Name a great band with a more uneven discography.
Name a great band with a more uneven discography
The melvins
No you hit the nail on the head. Just finished listening to every album today and many are shit but the good ones are very very good.
The funny thing is that they had a good run in the early 70s without Brian. They werent successful but they were making good music. Then they brought Brian back on board even though he wasnt in a fit mental state and it all went to pieces. They also ruined their albums by excluding songs. Surfs Up could have been a classic if they had included a couple of songs left on the cutting room floor.
>included a couple of songs left on the cutting room floor
Which ones would those be?
Fourth of July and Wouldnt It Be Nice To Live Again surely could have been substituted.
sorry, replying to this post
Here another example of a great song that was left off Holland:
Don't forget the fact their greatest hits record sold millions while stuff like Holland or Surf's Up sold peanuts. They abandoned all intentions of continuing down the path of progressive pop/rock when that happened.
I still really like their late 70s stuff though. 15 Big Ones is pretty meh but both MIU and L.A are actually pretty good. It wasn't until the 80s they really started going to shit.
I dont think they liked each other by the late 70s. M.I.U. AND L.A. Lights have good songs but they seem indiffrently recorded. Whilst i really like Love You and the unreleased Adult/ Child album, something during that period spelled the end of the band.
That being said, The Beach Boys have one of the most rewarding bootleg deep dives.
Damn, these are pretty good. Dennis had to be a close second to Brian when it comes to songwriting.
Scott Walker
he has 3 albums not in print because he was that ashamed of them, they were all covers albums, but still.
They really shortchanged Dennis. River Song could have been a Beach Boys song, he even debuted it at one of their lives shows. Lots of great Dennis songs from this period that never even saw a recording. He was probably too volatile to take the lead though.
Yeah the whole drug addicted psuedo-Manson follower thing wasn't a great look, so I can see why they maybe wouldn't want him to be seen as a leader of the band.
>note to self
>dont steal a song off a mass murderer
He paid him a lot of money for it
Charlie just got pissed because he changed it a lot and it hurt his already fucked ego
It gave me immense pleasure to read that Dennis beat his ass when he started to threaten him and family.
Same.
>Whatsa matter? You made too much money, buddy?
youtube.com
Guns & Roses made one good album and that was it.
That album's name? Chinese Democracy.
Yes
All The Beatles solo efforst are spotty.
I think an argument can be made for Pink Floyd. Dark Side of the Moon was their EIGHTH album, the 7 which preceded it range from borderline not-good to psychedelic masterpieces (though rooted in their time), then after their legendary 4-flawless-album run in the 70s they took a huge step back, especially after Roger Waters left the band (who by the way has the best post-Wall PF material out of the entire band).
Though I will admit that I am a huge PF stan and none of their work is unlistenable to me (yes even ummagumma).
Lou Reed
The Beatles kept each other's worst songs off the album for the most part. Can you imagine Whats New Mary Jane on the White Album?
Rolling Stones albums from the 80s and 90s go from pretty cool to boring pretty haphazardly
Any of their albums from the 80s - present that you’d recommend? I’m a big fan of their 70s stuff
not him, but i dont know if i like their music as much as their videos from the late 70s onwards that i like watching. words cannot describe it
I love their mid to late 70s stuff because even though it’s not great, it’s the epitome of coked out, sleazy, funky rock. All their stuff also keeps up a great groove that carries a lot of tracks