Best Album Rated 10.0 by Pitchfork Media Upon Its Initial Release

i'm sure the dylan boot is great, but i've never heard it. went with i see a darkness.

i think hi dere is a little harsh but yeah walt mink was waaaay past their prime

lol i always forget pitchfork started in st louis park, two local bands getting 10

man i gotta find this old local comp that has i believe the first 12 Rods recorded song...it sounds EXACTLY like jane's addiction

El Producto is a pretty solid record as far as I'm concerned. If it is a lot worse than their other albums, than hey I can't wait to check them out.

wotta bunch o shit

http://img808.imageshack.us/img808/1813/tapes.jpg

From "Red", we ease into "Make Out Music", a wistful recollection of hometown boredom and school bullies that takes a lyrical turn through an old Ziggy cartoon (no, you read that right) before plowing into the awesome lyrics, "I realize what I gotta do/ Nyah nanny boo boo/ Nanny nanny boo boo."

Hey. Make Out Music (at least the version on Split Personalities) is one of my favorite songs.

"OK Computer" of course. Still a marvellous album.

Man, old Pitchfork reviews were pretty ridiculous: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/8082-supermodified/

(I know that's not on this list but I ended up looking at the Amon Tobin reviews.)

Bricolage might get my vote. Otherwise, one of the Radioheads.

Should I listen to all of these?

Yes. Absolutely. (I say this having not heard, oh, four of them myself.)

The Amon Tobin one is the only one of these I could imagine myself listening to, so I guess it wins by default.

ayo whiney I know you think the 12 rods album is better than OK computer but newsflash dude, it isn't

i haven't heard any of these albums straight thru

that said i voted for trail of dead

Of all of the albums I've heard out of these, I like all of them but this just exposes the weaknesses in P4k's rating system.

As a site mainly concerned with new music, it seems perverse to say that a live bootleg of Dylan playing a gig in England 45 years ago is as good as it gets and you might as well not bother as you're not going to be as good as this or most of the Beatles albums (more 10.0s). Which means that you might be SunnO))) and record Monoliths and Dimensions or you might be LCD Soundsystem and record the Sound Of Silver or you might be Arcade Fire and record Funeral or you might be Mastodon and record Leviathan or you might be Burial and record Burial or you might be The Bug and record London Zoo but you will never come close to the self titled 'White Album' with its Rocky Racoon, Piggies, Ob La Di, Ob La Da, Bungalow Bill and songs about fucking sheepdogs.

It's not comparing like with like and it reveals the essential conservatism at the core of what they're doing.

That said, there is nothing wrong with this list at all. Most of the albums are great and if most people were to choose their best ten albums of the last decade, they would struggle to come up with a list that looked better to most others than this. It's just: why bring fractions into it, or even points, it's senseless, pointless and slightly daft.

i see a darkness

xxpost: You're wrong. Rocky Raccoon is one of the most magnificent songs on the white album.

jeez why are people so obsessed with a site peddling the terrible aesthetic with that bunch of shit as the crème de la crème

Should I listen to all of these?

― billstevejim, Friday, June 11, 2010 4:27 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark

absolutely not!!

the kindest thing i can say about any of those is that the bonnie prince billy album does have one terrific track on it iirc (the title track i think). albeit one i haven't listened to in years and am not sure i even own in any format any more, and i'm not enthused enough to rectify that in the way i immediately went to itunes last night when i realised i didn't have an mp3 of 20 fingers ft. gillette's "short dick man"

radiohead really are THE WORST

Doran I wouldn't worry about the ratings overmuch, if you don't like them you don't have to take any notice of them. I wouldn't say they were senseless or pointless either, they're just a bit of fluff around the edges of the review for people who can't be bothered to read the whole thing and just want to skim it, see if the record is worthy of further investigation.

This list wouldn't come even close to my top 11 albums of all time but the Dylan is pretty epochal and I would say OK Computer is a damn fine album as well. Voted Dylan then.

Moka: But you take my point that there is no way in fucking hell that The Beatles ST is a 10 out of 10 album and by reducing it to an unbeatable score (this is essentially what all album reviews with scores are doing), you can't really discuss it's perceived importance with any great clarity because you've already declared 'Wild Honey Pie' and the backing vocals on Ob La Di, Ob La Da as good as it gets. I mean, even the version of Helter Skelter isn't the best one by the group there is.

Whatever you think about Radiohead though Lex, I bet you can understand why someone would like those albums (I can understand why people like Bonnie Prince Billy and I wouldn't have the bald Mormon sex pest or any of his tedious records in my house)... that's a matter of taste.

Ob La Di, Ob La Da on the otherhand is demonstrably risible. Comedy cod reggae? One hundred percent for effort!

Anagram: Yeah, you're right and I like Pitchfork etc but this thread doesn't just invite discussion of the rating system, it demands it.

uh none of them?

If I had to pick, I'll go with The Soft Bulletin but that so ain't a 10, brah.

Seems like they were less cautious with the tens back in the late 90s/early 00s. Maybe some backlash from the Source Tags rating.

this thread doesn't just invite discussion of the rating system, it demands it.

Let's please not.

10.0: Essential
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible

In terms of the Dylan album I think anyone would be hard pushed to deny that it is indeed essential, it more or less documents the moment at which rock music was born and IMO you can't get much more essential than that. Plus "bootleg" is a misnomer (as it is for the whole Dylan Bootleg series), of course there were always bootlegs of the show but this was the official live recording which Columbia had been sitting on all those years for reasons best known to themselves.

Doran thats the rating system they came up with. The White album is "essential" because of how influential/important it, along with the other Beatles albums, is to pop music since then.
Your argument reminds me of my friend saying "The Velvet Underground are so terrible... if they put out those albums now everyone would hate them." That theoretical scenario is impossible because they were so influential on music, that you would be comparing them with a musical landscape/bands that wouldn't exist without them. And I think that Pitchfork currently understands that nothing really deserves a ten without a proper amount of time to measure its cultural importance.

listing their 0.0 albums would be way more interesting

also Lex is absolutely 100% wrong about Radiohead but then again I would say that (that Amon Tobin album is still the shit, too)

10.0: Essential
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible

― Evan, Friday, June 11, 2010 7:00 AM (20 minutes ago)

ha I remember this from way back. Nice find!

Spectacular vs Amazing

0.0 albums include both Zaireeka and NYC Ghosts And Flowers

we're assuming the Jet was a 0.0 although it seemed to transcend rating scales

Jet was beyond words or numbers

And I think that Pitchfork currently understands that nothing really deserves a ten without a proper amount of time to measure its cultural importance

yeah but that's total bullshit! "cultural importance" has little to do with how much a piece of music affects me. and in any case, cultural importance to whom? there are vast swathes of music and artists who owe little/nothing to the sodding beatles

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5607-travistan/

also the white album is terrible and therefore very much inessential

yeah but that's total bullshit! "cultural importance" has little to do with how much a piece of music affects me

Wasn't it you who was claiming last years Rihanna album was culturally important?

hang on that review is not a 0.0 review it is a 4.8 review

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/5607-travistan/

LOL: link to the left of the review "Travis Morrison Retires From Music"

And I think that Pitchfork currently understands that nothing really deserves a ten without a proper amount of time to measure its cultural importance

I wouldn't go along with that either, I don't see how that can be a factor given that (as per this thread) they give 10s to newly released albums as well as reissues

plus I don't think "cultural importance" is something that is built into pfk's concept of what is essential

there are vast swathes of music and artists who owe little/nothing to the sodding beatles

-lex

That doesn't mean that there isn't a huge percentage of music and artists who are. I'm not saying Pitchfork or its scoring system is perfect but they definitely seem more careful about it these days.

Wasn't the review of Coltrane's Live at the Village Vanguard (shit, cat) a 10.0?

Nah, 8.5.

Wait a minute I wasn't implying that Pitchfork was deciding cultural importance for us, just that thats part of what they are using to determine the score they give something, especially when they are considering a 10.

Oh maybe thats not what you meant either anagram. Sorry.

Wasn't it you who was claiming last years Rihanna album was culturally important?

as these things go it was, but that's not a reason to give it 10! (i'd give it 8.)

Eitherway, I just think "cultural importance" is a tiny summary of an element that helps them decide. There. Also, when I say current Pitchfork I mean post-2002 and no new releases have received a 10 since then.

I feel sorry for anyone under the age of 60 who thinks that the white album is "culturally important".

In what way is it essential? I know Beatles obsessives who don't think it's that good.

if the beatles aren't culturally important I dunno wtf is

But you take my point that there is no way in fucking hell that The Beatles ST is a 10 out of 10 album

No, but "A Hard Day's Night", "Revolver" and "Sgt. Pepper" all are.

I cant remember any other NME 10/10 albums. Did the strokes first album get a 10?

― pfunkboy (Herman G. Neuname), Friday, June 11, 2010 2:52 PM (1 hour ago)

The Strokes album did. The first Arctic Monkeys album also got 10 and was listed at number 5 in the best British albums of all time the week it came out.

Others I can remember getting 10..
Pet Shop Boys-Pop Art
Eve-Scorpion
Supergrass-Supergrass is 10
The Bug-Pressure

I seem to remember reading one of the early 90's Fall albums got a 10, maybe Shift-Work?

Pfunkboy: No, that was something that was flying round on ILX for some reason a year or so ago... I gave it 9/10

― Duran (Doran), Friday, June 11, 2010 3:13 PM (1 hour ago)

I remember asking you about that as the NME website had it listed as 0/10 then in the comments it said why is it listed as getting zero instead of 10? Metacritic and Wikipedia also say it was rated as a 10. I think 9 is a spot on grade though.

you know what still rules? Source Tags & Codes

I agree.

So close to a 10.0 with this vintage Save Ferris piece!:

Save Ferris
It Means Everything
(Epic)
Rating: 9.5

If you're lucky, really lucky in life, you might be able to occasionally catch sight of a band that has reached their perfect groove. It's when they're tight and unified, playing music for the sheer fun and love of it, far before the cynicism sets in. They give off a special energy that is meant for the smaller venues. They record CD's that become "keepers", the mainstay of your collection, though they may go "out of style" someday.

Save Ferris' It Means Everything knocked my socks off. I was in bed, the changer had just changed over from Meat Beat Manifesto and off in the distance this CD pulled me awake with its clean bouncin' groove. Its tight, unpretentious, energetic ska led by the rich and soothing voice of Monique Powell opened my eyes to a beautiful day. Yes, a band in their perfect groove. I reached bedside to my DC City Paper and began to frantically search for them live. That's when their cover of "Come On Eileen" came on. I think I came. Great music that won't be soon forgotten by anyone who's heard them.

-James P. Wisdom

james p wisdom gave mansun's first album 9.3 which was pleasing if charitable

I don't get that at all, anagram, especially considering that "Like a Rolling Stone" had already gone Top 10 in 1965, one year before this concert, not to mention that the Rolling Stones had released several albums by that point. (And I'm not sure I see it as obvious that the Beatles had less to do with the emergence of rock than Dylan.)

You're right about Dylan in '65, of course. I guess the Newport Folk Festival is the pivotal moment I'm really groping for, when he plugged in live for the first time. But there's no official live album of that, and the Free Trade Hall show just sounds so earth-shattering to my ears that I tend to think of it as the key document of his going electric. As for the Beatles and the Stones, I think I'd argue they were both pop, as opposed to rock, groups until '66, with Revolver and Aftermath respectively being their first out-and-out rock records.

some of the newport stuff was on no direction home

The white album is a 10. Fuck off.

it is very hard to choose as these are in fact the eleven greatest albums ever.

I'm thinking about my top 10 records and the only one I would ever give a 10 to is Fun House (if any record deserves a 10.0...)

of course Pitchfork gave it a 9.4...

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Nabisco's 10.0 to Disintegration was OTM!

Poor Walt Mink. Would have voted for that to give it a little love if it weren't for 12 Rods being there.

Would have given Walt Mink's Miss Happiness a ten but I think its showing here is fair.

(El Producto's showing, of course)

Evan, you put 12 Rods - I Wish You Were A Girl on your spring mix. I love how the song sounds but I can't figure the lyrics out. When he says "cause I feel green, if you know what I mean" I don't know what he means. Is bisexuality the theme of that song?

I always thought he meant inexperienced or immature.

total votes for radiohead discs: 46
total votes for any other of 8 discs: 91 (so roughly 11 votes per non-radiohead disc).

o_0

Oh CaptainLorax thanks for listening to it! Yes, the lyrics are about learning that you are gay because you wish this person was a girl so your feelings would be normal etc. The green feeling equals queasiness I assume.