Done.

And so it ends.

It's been 51 weeks since I started this project. It started as a test of baby boomer logic and my own discipline and it ends as a repudiation of the former and a confirmation of the latter.

I made it through the entire list, though somewhere my piece for "Armed Forces" got lost in the Internet. I'll rewrite it within the next week. Nevertheless, I got through about 490 records (after considering help from Padraig, Taft and Ellen) in under a year.

What did I learn? I learned that this type of list is ridiculous. We live in a culture wherein we rank everything constantly for no reason other than we need to fill column inches and TV time. The Web has followed suit with a constant barrage of 10 best this and 10 best that. It's an odd cultural entry to a variety of content, which is good. But, it also discourages serious criticism and analysis.

Gone are the days of the pullout stories and in its place are shorter pieces. I'm not one of the dinosaurs who laments these stories; this is the nature of information in 2008. I'm cool with that. Hell, I'm a Web producer by profession. But, I do appreciate great in-depth writing and we have lost a lot of that in the mainstream press.

Of course, I'm a total hypocrite being that none of my reviews are particularly in depth. But my point is mostly that these lists are an easy way to generate a lot of copy.

---

I mentioned above that the list has problems with the term "great." Like the MVP in sports, "great" is essentially meaningless. It could mean influence on other bands, it could mean records sold, it could mean groundbreaking sounds. It could mean any combination of those factors.

I've spoken a little about records that need to be on the list in lieu of some of the lesser albums (Quicksilver Messenger Service, for example). I'll just throw some more out there now with the caveat that this list is horrible incomplete.

1. Something by Mariah Carey. If only because Carey's vocal style is the most imitated in all of music. If Whitney Houston is there, Mariah needs to be there.


2. Anything by Garth Brooks or the Dixie Chicks. Country music, especially popular country, is wildly popular and not represented on the list.


3. Any music not from Britain or the U.S. This is a little more abstract, as the list doesn't make any claims about putting "world music" on it, whereas there are definitely jazz and country records there. Still, it'd be nice to see some Fela Kuti on there.


4. More jazz. Simple as that.


5. Anything by the Foo Fighters. I actually don't like the Foo Fighters, but I do think they're one of the bigger bands of the past 15 years and at least as important as the last few Springsteen and Dylan records on the list.


6. Something by Tupac Shakur. Tupac is rightly considered one of hip hop's greatest MCs and he is not represented on this list.

This is not counting my particular bent of having more indie rock and metal on the list (two genres I enjoy).

---

So... What now?

Despite suggestions, I am not going to tackle another list anytime soon. No AFI movie list, no RS 500 songs list. It's just too much work in too little time for me.

I haven't finalized what I'll do, going forward. I've got some ideas, but in the interim, I'll simply be writing some small reviews like the unlisted stuff from this site.

Obviously, thanks to everyone who has read, commented and helped with the project. It has been a blast and I've learned a ton.

Said, not surprisingly, better than I ever could have

Over at NPR, ex-Sleater-Kinner guitarist Carrie Brownstein keeps a blog called Monitor Mix and it's (not surprisingly) pretty excellent.

With that said, I wanted to point to something she wrote today on the topic of yesterday's halftime performer, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers:

But while Springsteen is a street preacher, with always an air of sacredness and rage to his songs, Petty is more of a street sweeper. His songs speak of what's been left behind or used up, and they put a polish on what we thought to be dull and dreary. His best songs are bursts of possibility born from dinginess, from nothingness; the guitars jangle, the choruses lift you up, and all the while Petty's voice is there to keep things earthbound.

It goes without saying that what Brownstein wrote is much better than anything I've ever written, either on Petty or not.

The process

A commenter recently wondered how many times I listen to each record before I write each piece, so I figured now would be as good a time as any to explain the process by which I do each piece of this project. I think it's a pretty good procedure and has produced some decent results.

The first thing I do is, of course, get the album. At the beginning of the project, I printed out the list and went to my CD collection (approximately 1,700 CDs and 250ish vinyl records with a lot of overlap). If I didn't have the album, I would borrow it from a friend, take it out from the library or (mostly) buy it. This, so far, has meant many hours at the thrift store by my apartment and at CDepot. also, a great deal of money spent at the iTunes store. At the start of the project, I had about 250 of the 500 albums. I currently have about 425, including all the albums I've reviewed so far with a few notable exceptions:

• Jackie Wilson's "Mr. Excitement" and Jerry Lee Lewis' "All Killer No Filler" are way out of print and I was not willing to pay over $100 for each. I obtained two different copies of other greatest hits collections for each artist and was able to get all the tracks on each collection.


• The Robert Johnson collections were not out of print, but I already had two different Johnson collections with the exact same songs. So, I just made a different playlist on my iPod with the songs sequenced as the RS-approved collections have.


• I borrowed, but did not rip, the "Anthology of American Folk Music" and the Ray Charles box set.

Everything else is either in my iTunes library at home or on a vinyl record on my bookcase.

The next step, of course, is listening to the record. I listen to every record at least five times (if I'm not already familiar with it. If it's something like "Nevermind," any of Beatles records or "Metallica," I already know it and will only listen two or three times). Most of the time, two listening are on my iPod (yes, I know. The sound quality isn't as good.) in transit. Being that most people experience music in this way, I find this to be a great first look at any record. Similarly, it's easy to concentrate on the music while walking to my office from the Metro station, as that route is etched into my brain. I will also listen to the record while playing Playstation (normally FIFA 2007, in case you care).

(For vinyl, I do all of the listening while eating dinner or playing Playstation.)

Finally, I'll take one or two more listens while I'm writing the review.

As for the actual writing, I like to read a little bit on each record. This includes looking the record up on following Web sites:

1. Rolling Stone's 500 album site (obviously)


2. Wikipedia


3. Allmusic.com


4. Robert Christgau's site


5. Pitchforkmedia.com (if applicable)


6. Any genre sites (The Source, for example)

The research is often done while writing the review, so the composiution of each review takes about two hours each. Some take considerably less time (seriously, I listened to that album probably 10 [!] times and couldn't think of anything to say). Some take more. I even farmed a few out.

Sometimes, I don't have a lot to say and often, I don't have the time to write as much as I'd like (I have a full-time job, after all).

I then will put the review down and revisit it the next day (I write everything a two days or so before they're posted). This is when I'll do my final edits, mostly on spelling, grammar and such. Stuff, of course, falls through the cracks.

I try to write about my personal experiences with records and mix it with some fun(ish) facts about each record. If I find something interesting in my research, I'll write about it, but I'm not trying to be some sort of repository of album history. The Web already has too much of that.

I hope everyone enjoys my nonsense. I'm enjoying writing it and I'm glad more than five people are reading it.

On comments redux

I've seen a small increase in visitors lately (probably due to the mixtape club thing), so I just wanted to reiterate something I've written before:

So, please, if you have an opinion, post it in the comments. Also, if you want to address me directly and don't want it posted on the site, my e-mail address is in the right column. I will respond to you as quickly as possible.

I encourage feedback, so please let me know if you think I stink or if you think I'm awesome or you think I shouldn't be so hard on CCR or whatever.

On comments

I wanted to thank those of you who have commented on any of my posts and encourage readers to do so. I've gotten a couple of corrections that I've made and some nice opinions from readers.

One of the great things about the Internet is the ability to have a discussion about something like this. I've laid out where I'm coming from, but certainly I'm not someone who can't hear the other side and I'd certainly like to hear the other side.

So, please, if you have an opinion, post it in the comments. Also, if you want to address me directly and don't want it posted on the site, my e-mail address is in the right column. I will respond to you as quickly as possible.

The first 100: A look back

I'm one fifth through the list and it's probably good to take a look back. What is there, exactly, about the first 100 records on this list that makes them special?

The first 100 featured albums by 62 different artists. The Beatles led the list with eight albums, while Dylan has five within the first 100. Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones each have four, while Jimi Hendrix and Stevie Wonder each had three. A bunch of bands had two.

The Beatles have four albums in the top 10 and five in the top 20 (actually, top 15). Dylan has three in the top 20. The newest album in the top 100 is U2's "Achtung Baby" (blegh), released in November 1991. The only other album from the 1990s is Nirvana's "Nevermind," released in September of 1991.

Here is my top ten albums (in no order) in the top 100. It is not my top ten of all time, but simply my top ten of the top 100. I imagine

• The Beatles, Revolver A hands-down rock masterpiece. Despite it featuring my least favorite Beatles song, the rest of the album more than makes up for it. Macca's best melancholy ("For No One"), one of Harrison's most vitriolic ("Taxman") and Lennon's best foray into psychedelia ("Tomorrow Never Knows") are just three of the brilliant tracks.


• Pink Floyd, The Dark Side Of The Moon Progressive rock's most palatable piece. "Dark Side" is the soudntrack to a million identity crises, temper tantrums, contemplative moments and, of course, acid trips. Darker (no pun intended) than most idiot hippies fancy it, "Dark Side" is a fantastic look into the minds of humans, set to brilliant song.


• Curtis Mayfield, Superfly The socially conscious funk transition. With much of the '60s ideology falling into oblvision, Chicago's Curtis Mayfield crafted a beautifully ambivalent look at urban decay and the black community.


• Nirvana, NevermindA generation gets its voice. As much a pop record as a punk rock classic, "Nevermind" gave voice to the children of boomers. As a people gets cozy with affluence, anxiety remains and the angst that bubble underneath was beautifully sculpted into sardonic wonder.


• Michael Jackson, ThrillerMusic for, well, everyone. Before he became a creepy zombie, Michael Jackson's "Thriller" became the blueprint for dance music. Only Prince came close (but, really, not that close) to Jackson's sheer poppiness and danceability. Every R&B record since has echoes of "Thriller." Every goddamned one. And none come close.


• Fleetwood Mac, RumoursThe easiest possible listen for such dark music. Fueled by cocaine and breakups, the California rock pioneers crafted a record of anger and fury, totally cloaked in AM radio saccharine. Also, Stevie Nicks actually sounds reasonable.


• The Clash, The ClashPunk rock perfected. Socially conscious but energetic, "The Clash" explains British political strife in a way that still resonates. Unlike the Sex Pistols, The Clash appear to have brains in their heads, disorted as their message has been since.


• Captain Beefheart And His Magic Band, Trout Mask ReplicaWeirder than weird. Despite not being conventionally "listenable," "Trout Mask Replica" uses about a million different sounds that all interest a listener. It takes a few times, but eventually, everyone has a "eureka!" moment with "Trout Mask Replica." Just keep listening.


• Public Enemy, It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us BackRap music in the image of a revolution. Before gangsta rap, Public Enemy used Black Panther iconography and militant lyrics to bring the problems of the street to white America. While Flavor Flav brought some much-needed levity, Chuck D was giving it to us straightforward.


• Led Zeppelin, (untitled)Rock gods at their peak. This will probably surprise anyone who knows me well, as I frequently complain about Robert Plant's voice and mock Zeppelin. Still, the fourth Zep record is so ingraned in metal -- a favorite genre of mine -- that I can't help but love it. Every song is fantastic, even the patently ridiculous "Stairway To Heaven." I listen to it to mock it, but by the end, I'm rocking right along.

No. 101 -- Eric Clapton's first appearance on the list -- comes Monday.

My biases

Well, before we go nuts, let's examine my biases about this project and my purposes for doing so. As I mentioned, I think the baby boomer are constantly hurting their shoulders trying to pat their collective back. So, I am going into this with less regard for the big bands that get hammered down our throats (Dylan, the Stones, etc.) and certainly with prejudice against that boomer era of '65-'75.

So, I'll outline the things I think will be important going forward:

• I'm 26 years old, white and I live just outside Washington, DC (two miles over the DC line, actually). I grew up in affluence in suburban Chicago.


• I am a northerner through and through. I do not care for country music. I am not a huge hip hop guy, but I'm very well-versed in music and do appreciate hip hop (and consequently, find it vastly underrepresented on this list).


• I do not listen to much jazz or soul music, though I enjoy both. I just don't know it as well as I know rock and roll.


• As I mentioned before, it was a dream of mine to be involved in the industry, so I am well-versed in music. I own a huge amount of music (over 1700 CDs and LPs). I used to be music director at my college radio station and interned a summer at a commercial radio station.


• I prefer independent rock to mainstream stuff and hope for music to be somewhat interesting. I think more about music than I should and I probably over analyze it. I appreciate pop music, but if we're talking "greatest," I think it should be really interesting. Again, I like indie rock the most, but I grew up in America, so I'm familiar with and love a lot of classic rock. I grew up listening to the Beatles and Who almost exclusively, as that's what my parents like.


• Two of my three favorite bands are not on the list. They are, though I'm sure you don't care, Mogwai and Tortoise. Pink Floyd, my other favorite band, is on the list, though I'd argue Floyd is not represented well. My favorite songwriter is also not on the list (Elliott Smith).


• I am wholly unfamiliar with early rock and roll. The Sam Cooke/Ray Charles/Elvis stuff is mostly alien to me, so I'm hoping to discover some new stuff.


• I am not religious, so the religious songs might not be very effective to me.


• Because I grew up in affluence, I don't care for blue collar rock. Sorry.


• I'm not the world's biggest punk rock fan. For me, it's basically the Clash and Black Flag. Also, I like metal a fair amount, but I'm no metalhead.


• While I prefer Tortoise and Mogwai, I find The Beatles to be the best straight up rock and roll band ever with the most extensive catalog of truly great songs.


• I don't really like love songs, because the Beatles wrote all the great ones.

There are a few bands I think are really overrated and therefore, take my views on them with a giant grain of salt:

1. The Cure


2. The Smiths


3. Led Zeppelin (though, only because of Plant's voice)


4. Dylan, as a performer


5. CCR


6. The Rolling Stones

There are three artists I hate who appear on the list multiple times: U2, Springsteen and The Eagles. I find all three to be mostly deplorable (though I like "Sunday, Bloody Sunday").

Those are my biases. Sorry.

The top 500 albums, reviewed by me

I own a lot of CDs and I consider myself something of a "music guy."

It was a longtime goal of mine to

• work in the industry (not a musician, because I have no skills)


• work in radio


• review records for a magazine

This fell to the side when I actually interned at a professional radio station between my junior and senior years of college. It gave me a pretty negative view of radio and radio was really the only avenue for me to reach any of those goals (I didn't work for our college magazine and I'd worked at our radio station all four years, including 2.5 on the exec staff). A friend has offered me some freelance work in writeing about music, but I'm not very good at writing.

--

A favorite conversation of mine is to slam "Forrest Gump," as I find it to be a two-hour masturbation session for baby boomers. The entire film is based around boomers saying "hey, look at all this shit we've endured. Aren't we an awesome generation? Without us, you wouldn't have rock n' roll, drugs or political protests. Plus, our stuff was the best."

And they have a point in a lot of ways. The Beatles are probably the greatest rock 'n roll band ever. They're certainly the template by which all later bands are compared (and rightfully).

And rock 'n roll (a largely dead genre, but the way) blossomed under the boomers' care. But there were certainly political protests before and after the boomers were around and there were lots of drugs, as well.

The boomers were lucky to have come of age when television was finally getting traction in the homes of nearly every American. This makes the Vietnam war that much more powerful, because the networks and the U.S. government didn't have a beat on how to control the official war message as the government has since the 80s (a lesson learned from Vietnam). Similarly, the political activision was still news and interesting in the 60s. Since then, that stuff doesn't make for good Tv; We're used to it.

Again, that's not to say that the boomers didn't do a lot of great stuff, aided by TV. The women's movement and the civil rights movement both were big feats because of the way boomers used TV to their advantage. And that's great.

--

Baby boomers run, basically, everything nowadays and they have run radio since the mid to late sixties. They believe everything they experienced during their heyday. They don't hammer the Beatles, Stones and Zeppelin down our throats like they did 10 and 15 years ago, but the general thought remains that boomer music is the do-all and end-all.

Rolling Stone magazine is the pinnacle of this. They have a few bands/artists that they love (Springsteen, Dylan, etc.) and whenever a new release comes out by these artists -- no matter the quality -- they give it four stars.

A few years ago, the magazine put out a list of the 500 "greatest" albums of all time. What "greatest" means is pretty nebulous. I've got several pet peeves about the list (the prevalence of greatest hits records being the operative complaint of mine) outside of the normal Rolling Stone complaints. These complaints will bear themselves in this project.

What is the project? I'm trying to buy and write about (in short form) each of the 500 albums. This is the purpose of this blog. I currently own over 200 of these records in one form or another and I will certainly have all of them by the time I get to them (I'm going in order and I have 71 of the top 100).

I'm going to do two each weekday. Each post will be about each album, with me writing a paragraph or two about the album and then filling out this list:

• Best song:
• Why Rolling Stone gets it right:
• Why Rolling Stone gets it wrong:
• Best song:
• Worst song:
• Is it awesome?:

I start today, with the first two albums on the list. I will be doing two each day.