Rolling Stone magazine's 500 Greatest Albums (2003)

I know that this list was compiled years ago, but it's one that I've always found odd: Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time.

I know that any list of greatest anything will have bias, but Rolling Stone's list seems really biased. While there are definately many albums that should have been included, there are many that are on there seemingly for sales or for the fact that they were the first of something (e.g. genre, social/political movement, etc).

For instance, there seems to be far too many Beatles albums. Don't take this critique to mean I don't like them, because I love the Beatles, but it seems stupid to include so many of their albums simply because they were the first to do this and that. While I don't deny that Sgt.Pepper's is a phenomenal album, does it really deserve #1 because it incorporated so many different musical and production elements? I love that album, but at times it comes across as just weird for the sake of weird.

Also, why is the Metallica's Black Album on there, when only Master of Puppets is included? What, aside from sales, makes that album more significant than those other landmarks? People say it broke metal into the mainstream. I think that's a load of crap: were Sabbath, Maiden, Priest, (old school) Metallica, Aerosmith, Motley Crue, Megadeth, etc, underground? No, they were huge. So, why is the Black Album included over other creative (and financial) landmarks? These are just some examples, but there are more instances of this. Obviously, no fan will ever be satisfied with any list.

What are your thoughts?

It's Rolling Stone, one of the worst magazines ever.

They know pretty much 0 about quality metal.

They're about as well-informed as the Grammys, which is to say, not at all.

Yeah, man, you're better off reading the back of a cereal box than to put any stock in "rolling stoned"'s established clique of "music"(which seemingly invalidates anything that doesn't have a 60's-feeling or "message"). I'm sure they were all sniggering and patting themselves on the back for even remembering to include ANY MeTal at all! Plus, as stated before, ANY list is gonna aggravate ANYone (anyone who can think for themselves, anyway!)

Rolling Stone is, was and always has been a waste of perfectly good trees. Nuff said.

Here's the list for anyone who want's to look at it before judging.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5938174/the_rs_500_greatest_albums_of_all_time/


I think it's a great list, and probably the only worthwhile thing Rolling Stone magazine have done for the past 20 years.

I have no problem with a list that has The Replacements, Jane's Addiction, Big Star, The Flying Burritto Brothers, X, Elvis Costello, Husker Du, The Ronettes, Gram Parsons, Tom Waits, Mott The Hoople, Aerosmith, The Jesus And Mary Chain, New York Dolls etc on the same list. Those are some of my biggest favs. 'Frickin' fab i say.

And what about you hard rock/heavy metal knuckleheads as well, Metallica, Aerosmith, Van Halen, Black Sabbath (3 albums in the list!), Guns N' Roses, AC/DC, The Stooges, Sex Pistols, Kiss, Soundgarden, Led Zeppelin, Alice Cooper, Def Leppard etc. Rightly or wrongly those are the bands and albums that have had the greatest effect outside our little hard rock/metal cocoon. So that's why they are judged as the best hard rock/metal albums by default on that list.

And actually it's pretty close to a large poll of heavy metal fans that was taken by metal scribe Martin Popoff in relation to those 'heavy metal' albums.

This was the top 10 heavy metal albums as voted by the heavy metal public, well a large portion of it that i think would best indicate what a final result would be if all voted. Highlighted are the albums that made RS 500 list.

1. Metallica - Master Of Puppets
2. Iron Maiden - Number Of The Beast
3. Slayer - Reign In Blood
4. Metallica - Ride The Lightning
5. AC/DC - Back In Black
6. Black Sabbath - Paranoid
7. Queensryche - Operation Mindcrime
8. Iron Maiden - Piece Of Mind
9. Van Halen - Van Halen
10. Guns N' Roses - Appetite For Destruction


So 5 of the top 10 heavy metal albums as judged by the heavy metal public made the RS list. No argument here.

The mere fact that rolling stoned's list excluded Iron Maiden absolutely INVALIDATES that "magazine"'s credibility to discuss MeTal. Look at all the rather obscure "underground" albums on that list, many of which are nothing but artifacts that when dug out at a party other hippies can say in a cloud of marijuana smoke "wow, maaaaaaaan, where'd you score THAT platter?" SO, rather than list those artifacts, why NOT explore the genre or MeTal, or punk, or even country...or any OTHER genre they gave token nods to, and include what the classics of those genres REALLY are? Why no Misfits? Seems to me that they were just as "notorious" as the Ramones and the Sex Pistols and the Clash.....oh, but they weren't "serious musicians" like those other punk bands, were they? Why not take off just ONE album listed by Tom Waits(or any other multiple listings; I'm just singling him out because I find it preposterous that he's on ANY "best" list!) and put on an Iron Maiden? And, honestly, does nas belong on there over "Panzer Division Marduk"? Or, if "PDM" is a bit too underground to expect from them, why not include the undisputed classic "Reign in Blood"? See, the only MeTal they put on there were just the easy choices...it's as if they were in a grocery store full of every food in the world and they just picked out hot dogs and mac 'n cheese. THE METAL ENTRIES ARE NOTHING BUT TOKENS!!!!!! along with almost every other listing......... but, once again, that is exactly WHY mags put out those lists, to irk people and encourage debate. It is just disgusting that rolling stoned makes itself out to be an authority.

Oh, and it took them until #231 to remember Queen? Yeah, THEY never put that much thought or craftsmanship or talent into THEIR albums, did they.......

Why no Misfits? Well i would place a record by The Damned or the Cramps before i would put anything by the Misfits.

The reason alot of those groups are on there is because they don't fall into a cute genre of music. They can't be pigeonholed and are extremely original, influential and at times groundbreaking.

Slayer and Iron Maiden mean zilch outside the world of heavy metal music. Their influence is restricted to one style of music. Van Halen, Guns N' Roses and Black Sabbath had enormous impact on music in general outside the heavy metal spectrum. That's why their on the list and not Slayer or Iron Maiden.

Heavy Metal is a small fish in the big pond of music, some people forget that.

Rolling Stone covers more than just metal, so it's to be expected that they include a wider spectrum of artists, albums, & their impact on music as a whole. the fact that many good metal albums made their list just proves that metal is as valid & important as any other genre.

yeesh! give them a break. let's see any of YOU come up with a list of FIVE HUNDRED of the greatest albums, either by yourself or with a bunch of friends. chances are YOU'D be completely biased towards your only personal favourites as well. it's impossible to be neutral about such things. the folks at RS are known to like the 60's, so that plays out in their choices. a 500 list with slayer, maiden, and pantera in the top 20 might please bw&bk's readership but it doesn't represent broader reality. sorry, but it's true.

When they say Greatest, they are assigning a dollar value to the
definition of the word and more than likely are just going by total
sales. That would explain a lot of the 1960's and 1950's dominance over the first 100+ slots on the list. If they actually polled people on the street for a more objective list,or even had an online vote, they would come up with something vastly different. I doubt Michael Jackson would be so high on the list.

Polls like this are a major pet peeve of mine. I'm not sure how they are put together, but my feeling is that often you have a bunch of "expert" critics who are voting way outside their area of expertise; and you end up with a bunch of shlock with a few ideosyncratic cuties thrown in.
I wouldn't use any of those lists for toilet paper, for fear of getting ink on my ass.

Your fear of getting ink on your ass is warranted Sahb but i can't see any problem with this list.

This list has 2 Mott The Hoople, 2 X, 3 Big Star and 3 Black Sabbath records count em 3 in the top 500 records ever. I just can't complain.

These people who compile them have a bit of clue about music. And the influence of certain artists have had through time.

Here's an alternative to the critics list, its the top 500 on rateyourmusic.com. Were your average music fans rate well their music out of 5 Stars. The best averages weighted with how many times their has been a vote come out with each albums magical placing.

http://rateyourmusic.com/charts/top/album/all-time/1

Yeah, I think that "fans" list is more valid than what most critics come up with. Lots of good stuff there. Nick Drake for example. And Fun House. But everybody knows that I don't like good music anyway, so I don't care. I mean I have one encylopedia (I think it's the "Rough Guide to Rock Music") that's a thick tome, but that after following it's advice for 50 or so purchases I realized that I disliked at least 75% of the discs they endorsed. I made up my mind it was a good reference for what NOT to buy more than anything else.
But Martin Popoff's poll makes the point that most gets on my nerves about these kind of lists in the first place (especially metal lists). For the last 30 years it's been almost a default position to list Led Zeppelin as "The Greatest Metal Band Of All Time". I've always had the feeling that while this may have once been true, that Sabbath passed them up about the time Zep quit and Sabbath took Dio on board, and that Sabbath has turned out to have more influence (as well as a certain kind of staying power) that has long since left Zep (god love 'em) in the dust. But the popular polls have almost always continued to spout the recieved dogma that "Zep Is The Greatest". My guess is that the reason for this is that Zep is actually the favorite metal band of non-metal fans. I think they keep the number one position by default because they are much more accessible to Pop fans or R&B fans than Sabbath or some of the other contenders. For that reason I find Popoff's list (which came from his polling of Metal fans) a lot more relevant, and it's the only list I can recall that not only didn't have Zeppelin #1, but regarding albums doesn't list them at all.(!)
Now I know Popoff had a similar list for metal bands rather than albums, and since I don't have it in front of me here at work my fear is that I'll come off as a complete ass because maybe even the metal fans voted Zeppelin #1. I don't remember the results of that list to be honest. I can see Zeppelin in the top three or four sure, but a lock as #1 time after time, no.
Go ahead and put up Popoff's best band list if you can find it....I don't mind making an ass out of myself

I looked at the Rolling Stone list too, and I'm proud to say that I only own six of the top 100 there...Doors, Pistols, Hendrix, a couple of the Zeps....And Captain B-Fart "Trout Mask Replica", which is very easily one of the worst 100 albums I've ever heard. Genius my ass.

they don't have zero in the rating.....