Now this is how it started: THE ILX 1980s ALBUM POLL RESULTS!!

29. Young Marble Giants - Colossal Youth [1980] (200 points, 17 votes, 1 first place vote)

http://dominorecordco.us/images/artists/young_marble_giants/1024_540/ymg_colossalyouth.jpg

Hooray, another point of intersection for me and Dr. C. ;-) Wonderful, full stop. _Colossal Youth_ is one of those albums I can just pull out and listen to, and do, without thinking too hard about it. It's so great and always puts me in a fine mood -- something about the understated performances sounds so warm and full. I hope the royalties on sales from _Live Through This_ and the cover of "Living in the Straight World" on it set them up for life.

― Ned Raggett, 26. huhtikuuta 2001 3:00

They were colossal youths. 'Colossal Youth' is a great song. The sewing machine metaphor could definitely be applied to it, to lots of their songs. Not only precise, but clean stitches. No smokestacks. I love Alison Statton's voice. It's cool but without *obvious* attitude.

― youn, 5. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

I always find I have to be in a very specific mood to fully enjoy and absorb YMG's music. It is so subtle and fleeting an appeal that you have to be actively wanting their immense sparseness... The gaps in instrumentation and lack of flourish are what count really. The absence plays upon one's mind in quite a symbolic way, for me.

They tend to have some of the most affecting organ playing on record that I've heard, also...

― Tom May (Tom May), 9. huhtikuuta 2004 17:36

YMG is dry, stripped down to it's basic parts, the percussion is just a click and a pop. There is space, then there's a guitar riff. A nice, melodic, hook, played simply. Likewise the bass does it's job with minimal fuss, though perhaps more excitement then the other parts. Nothing's monotone, you know? They are mostly well-crafted song simply constructed and plainly presented. I think their influence on indie of the 80s on shows in that it was their songs more then their style/aesthetic.

And if you're missing the bonus tracks, Phil, that may help to persuade you.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), 6. helmikuuta 2007 20:06

There's something very wonderful about this band, but they make me feel restless, as though I'm being told to sit still. Maybe one day the music will completely take hold of me, but until then I can only take a few minutes of YMG before I feel the need to do about ten pushups or a cartwheel.

― RabiesAngentleman, 14. tammikuuta 2008 14:12

x(^20)p Pete et. al.: about the "eye-stabbing" comment.

This was taken out of the context of my first line (which I had merely intended to amplify): polls are about demographics, not truth. AFAIK, this forum evolved out of the mid-90s rec.music.alternative usenet newsgroup, and that history generates a certain demographic (in age, in braided paths of musical interest). Forums being self-selecting communities, I don't know any reason why our poll should look like the canon of mainstream commercial publications. It's not "representative".

YMG #2 on my ballot. I suppose I was hoping it would place higher, but inside the top thirty isn't bad for a small album in a field that will now be shelled mercilessly by the heavy canon.

^ have probably listened to 'colossal youth' more than any other album on this list. the only reason i didn't vote for it was because i knew everyone else would

"Final Day," so beautiful and empty. Didn't think this would come so high.

28. The Stone Roses - The Stone Roses [1989] (201 points, 15 votes, 2 first place votes)

http://s52.radikal.ru/i137/0901/63/edc302d14fbe.jpg

I hate to disagree (no, wait I LOVE it), but the first Stone Roses record is pretty freakin' brilliant. When it came out, it pretty much blasted everything else coming out of the UK out of the water, at least for your average US high school senior.

I think a lot of the guitar playing on that record is quite inspired. Squire took your average chords and spiced them up a good deal with cool overdubs and interesting sounds. The John Leckie production is probablly the thing that doesn't age well for a lot of people. Its pretty "soft" and compressed. Subdued, I would say. Its immediately dating when you listen to it now. But the songwriting is nice and simple and catchy. Not every tune is amazing, but every one has some seriously redeeming qualities. Probablly the best overall quality of the album is that its well bookended. The best songs are in the beginning and at the end. The middle is a bit of fluff, but by the time "Resurrection" and "Fools GOld" play out, you've forgotten about the bathroom break that you took in the middle.

Either way, its definitely in my top 100. Probablly top 10.

― Tim Baier, 3. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

I think John Squire's guitar playing is great. When I first heard Stone Roses, it sounded new to me. I found out about their influences through them. I'm glad John Squire pointed out 'Chestnut Mare' as one of his favorite songs by the Byrds; otherwise, I wouldn't have bothered to listen to so much of the Byrds' later stuff. And 'Chestnut Mare' is a great song.

I don't think they just repeated what people did before them. I agree with Dr. C here: "The tension between the great melodies and the swaggering thuggish undercurrent of the lyrics is one of the great attractions for me." Comparing the first album to the songs that came out on the singles is interesting cos then the awed, almost reverential, out-of-nowhere feeling on the album is evident. (Sorry I'm so bad at expressing what I mean.) The songs on the singles are brash and in love with life.

Finally, I think John Squire is inspiring. I read in an interview how he got off drugs. He decided to go cycling in the evenings instead and just worked at it. And the way he described it was so matter-of-fact. I like his hair, too.

― youn, 3. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

the original us version did not have fools gold on it either, i only know cause i bought the album on cassette and when i had worn it out i bought the cd which had a new song 'fool's gold' on it. to me the album is deserving of its status, it is very popular now to dismiss them but talentwise and regarding the ability to write inspiring, syscraping, epic pop songs they were so far above the mondays or inspiral carpets or house of love any other band of the time and that, for me, is without question. look at oasis they were essentially stone roses imitators and failed to release one song to match anything on the roses' debut. perhaps it is because it came out when my musical taste was beginning to expand and blossom but this album is a landmark in my life and still the opening of 'waterfall' gives me chills, 'she bangs the drums' can still make me scream along, 'this is the one' just explodes in my head, 'ressurection' is a wank song that i find brilliant. i think looking at john sqire with the filter of having heard the very very awful seahorses somehow taints the fact that he was untouchable at the time of the release of 'the stone roses'. they were also an art school band that made it big, how cool was that.

― keith, 3. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

But anyway, Stone Roses first album. I remember hearing it for the first time, soon after it came out, when my music scene was drowning in a sea of goth-industrio-techno-bollocks and it really did just shock and amaze me. How could something so simple be so amazing, and something to retro be so fresh?

Melodically and harmonically, it's beautiful, the guitarwork is perfectly balanced between naive psychedelic haze and blazing technique (clearly, Squire went well off the wrong end of that balance later) but it is simply the amazing BASS on that album that renders it forever a total CLASSIC.

The cult of the Stone Roses, Madchester, the next album and the collection awfulness of the solo output, the whole Manchester Oasis Britshit that followed... none of this can taint the fresh, startling effect that hearing that album for the first time had on me. Och, you just had to be there. Reading about it must be like seeing a butterfly preserved in a formaldehyde jar and wondering what the hype was about.

― kate the saint, 4. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

knew this ^ wouldn't be top 10

at least it's not higher

I know it is, but I hardly ever think of this as an '80s album.

shoulda been top 10. Who else had it at no1?

presumably keith!

ILOLM

there's something to like about the stone roses' debut, even though i hardly ever listen to it these days

their best two tracks are the first two on second coming XD

I'm not gonna engage because I don't get it and I've never got it. The notion that this is a wonderful or important record is just opposed to every idea I have about music.

I mean, it's probably better than the first Primal Scream album or something but hey

it's a decent bit of psych-tinged pop AFAIC, and 'don't stop' is kinda hella cool (and i have a soft spot for 'this is the one'/'i am the resurrection') but it's not something that draws me in any more.

Tight voting - there's just two points between that and Sister at no. 31

d/l'ed and listened to some Foetus thanks to this poll, but still don't see the appeal

at least it's not higher

― iatee, Sunday, 29 November 2009 20:16 (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Surprised it's so low - I thought it had been largely rehabiliated over the last year or two, breaking clear of its contemporaries into just being a great pop record.

In retrospect I kind of wish I'd reversed the positions of the two SY albums I voted for, but no huge regrets really.

Other artists to get multiple spots on my ballot: Elvis Costello, Talking Heads. (/boring, canonical, another man's sac)

― Bob Saget's "Night Moves": C or D (WmC), Sunday, November 29, 2009 2:20 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah i think it'd be interesting to know what artists most frequently had multiple albums on a given voter's ballot. for me it was three Sonic Youth, and two each of Prince, Elvis Costello and the Meat Puppets.

Just checked my ballot and found I somehow missed this off. A mistake. I would've put it top ten, maybe top five.

XTC 3
The Cure 2
Talk Talk 2
The Fall 2
Foetus 2
The Chameleons 2

Yeah, the Stone Roses record is quite nice, but I'm glad it wasn't any higher. Still smarting about the De La Soul being so low, too. There are other, better, records that I don't mind coming lower as I figure it's mainly because not as many people have heard them (or in the case of SY/The Fall etc, they have too many albums and split the vote), but surely De La are as famous as the Roses?

Lots of R.E.M. from me. Looks like they'll do well since Murmur's surely a top-tenner. My guess is Document gets the shaft, which I think is too bad -- not only a great record, but probably the single album that did most to make "college rock" a viable commercial enterprise, for better and worse.

xpost:

Two Springsteen, two R.E.M. and three Prince.

surely De La are as famous as the Roses?

Here I think we have a transatlantic issue -- I mean, I'm sort of shocked at Femmes being so low but I think UK people just don't listen to that record at all. And on the other side, being in the US I forget that Stone Roses were in the UK context massively huge -- much bigger than De La I'd think.

Yeah, the Stone Roses record is quite nice, but I'm glad it wasn't any higher. Still smarting about the De La Soul being so low, too. There are other, better, records that I don't mind coming lower as I figure it's mainly because not as many people have heard them (or in the case of SY/The Fall etc, they have too many albums and split the vote), but surely De La are as famous as the Roses?

If you look at the numbers, more people voted for 3 Feet High and Rising than The Stone Roses, but people who voted for the latter rated it higher. Two people put TSR on the top spot of their ballot, but no one did that for 3FHaR.

At the time maybe, but I would have thought that their level of fame and respect in the '00s was the same (especially for ILM people). [I am from the UK, btw.]

xpost ah, that is interesting. And I guess kind of understandable.

It's a shame The Stone Roses made the list but The Happy Mondays look like missing out, Bummed is so much more enjoyable in my opinion.

Bummed yeah obv but much more of an acquired taste, obv.

I was actually thinking about Love is Hell which was released more or less at the same time as the Stone Roses and is a several trillion times better use of guitars, pedals and English accents.

27. Guns N' Roses - Appetite for Destruction (201 points, 18 votes)

http://productshopnyc.com/htdocs/GNR_Apetite_Original_Cover.jpg

To quote Ethan's lovely "Why the fuck did you bother?" answer on the beatles thread: yawn. Do you two have to start?

To answer the question (and yes, Ethan's right, G'n'R are misogynistic scumbags and anti-gay to boot - definitely not moral values I want around if I cared about such things), Appetite for Destruction is classic classic classic. It rocks like a bastard on speed.

Unfortunately, G'n'R as a rock outfit are duds. Even duds can put out amazing work every once in a while.

― Ally, 2. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

The greatest album ever made. I really need to get me some speed.

― Otis Wheeler, 2. toukokuuta 2001 3:00

Just gave the album a spin annnnnd: it's still as great as it was back in the day. Quite refreshing actually to hear it again. Lovely mix of nihilism, sleaze and utopian/opiate dreams (or should I pull a Penman and say utopiate? ;). And it's filled with classic lines, "your daddy works in porno, now your mom is not around.", "besides, you got nothing better to do and I'm boooaaared.", etc. The Led Zep comparison is a bit false anyway (like them too, although in the end I prefer songs about heroin to songs about hobbits), same with Aerosmith. It just became clear to me that GnR reside in the company of The Stooges. Yeah, that great. :)

Also remembered how big they really where at school: metalheads, jocks, posh girls, hiphop heads, geeks...everybody loved them.

― Omar, 23. lokakuuta 2001 3:00

"Jungle". Best rock/metal album of the '80s? It's hard to be objective, because as people upthread have said, we've all heard it a million times. Every time I hear "Jungle" now it's not like I'm hearing the song at all, just reminding myself "oh yeah, Axl was sleeping rough in a schoolyard and this guy came up to him and said...". But yeah, it beats just about any other rock/metal album from the same period.

― snoball, 2. marraskuuta 2007 1:23

No argument from me. Probly wd have placed higher if you didn't feel like Appetite marked the end of a wave rather than the start of one.

I remember when my friend got that album when were 8 or 9, that cover was the most mind-boggling but also the coolest thing ever. Kids that we were, we didn't even realize the woman was supposed to have been raped by the robot. Now that I look at it as an adult and a feminist, I really have no idea what to say. Is it supposed to be some kind of a rape revenge fantasy?

Amazed at this. I thought it had a genuine shot at no.1.

It's so weird to me that people think of Fool's Gold as being part of the Stone Roses album.

Oh yeah, I forgot to add the release year, sorry. Obviously Appetite for Destruction was released in 1987.

Americans do, because that's how it was served up. xp

xxxpost can't imagine thinking G'n'R had a shot at no.1 on a ILX 80's poll

I actually think of "Fool's Gold" as this thing aside from the Roses, that would have happened in 89/90 whether they existed or not, just kind of coalescing out of Baggy and the "Funky Drummer" break and the general pop vibe at the time.

well like 5 rad albums now

Not much to contribute here I'm afraid (hardly a peep from any of my votes so far), but I'm Spotifying Young Marble Giants just now, and whilst it's not blowing me away at all, it's definitely a fine wee record and something I'll pick up if I ever see it. Just went through Wurlitzer Jukebox, that was actually great.

Slash really never gets his due as a guitarist, but Appetite is a work of art in that respect.

xp ha maybe, but more obvious contenders nearly all have a split vote, I though Appetite might sneak through in a clear run. Plus I know nothing about what makes other people tick, that helps a lot.

Too high.

This placement is interesting since I kind of think the Stone Roses debut was kind of to the UK what AFD was to the US-- an album that seemed awfully groundbreaking and awesome to people paying attention to that kind of music, yet to outsiders it felt like refried stuff (in the case of the SRs it was 60s psych pop over trendy beats and with GNR it was Motley Crue doing Stones covers) that is still mystifying to see lionized decades later.

i hoped Appetite would at least get to the top 10. i totally think Slash gets his due, more or less, though. how many hard rock guitarists of the past 20 years are as revered?

at least it's not higher

― iatee, Sunday, 29 November 2009 20:16 (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

― The N'Gog of the Marriage (a hoy hoy), Sunday, 29 November 2009 20:26 (33 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

how many hard rock guitarists of the past 20 years are as revered?

Very few, but that's the problem. Slash gets lost in the Clapton/Hendrix/Page/Blackmore shuffle created by classicists.

Slash is on the cover of guitar hero