SPIN Top 40 Of 2003

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (298 of them)

I think it(Fischerspooner) came out twice. It got launched in the UK first, and flopped. Then it launched in the US, and flopped.

― Charles McCain (Charles McCain), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:39 (twenty years ago) link

sounds right to me!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:41 (twenty years ago) link

Not to be a party pooper, but why do so many people on here always worry so much about The Exact Year That Records Came Out? Isn't it obvious that lots of records might not hit you until a few months AFTER they come out? Which is why literal release dates don't matter in Pazz and Jop; also, if your deadline was October last year, you'd automatically miss stuff that came out in the two months after that, right? I mean, I have no love for Spin, and couldn't care less about defending them, but this kinda thing always just seems NITPICKY to me.

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

I never understood why they didn't just make the Fischerspooner guys record a new album and hope for a single rather than push an album which quite obviously had nothing that was going to be a radio/MTV hit.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

I mean, it's really weird to keep trying to release the same set of 10 songs three or four years in a row. Aside from the Kylie remix, have they done anything?

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:43 (twenty years ago) link

They mowed my lawn. They got some ribbon candy and twenty-five cents to buy some moon pies.

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:45 (twenty years ago) link

oh, I'll let that one slide, but thanks for thinking of me! :-)

As a gesture of gratitude, I'll let you borrow all my Fading Captain series 7 inches! ; )

― Matt Helgeson (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:46 (twenty years ago) link

They've partied...HARD.

― Charles McCain (Charles McCain), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:46 (twenty years ago) link

More whining about 2002 albums: Personally, I'm kinda pissed that the Justin Timberlake and Sean Paul albums (the latter of which I still haven't heard, but lots of other people did!) DIDN'T make this list, since 2003 was pretty clearly the year they had impact. (Ditto maybe T.A.T.U., who you'd think would've at least deserved a *single.*)

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:47 (twenty years ago) link

I don't know, I don't understand the dissing, it seems so obvious, pretentious arty band call act in a way which music press deem pretentious and arty and music press act boorish and hate them for it, so fucking predictable.

And the Kylie remix and Emerge fucking rock!

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:47 (twenty years ago) link

Not to be a party pooper, but why do so many people on here always worry so much about The Exact Year That Records Came Out?

Well, it's just a logic thing. If it's a Best Of 2003 list, shouldn't everything be from 2003 for it to make sense at all?

I do think that in the interest of fairness, records from the last month or two of the previous year should be allowed, but that sort of thing should be made clear somewhere in the introduction.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:48 (twenty years ago) link

I was pretty surprised that Timberlake didn't make their Top 40 albums list. I was even more surprised that Beyonce got snubbed from that list, and had a very low placing in the singles category. B got robbed!

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:50 (twenty years ago) link

There is some kind of implied time window with these type of lists though. It can't just be the totally subjective 'When did the record hit for me?' - because obviously you shouldn't include, say, a record from 20 years ago that you finally got around to hearing this year. (Well maybe you could get away with it if it was reissued, but not otherwise.)

― o. nate (onate), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:51 (twenty years ago) link

Chuck, it's one thing for them to have been released last year and made their impact this year--it's another thing for them to have been released AND made their impact last year and then get shoehorned into this year's list.

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:52 (twenty years ago) link

O Nate is right. If the "when did the record hit for me" thing was a rule, I'd have to put a bunch of Squeeze albums on my hypothetical year end list.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:53 (twenty years ago) link

I wonder if "No One Knows" was a Spin typo for "Go With The Flow".

― Charles McCain (Charles McCain), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:54 (twenty years ago) link

I mean, "Lose Yourself" placed SECOND on last year's P&J singles (and "No One Knows" eleventh, and "Made You Look" 21st)--it's not as if those songs were unknown quantities even in, say, October, which is when I think they put those lists together. Either way, it looks fucking lame.

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:54 (twenty years ago) link

obviously it makes sense when something carries over--cf. Thriller winning P&J in '83, or even Spin naming Coldplay band of the year--they're not MY band of the year, but it's a legitimate choice. but "Lose Yourself" or last year's White Blood Cells as album of the year 18 months after it came out AND MADE ITS IMPACT (and placed fourth in P&J) isn't the same thing AT ALL.

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 21:58 (twenty years ago) link

Surprised that Evanescence didn't make the list since I think they did more for the goth revival than AFI. And, as a friend said, "They rocked harder than 10 St. Angers."

― Jeanne Fury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:00 (twenty years ago) link

my left toenail rocks harder than St. Anger

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:01 (twenty years ago) link

they got pigeonholed in the "women who rock" article instead, jeanne. (unjustly, i might add)

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:01 (twenty years ago) link

"Lose Yourself" (which didn't hit til November or December, right?) does indeed seem weird, but hey, it's Charles Aaron's list, not mine. I forget what those Nas and QOTSA songs sound like; I'd say, if they were still on the Billboard charts in January (which they were), which means Charles was hardly the only person discovering them in 2003, then they're fair game if he wants them to be. And Bob Xgau voting for "Rock the Casbah" a couple years ago was a lot weirder. Anyway, if anything, rock criticism is way too anal-compulsive in general about release dates these days, so more power to anybody who isn't. It's not like we work for the record companies, after all -- Their release dates shouldn't set our agenda; our tastes should. (Wow, I NEVER use the editorial "we." What the hell got into me?)

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:01 (twenty years ago) link

(actually, it probably doesn't. but it's fun to think it does!)

the very idea of that "women in rock are back!" article makes me do a whole-body cringe

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:01 (twenty years ago) link

Unjustly because you don't think she rocks, or because they are a very dude-centric band with a girl singer? Or...?

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:02 (twenty years ago) link

Looking back on the reissues, where's that deluxe "Harder They Come" soundtrack. That seemed one to (me at least) to be the best excuse for those Universal deluxe albums yet.

― Charles McCain (Charles McCain), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:02 (twenty years ago) link

Chuck, aren't you the guy who discounted Joe S. Harrington's P&J ballot because none of the records were "new"?

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:03 (twenty years ago) link

I mean, as long as we're making exceptions....

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:04 (twenty years ago) link

>um, no offense, Phil, but your tastes are, how we say, *specialized*

My tastes are, but my listening isn't, really. Well, not totally; I don't listen to the radio, ever, but I watch MTV every day.

― Phil Freeman (Phil Freeman), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:05 (twenty years ago) link

On the other hand -- and I guess this is Matos's point, which makes sense -- that Eminem single or White Stripes album basically strikes of Spin covering their stupid asses, since they'd missed the records (assuming they did, I forget) the year before. The obvious solution would be to run the poll LATER. But they're so obsessed with being FIRST (just like all the magazines who only review albums the week that they came out) that being SMART doesn't matter to them, I guess. (Actually, I wonder if it's an advertiser-driven decision: i.e., getting the lists into the store while people are still doing Xmas shopping. I have no evidence for this, but it wouldn't surprise me.)

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:06 (twenty years ago) link

unjust cuz evanescence deserved to make either the albums or singles lists!

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:07 (twenty years ago) link

>>Chuck, aren't you the guy who discounted Joe S. Harrington's P&J ballot because none of the records were "new"?<<

Nah, the stupid fuck didn't list any record labels for all those 25 year old albums, and I didn't want to waste my time looking them up, basically. If you're gonna be a moron, at least DO YOUR WORK, you know?

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:08 (twenty years ago) link

I don't think the Eminem thing is about them "covering their asses" - SPIN has been worshipping Eminem for the past three or four years now. I'm pretty sure that every one of his albums have made their year end list, mostly in the top 10.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:08 (twenty years ago) link

>I don't think the Eminem thing is about them "covering their asses" - SPIN has been worshipping Eminem for the past three or four years now. I'm pretty sure that every one of his albums have made their year end list, mostly in the top 10<

Exactly. So they couldn't afford to miss this one. Which was my pint. (Though I bet it had more to do with THAT SONG than with Eminem. It's not like ever single he's ever made has placed on their lists, right?)

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:11 (twenty years ago) link

that's pretty much it, Chuck. I mean, I have a year-end thing coming up too but I'm in the more privileged position of having most of the year instead of 3/4 of it behind me to make sure stuff gets covered. (well, actually, "what gets covered" depends on what my writers decide to cover, but you know what I mean.) so no, I don't envy Spin that way at all. but it seems so egregious to have "Lose Yourself" or White Blood Cells on those lists way after the fact--everyone knows those artists are Spin-endorsed because they're on the fucking cover every other month!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:12 (twenty years ago) link

xpost, obviously

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:13 (twenty years ago) link

Anyway, maybe the reason I'm not being so kneejerkedly anti-Spin this time is because at least, unlike last year, they didn't fill up their list with Janes Addiction/Weezer/Audioslave/Chili Peppers/Or-Whoever type '90s alt-rock hasbeens. Which is an improvement of sorts.

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:13 (twenty years ago) link

Chuck, how obscure were Harrington's picks?

Judging by his Top 100 Greatest Albums list, he seems pretty obsessed with canonical boomer rock.

Also: I misunderstood your implication of "covering their asses," sorry.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:13 (twenty years ago) link

Except for Broadcast and the still-sorta-undecided Tenth Slot (it was Lyrics Born for a while, but now I'm considering changing it to MF Doom's Viktor Vaughn Vaudeville Villain or Sean Paul), all of my Top Ten albums of '03 are on the list. (They have my top eight, though my #1 is ranked pretty low.)

Good to see !!! on the singles list, but no Junior Senior = TRASH.

Matos: you only have one toenail on your left foot? What the hell?

― nate detritus (natedetritus), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:13 (twenty years ago) link

that Harrington list makes the Rolling Stone 500 look like . . . a decent list!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:14 (twenty years ago) link

Maybe Charles Aaron was considering the fact that "Lose Yourself" won an Academy Award in 2003. That could be part of the reasoning.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:15 (twenty years ago) link

Nate, I'll show you when I come to Mpls for Xmas, it's really gnarly!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:15 (twenty years ago) link

>Chuck, how obscure were Harrington's picks?<

I forget, but not especially, I don't think. I mean, I think he even put the Sex Pistols on there. So the list was not only a dumb music-sucks-these-days statement, it was also completely boring about it.

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:15 (twenty years ago) link

haha Joe S. Harrington in boring shockah!

― M Matos (M Matos), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:17 (twenty years ago) link

Re: Women Rock the Front Stage

I didn't even bother to address this earlier in the thread because this is the Donnas', what, SIXTH album. And the Distillers' THIRD. AND BOTH bands have been selling out and headlining shows in clubs for years. That and it's a stupid fucking thing to say to begin with. "Women In Rock are Back." Fucking die, please. But it doesn't piss me off half as much as Stone's insistence to put Eve, Mary J. etc. on the cover of this year's Women In Rock issue. For fuck's sake, change the issue to WOMEN IN MUSIC. Drives me NUTS.

― Jeanne Fury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:20 (twenty years ago) link

And by the way, I fully intend on putting Cyndi Lauper's new album on my Pazz & Jop ballot because it's the most beautiful-zany thing that's hit my ears all year.

― Jeanne Fury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:23 (twenty years ago) link

(I don't know why the hell I decided that this thread needed that last post.)

― Jeanne Fury (Jeanne Fury), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:23 (twenty years ago) link

Um, not to defend Joe Harrington, but these are hardly "canonical":

15. The Smoker You Drink, The Player You Get-Joe Walsh
16. Slayed?-Slade
18. Bridge of Sighs-Robin Trower
28. Fool for the City-Foghat
49. Thick as a Brick-Jethro Tull
55. Straight Shooter-Bad Company
57. Lights Out-UFO
63. Frampton Comes Alive-Peter Frampton
70. Starless and Bible Black-King Crimson
71. Flat as a Pancake-Head East
76. They Only Come Out at Night-Edgar Winter
77. All American Boy-Rick Derringer
80. Molly Hatchet
81. Dreamboat Annie-Heart
82. Little Queen-Heart
86. Montrose
90. Klaatu
91. Brain Salad Surgery-Emerson, Lake & Palmer
92. Hair of the Dog-Nazareth
94. Mirror Stars-Fabulous Poodles
100. Not Fragile-BTO

Most of them are actually pretty good, too.

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:25 (twenty years ago) link

Chuck, I wasn't putting down the records at all! But that list is generally boomer rock icon stuff...

(Hey Jeanne, I'll check that record out based on your recommendation just now, so hey, good thing you posted it here.)

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:29 (twenty years ago) link

And if some of things aren't quite canonical, they are definitely staples of classic rock radio.

― Matthew Perpetua (Matthew Perpetua), Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:30 (twenty years ago) link

If you ask me, Head East, Nazareth, Foghat, UFO, Rick Derringer, and the Fabulous Poodles (none of whom has ever made any Top 500 boomer-album list in Rolling Stone, I guaranfuckingtee) aren't nearly icons for ENOUGH people. (But hey, you didn't.)

― chuck, Tuesday, 2 December 2003 22:35 (twenty years ago) link

Skipping 198 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.