available.

If you look at the "Retro Albums of the Year" thread, you'll see incredibly similar top 5-10 albums from everyone, regardless of age. I completely expect that as the years move forward we're going to have more and more variety between people's lists. So much content is available these days that almost nothing is iconic or widely-loved in a completely mainstream sense, but rather it happens within certain genres and niches.

Most of my favourite music is from the last 15-20 years but I can't see any of it having the status of things like Dark Side of the Moon, Abbey Road, etc. because of these social and technological trends. People are talking about Taylor Swift a lot in this thread, and I like Folklore well enough but I can't see how it would be considered one of the best albums ever even now, let alone in 20 years.