Book Description
In the continuing tradition of Rolling Stones in-depth coverage of the legends of musicfrom the seminal songs to the greatest guitaristscomes Rolling Stones 500 Greatest Albums of All Time. Compiled by the editors of Rolling Stone, the widely-recognized bible of popular music, and a star-studded panel of rock n roll experts, the Rolling Stone 500 is the definitive collection of the greatest albums ever made and a need-to-own for the true music fan. This collectors volume contains the best from the Rolling Stone archivesinside stories and never-before-seen photographs taken at the great recording sessions.
Customer Reviews:
Proceed with caution!.......2007-07-22
Okay, before I go on, I would like to say that this is not a subjective review. I am not trying to beat the fact that the Eagles and Led Zeppelin (though, in the latter band's case, good) are gruesomely overrated while Herbie Hancock and The Allman Brothers Band are gruesomely underrated into anyone's heads. I am stating my opinion, which I know quite well differs greatly from fact, because opinion by nature cannot be fact.
Rolling Stone pompously declares the 500 albums in this list to be the 500 best ever. In this case, there'd be a lot more jazz on this list, right? Well, according to the good folks at Rolling Stone, "jazz" consists of Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Ornette Coleman - don't get me wrong, some of jazz's greatest artists. But doesn't Charles Mingus deserve some credit, if only for widely influential works like Mingus Ah Um or The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady? Similarly, Thelonious Monk's Underground, widely considered one of the genre's greatest albums, is totally neglected. How about Herbie Hancock's tremendously influential Head Hunters, Empyrean Isles and Maiden Voyage? They're gone too. And if they wanted a rock spin on jazz, shouldn't the Mahavishnu Orchestra's Inner Mounting Flame been included? Alas, no, that is rejected too. To say nothing of the works of Duke Ellington or Louie Armstrong. You can bet they don't give that a second look. Stupid, it is. Oh, and there are six jazz albums out of these 500: three by Miles (Kind of Blue; B*tches Brew; Sketches of Spain), two by Coltrane (A Love Supreme; Giant Steps), one by Ornette (Shape of Jazz to Come). By contrast, Eminem (a lightweight, obnoxious shock-rapper whose material isn't even that shocking at all) is fawned over - three of his albums are included on this list, which I believe was his complete discography at that point. Similarly, two albums by the Eagles? Ha. And Green Day's Dookie? Again, ha. Also MIA are some more influential and just plain good albums: Jeff Beck's Truth (the original metal album - you'll note how much praise they place on Led Zeppelin's head, who, while a good band, were essentially imitating Jeff Beck) and Wired; Traffic's John Barleycorn and self-titled; Alice in Chain's Dirt. And no matter what this list would want you to believe, there is far more to Joni Mitchell than Blue and Court & Spark.
Wh
ich leads directly into my next point: no dark horses I can think of. A seasoned music fan could probably smell the contents of this list from a mile away. All they offer us is the usual cascade of albums that have been met with floods and floods of praise. I, for one, would rather see them stick up for a relatively unknown album like Joni Mitchell's Hissing of Summer Lawns or the Rolling Stones' Goats Head Soup (or the Allman Brothers' Eat a Peach and Idlewild South!!!) than see yet another list with Hotel California or Led Zeppelin IV on it.
I give this album 2 stars because I do agree with several choices this book makes, though I would argue their positioning (I, for one, would put Abbey Road at #1). However, there are too many fundamental flaws, and the scope of this list is too limited, to make it truly definitive.
Oh, and anybody looking to contest my claim about Led Zeppelin IV, Dookie Hotel California, or any other albums I claim do not belong on this list (e.g. Pet Sounds - god, what a boring album)... if you say what you wish to in a polite, civilized manner, I will listen to your claim and debate it in similar polite, civilized terms. On the other hand, if you wish to confine your comments to pointless immature sniping, I believe you know where I will instruct you to stick it, because I've heard it all before. So to all flamers, don't bother, as your flame will be ignored.
I may disagree heavily, however..........2007-07-05
It is because of this book that I got into two of my favorite artists, Neil Young and the Velvet Underground. I guess thank you for that.
But of course there are flaws. Sgt. Peppers shouldn't have been number 1. I don't think I'm alone in saying that that isn't the Beatles best work.
Also, how could No Doubt's "Rock Steady" do better than the Smashing Pumpkins' "Siamese Dream" and "Melancholy and the Infinite Sadness"? It doesn't add up.
What I think happened is that the first 150 or 200 albums were very honestly thought out. After that, it was any halfway decent album they could think of.
I did find this to be a enjoyable read, but I diagree. To each their own; you be the judge.
great.......2007-02-18
It gives you all you need for the perfect glossary of music. You have pictures of the albums, numbers of how good the record is, and a decription of the album and why it was good. And about every 5 paes they is artifects of old lyrics and decriptions where they made them. I think that any music lover or fanatic should have it. The only downside is that you might not agree with some of their decisions on where to place the albums. I say it's a must have.
Typical Rolling Stone .......2007-01-29
If you're looking for a decent read that summarizes some great albums, this book does a decent job. But please don't pay much attention to the album rankings. The Beatles are the greatest band ever, but are not worthy of top ten dominance. Some selections are just plain questionable. Also, you can tell that in their attempt to put some contemporary music in the book, they didn't know what to do, particularly with their grunge and hiphop selections. The book is worth the purchase. Just don't run out and buy the 500 albums according to RS's opinion.
Total fluff - some voters' favorites but not the greatest albums.......2007-01-18
This is at best an amusing coffee table book, so why does it call itself "The 500 Greatest Albums Of All Time?" Surely such a title alludes to the musical contributions of the albums - not necessarily if they are pet favorites of some, even famous, rock critics. The problem was the method. Ask a hundred rock critics to compile a list of the greatest albums and they will list either what they feel they should list to stay hip with readers or what they personally loved the most. Recipe for disaster. Bias multiplied by a hundred. In short, you get a massive hodge-podge of personal bests, not necessarily an historical evaluation of which records were the most important. Thus, a dumbing down occurs, rather than a serious analysis of the best music from the past half century.
That is exactly what happened with the 500 Greatest Albums Of All Time. It works fine as a glamorous exposition of albums that sold well in their time and are favorites of their fans (the contributing critics), but not as a serious list of what really constitutes on a musical level (that is, minus the hype) the greatest albums. Which is a great shame, since compiling a list of the "500 Greatest Albums Of All Time" ordinarily invites such a selectiveness.
Isn't the whole fun and point in creating a list like this to be able to argue: "surely we have to put Dylan before the Beatles as Lennon's more interesting lyrics were influenced by him, and also because the Beatles wrote meaningless ditties compared to Dylan's poetic commentaries?" "Sure, but then if we consider Sgt. Pepper important for its use of the studio, then we must place Pet Sounds before it since its experimental use of the studio inspired McCartney to produce this Beatles album with Geroge Martin's innovative recording techniques?" And so on and so forth. Thus, the criteria in creating such a list must be to what extent the album was ahead of its time, influencing others, or daring to do something with music that had not yet been dared, trying very hard to stay on that level and not stoop to the temptation of including albums merely for their sales or fame (and let's be honest, these critics are partly responsible along with the label's marketing staff and budget, for an album's hype anyway).
I am not about to use some examples merely to whine and complain about personal favorites, but rather to support and illustrate my hypothesis. Highly innovative musicians whose styles were extremely original and who influenced modern rock are glaringly missing.
For example, no Nico. It is true that the average rock listener may not even know who Nico was, but her dazzling originality on an album such as Desert Shore has influenced thousands of modern Alternative artists. I can't even think of another artist from the era of Desert Shore or Marble Index that produced a sound as unique as hers.
Another extremely glaring ommission - no Robert Wyatt. Hard to imagine a greater musical genius in rock loved more by other artists and music lovers - both in Soft Machine (a band that along with early Pink Floyd were extremely experimental and innovative in the English scene) and in his solo career with an album such as Rock Bottom that is probably one of the most accomplished rock albums of all time. Such an album is certainly "greater" than this book's #1 album, Sgt. Pepper, since that Beatles album was inspired by an already thriving psychedelic scene that that band did not create nor was even part of, even though, yes, that album may have been the scene's best seller and its most famous. This is where sales and hype constitute two variables that tend to take first place to musical importance in this book.
Another extraordinarily original artist in rock music was Tim Buckley whose Lorca and Starsailor are among the most original albums of popular music ever created, both missing in this book's list.
The Krautrock bands like Faust, Can, Neu!, Popol Vuh, or Amon Duul were each extraordinarily original for their time, and influenced almost every pop genre that followed them (from punk to progressive to modern alternative) - but they are not even listed once, despite their huge contribution!
You see the problem? By listing almost every Beatles album, for example, when only about 2 were truly original works (Sgt. Pepper and Abbey Road, for their use of sounds, medleys, mixes, instruments and the studio itself) places are wasted for other important selections. It is incredible to see no Pere Ubu among early punk influences - the Modern Dance for instance. If you don't believe me, this is what Wikipedia says about Pere Ubu: "they have been hugely influential on several generations of forward-thinking musicians and are among the most critically acclaimed American musical groups." You will find a similar determination of greatness if you do research on Wikipedia or in rock history books on any of the other artists I mentioned, and there are dozens more I did not list.
For instance, how come no John Fahey, no Red Crayola, and why, among modern artists, no Lisa Germano, one of the most original from the 1990s?
You must all be acquainted with the influence of Asian instruments and sounds in the rock music of the 1960s, and the departure from the short ditties of the early 1960s (e.g., the Beatles' Love Me Do and Please Please Me) to the extended, raga-ish works of the middle to late '60s, as rock matured, gobbling up not only so-called World Music but also the improvisational quality of jazz? By that estimation, early musicians such as Robbie Basho and Sandy Bull were early geniuses showing rock the way with their accoustic instrumentalism. And, of course, you would not even know it from this book.
Do any of you know what geniuses a band such as the Vampire Rodents were? They combined metal, melodic rock, punk, jazz and even classical in their highly original albums. Their sound was so unique and creative at least one of their albums should rank among the greatest of all time? There are tons of artists like this from the 1980s to the present day that are completely missing from this book, yet deserve a mention when you have 500 titles to include. What about extremely hyped artists like Radiohead, Elvis Presley and U2? Should they be listed at all compared with the true trailblazers? Controversial, well that is what modern popular music is supposed to be. It is supposed to be about novelty, experimentation, risk, passion, inventiveness, no?
This book does not even scratch the surface of such a discussion, it does not even provide intelligent commentary from one album to the next, and so while it might provide entertainment, it simply does not live up to its name. This does not mean I think you should not be in possession of it - there is a place for fluffy coffee-table books, after all, the coffee table! It simply means it is not a real collection of the greatest albums of rock as the title implies, so don't be fooled if you are interested in discovering great modern music. On the other hand, you will only learn by developing a vast library like me, with some works more useful than others, until you can form your own opinions. I would say that every album in this book is worth listening to at least once, so the book is not completely useless. But if you do listen to some of these, don't let it be said I did not warn you!!
This book may have some sociological significance as a work reflecting the influence of sales and hype upon rock critics. But for a serious appreciation of the greatest albums, do not look into this tome or you will be greatly disappointed (although obviously many classics are included, inevitably). It is not surprising that this list was published by Rolling Stone, a journal that has not been cutting edge since the 1960s. It appears to be simply clueless. This rolling stone grew moss a long time ago.
Product Description
Alfred has expanded the Classic Album Editions series with the new Authentic Guitar TAB edition of the Rolling Stones legendary record Let It Bleed . Let It Bleed features the hit songs Gimme Shelter and You Can t Always Get What You Want. This book provides the guitar parts for each song as they were recorded. Titles are: Let It Bleed * Love in Vain * Midnight Rambler * Gimmie Shelter * You Got the Silver * You Can t Always Get What You Want * Live with Me * Monkey Man * Country Honk.
Customer Reviews:
Very Well Done.......2007-07-08
This version has multiple guitar lines, tuning notes, chord names & frames. Clear, precise and accurate. What more do you want?
Average customer rating:
- Bilious Bilgewater
- Not what I expected
- 1/2... A Standard in the Genre - A Personal Fave
- An introduction to the most mainstream of rock criticism
- best one out there
|
The Rolling Stone Album Guide: Completely New Reviews: Every Essential Album, Every Essential Artist
Rolling Stone Magazine
Manufacturer: Random House
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Discographies & Buyer's Guides
| Reference
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Rock
| Musical Genres
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Theory, Composition & Performance
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
| Appreciation
| Composition
| Conducting
| Exercises
| Instruction & Study
| MIDI, Mixers, etc.
| Sheet Music & Scores
| Songbooks
| Songwriting
| Techniques
| Theory
| Vocal
Look Inside Entertainment Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The New Rolling Stone Album Guide: Completely Revised and Updated 4th Edition
ASIN: 0679737294
Release Date: 1992-10-27 |
Book Description
A completely revised edition of the bestselling guide to popular recordings--featuring 2,500 entries and more than 12,500 album reviews. The definitive guide for the `90s.
Customer Reviews:
Bilious Bilgewater.......2007-07-28
I'm happy to see that I am not alone in my loathing, not only for the book under review, but for ANYTHING to emanate from the Princes Of Superciliousness at Rolling Stone.
First of all, let's look at the sub-title: "The Definitive Guide To The Best Of Rock-Pop-Rap-Jazz-Blues-Country-Soul-Folk & Gospel." OK. From that you might expect simply a compendium of the available albums of the major artists in any of the genres mentioned.
But no. The writers have to proceed to dump all over those artists whose music appealed to the masses [example: "His name synonymous with soft porn shlock, Tom Jones remains a phenomenon of pandering and a marketing triumph."], while extolling the virtues of spaced-out drug-culture icons like The Velvet Underground - who most definitely did not attract mass attention.
And that would be fine IF their book title included a further blurb along the lines of "and offering the very personal biases of the editorial staff."
This is to be avoided at all costs. You would be better served by any of the books from Joel Whitburn at Billboard.
As to what to do with my copy? Well, I recall Max Reger's response to a severe criticism of one of his works: "I am sitting in the smallest room of my house. I have your review before me. In a moment it will be behind me."
Not what I expected.......2005-10-13
I bought this book about 5 years ago because I thought it would have help me out to approach to new music, but it didn't. It's unbelievable that one of the most important music publications could have done such a thing. This convinces me that Rolling Stone magazine is not a publication about music, but just a publication about best selling records and artists, which are not always the best ones.
I just can't believe that this editors commissioned a Pop reviewer to write about Metal, Art Rock and Progressive Rock bands. What were they thinking? (that is if they were actually thinking).
There should have been at least 12 (hopefully more) reviewers divided by genres.
I would've give it one star if it wasn't for the fact that at least it gives you a "decent" list of the albums by an artist.
Overall I think this is not a good purchase.
1/2... A Standard in the Genre - A Personal Fave.......2005-08-27
I first purchased "The Rolling Stone Album Guide" back in '94 together with the "All Music Guide" edition of that year. I was a music-crazed, scatterbrained, hormonally-inflamed teen back then going through the turbulence of adolescence. I wasn't a reader then, but going through the pages of this book, browsing the snippets of reviews here and there, I was impressed and enthralled with the smart and memorable lines the talented reviewers would use to describe and stamp their collective marks on the artists and their recordings. Before the age of bilious Political-Correctness and mediocre music, this edition of Rolling Stone's ongoing music guide was a representative of it's time: an era of taste and quality matched with integrity and vision.
Here one can find some of the most apt and most sound criticism ever penned or typed for the printed page. And a collection of artists chosen for their merit, not popularity. Thus one will find praise for artists as diverse as Elvis, The Beatles, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, etc.. Rolling Stone started as a rag to chronicle and feature the Rock scene, hence the preponderance of Rock musicians in the book, but artists who influenced the course of Rock music and were influenced by it are well represented too: Robert Johnson, Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Charlie Parker, Muddy Waters, etc., are given their equal tribute. Other genres are economically touched on, and Rap, Folk, Country, and others are given just due. The writings are some of the very best, balancing seamless lines between worship, accuracy, humor, scathing word-bites, pathos, and knowledge.
As admirable as this edition gets, there are some slips and tangles that come along, just like almost anything else. Some of the reviews are hilarious, perhaps inappropriately so (read the one on Gino Vannelli and laugh). Others are ridiculous, revealing the critics' prejudices and limitations (2 stars for Black Sabbath's "Vol.4"?. And the same for Slayer's "Reign in Blood"?.). And as one critic who I read from the net pointedly stated, somewhere along these lines, "Did they really listen to all of those recordings? What's with all of those old bluesmen all getting 5 stars?".
After the passage of more than a decade, I still go back to this model of music criticism. I still appreciate the brevity and wit with which Messrs. Mark Coleman, J.D. Considine, Paul Evans, and David McGee shared their talents and efforts for future music fans to revel and cherish only the best in Popular Music.
An introduction to the most mainstream of rock criticism.......2004-07-13
This book, I must confess, was a guide to listening (together with subsequent "Rolling Stone" reviews) for many years.
On the whole, it has many virtues: the arguments are very sensible, the writers appear to be very well-qualified, and the selection of music included is varied enough to satisfy most listeners - especially someone like me who was looking then for music from the 1980s to listen to. There is very little outright lying: indeed most of the album reviews are very clearly written and do indeed provide an accurate description of the music being written about - something I wish I was able to do far better.
However, this book's age gives it one fatal flaw: it does not understand the real impact of music over a long period. Many albums I bought on its recommendation have proved quite useless to me even if I understood the reasons (though my narrow perceptions at that time can in no way have helped me).
Moreover, some of the albums it recommends (or at least does not condemn) would be violently condemned by critics like Joe Harrington and David Keenan whose knowledge and intelligence certainly exceeds that of those critics in this book. It is to them that I now recommend one turn for really accurate music criticism - I recommend their list to people who do not know much about msuic all the time. However, with older music I was never into back in the 1990s the book is actually more helpful and accurate due to greater hindsight, though many albums of great value were not then reissued.
Thus, read with great caution: this is introductory, but good for that. there is better criticism - the problem is finding it and seeing for yourself.
best one out there.......2002-08-01
Excellent and good fun. The New York Dolls review sums up the tone of this guide nicely. Definitely not for the Top 40 crowd though. If you're one of them, stay away as you'll probably get somewhat insulted.
A drawback is that out of print albums were omitted, which makes the guide incomplete as soon as these albums are reissued. And of course the guide is outdated. Any guide is the moment is goes off to the presses.
That said, we want an update now.
Product Description
Alfred has expanded the Classic Album Editions series with the new Authentic Guitar TAB edition of the Rolling Stones legendary record Beggars Banquet . The last record the Rolling Stones released with guitarist Brian Jones, Beggars Banquet includes the hit songs Sympathy for the Devil and Street Fighting Man. The Authentic Guitar TAB edition provides the guitar parts for each of the songs as they were recorded. Titles are: Sympathy for the Devil * No Expectations * Dear Doctor * Parachute Woman * Jigsaw Puzzle * Street Fighting Man * Prodigal Son * Stray Cat Blues * Factory Girl * Salt of the Earth.
Book Description
For the first time since 1992, Rolling Stone's definitive classic returns to the scene, completely updated and revised to include the past decade's artists and sounds. When it comes to sorting the truly great from the merely mediocre, the enduring from the fleeting, The New Rolling Stone Album Guide provides music buffs and amateurs alike with authoritative guidance from the best voices in the field. Filled with insightful commentary, it not only reviews the most influential albums of all time, but also features biographical overviews of key artists' careers, giving readers a look at the personalities behind the music.
This fourth edition contains an impressive -- 70 percent -- amount of new material. Readers will find fresh updates to entries on established artists, hundreds of brand-new entries on the people and recordings that epitomize the '90s and the sounds of the 21st century -- from Beck to OutKast to the White Stripes and beyond -- along with a new introduction detailing changes in the music industry.
Celebrating the diversity of popular music and its constant metamorphoses, with thousands of entries and reviews on every sound from blues to techno, The New Rolling Stone Album Guide is the only resource music lovers need to read.
Customer Reviews:
don't believe the hype.......2007-03-21
reviews are off the top of head throwaways...and you'll be disgusted to find that METALLICA and NINE INCH NAILS have no entries. go look! unbelievable!
2.5 stars - Extremely flawed........2006-12-12
Mind you, I didn't buy this book, but I did give it a very thorough looking through during a two hour visit to Borders.
I went through this entire book, looking at the artists that I like, including R&B and a little bit of hip hop. I cannot speak for their reviews for other genres, but for the ones I read about the actual albums I own... the reviews are extremely flawed. Almost every review I read, I disagreed with.
Erykah Badu's album, Baduizm, was given a mere 3/5 stars. This album is now considered a classic, yet it is supposedly musically equivalent to Janet's 'Damita Jo' and worse than Toni Braxton's 'More Tha A Woman?!' And Erykah's terrible live album is also 3/5 stars? Jill Scott's classic albums are only considered 3 star material, too? TLC's 'Crazysexycool' is, too? Missy Elliott's best album is her first, 'Da Real World' is her worst and 'This Is Not A Test' is her second best?!!! I could go on and on...
It is nice to spark up conversation between your music buddies, I guess. The book is a very entertaining read and the writing/critiquing can be admired, but as far as using this as a guide for albums to buy and not buy... 2 thumbs down.
I used to like this book, the original that is.......2006-12-07
No George Harrison, but Milli Vanilli and Paula Adbuhl? This just goes to show you what a joke Rolling Stone has become. Looking at the publication date they omitted George Harrison after his death. What insensitivity, compounded by the fact that he was one of the Beatles to which credit is certainly due for helping to exist a culutre that a magazine like Rolling Stone started as a result of, and certainly thrived from.
Rolling Stone has lost most of what little respect I have for them anymore.
Credibility in short supply.......2006-06-10
If it was 1983, Blink-182 would be dismissed as "a poor man's Descendents" and given 1 and 2 star ratings for their albums in the Rolling Stone Album Guide. Here, of course, the writers conveniently skip over Alanis Morisette's early pop albums and give Jagged Little Pill (angry sold units in '95, and this record is reeeall angry) a near perfect rating. The 1983 and 1992 editions are much better reference guides, despite the fact that this edition covers much more ground. There's a clear difference between this and the older editions. Many of the album reviews here are no more critical than a write-up from a record label promoting product. A 5 star album is supposed to be perfect or nearly flawless. Dookie by Green Day is not a 5 star album. Kid Rock and Shania Twain have never and will never release 4 star albums. I love how the writers used to tear into hacks like the Osmonds and Olivia Newton John in earlier editions. The wit, the bite, and the critical integrity just aren't there anymore. Regardless, I bought it (all music geeks will), but I don't think this book should be anyone's last word on what albums to buy.
Deeply flawed...but essential.......2006-06-01
First of all - do not think of this as a reference book. There are far too many omissions and even more curious inclusions. (I'm not going to debate the mix of artists - it's simply curious.) With that in mind, if you treat the book as a collection of essays on popular music, you will find countless hours of reading pleasure. In particular, the essays on major classic rock acts are exceptional - and exceptionally free from the Wenner-driven star gazing that has marred RS's record reviews from day one. One could read chronologically from Elvis through Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Beach Boys, Who, Neil Young, Led Zeppelin, Bruce Springsteen, and on (with the glaring exception of Metallica) and get as clear a picture of the development of rock and roll as anyone has gathered in one volume anywhere. New insights pop up everywhere (David Bowie and Prince, for instance, much stronger in comparison to their peers.) For long time RS readers, amusing transitions in taste will appear (especially evident in the CCR section which gives credit to the rhythm section for much of the band's impact. During their recording years Rolling Stone hated CCR's rhythm section. You couldn't read a paragraph about the band that didn't mention how stiff they were.)
This book has provided my bathroom reading for the last two years. Rock and roll is way too wild and ferocious to lend itself to a definitive collection of criticism. There are far better compilations of discographies out there, but there aren't any better collections of essays on popular music. An uncut diamond of a book.
Customer Reviews:
The only record guide at the time (unfortunately).......2007-02-28
Back when I was growing up and discovering music, all "serious" music fans read The Rolling Stone Record Guide (and later the "blue" edition from 1983).
There was lots of information about a lot of records in these books. Unfortunately, there was way too much Dave Marsh. Dave Marsh's reviews are the weakest (and most prevalent) of anyone's in these books. He was so wrong about so much music (and so self-righteously smug about it) that he ticked a lot of people off, myself and all my music fan circle included. It really was poor analysis, often quite lazy and shallowly dismissive of anything he didn't "get," and overly praising of many critical flavor-of-the-month acts that went commercially (and critically) nowhere after the fact. But it was the only book like that at the time, and everybody read it. And got mad at it. I know for a fact that it went sailing violently across many a teenager's bedroom back in the day.
It's quite interesting to compare this book with the DeCurtis edition from 1992. As far as I can tell, that's the one to beat in terms of useful information about worthwhile records.
Bedrock Educational Text Vol.1.......2006-09-29
I first discovered this book in '82. The "hip" and perspicacious overview of popular music-and rock and roll and it's antecedents in particular, provided the framework of understanding which has informed my listening to music ever since.
Dave Marsh possessed a singular vantage point in the history of the music and the artists. The passion and insight endlessly infuses the reviews with humor, wit and, where necessary, some of the most caustic summaries ever committed. You will live a richer and fuller life if you avoid at all expense the "bulleted" albums in this book.
A different reviewer noted that Hip-Hop had just begun its emergence when this book was published-important because of the reworking of "classic" popular music hip-hop and rap brought to the fore. Savvy rap artists GET why a loop may provide clever or ironic elements to the music; the audience, alas, mostly doesn't. This book identifies the milestones and monumental moments in musical history critical to a deep understanding of popular music.
Anyone who wants to learn about rock and roll, and anybody who surfs garage sales and Goodwill bins looking for lost masters needs to own and read this book.
25 Years Before the 2004 Rolling Stone Album Guide.......2005-03-28
If you found the 2004 Rolling Stone Album Guide as disappointing as most of us did, much of the reason can be traced back 25 years to the first Guide. Dave Marsh's original edition was intelligent, witty and informative. Naturally you'll find some smugness (this is Rolling Stone after all), but it was smugness which emphasized a point about the music, not a clumsy attempt to make the reviewer appear "hip." This book is certainly for historians more than anything. The publication year is also Year One for hip-hop, so it really does come from another world, but it gives us a window into those first 25 years of rock n' roll. It also contains a couple of features which future RSAGs should consider. The ratings system ranges from 5 stars to a 'bullet,' or black square, denoting albums which aren't even worthy of one star or half a star, and there are enough of those to bring back this appropriate symbol. Another feature was small pictures of the covers of many of the 5 star albums, which was nice. Maybe in the next Rolling Stone Album Guide we'll get a picture of the cover of OutKast's Speakerboxxx/The Love Below and a bullet next to a couple of Josh Groban albums. And maybe next time we'll get critics more like Dave Marsh and less like Rob Sheffield.
Average customer rating:
- What's going on?
- An invaluable guide to American music
- excellent resource for any Jazz buff.
- Scratch n' Sniff
- Useful but flawed
|
The Rolling Stone Jazz and Blues Album Guide
John Swenson
Manufacturer: Random House
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
Reference
| Subjects
| Books
| Almanacs & Yearbooks
| Atlases & Maps
| Books on CD
| Books on Cassette
| Business Skills
| Careers
| Catalogs & Directories
| Consumer Guides
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Education
| Encyclopedias
| Etiquette
| Foreign Languages
| Fun Facts
| Genealogy
| General
| Job Hunting
| Large Print
| Law
| Publishing & Books
| Quotations
| Spanish-Language Reference
| Study Guides
| Test Prep Central
| Words & Language
| Writing
Discographies & Buyer's Guides
| Reference
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Blues
| Musical Genres
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Jazz
| Musical Genres
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Theory, Composition & Performance
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
| Appreciation
| Composition
| Conducting
| Exercises
| Instruction & Study
| MIDI, Mixers, etc.
| Sheet Music & Scores
| Songbooks
| Songwriting
| Techniques
| Theory
| Vocal
Look Inside Entertainment Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0679768734
Release Date: 1999-04-27 |
Customer Reviews:
What's going on?.......2000-07-23
This guide is no better than John Swenson's "Rolling Stone Jazz Record Guide" from 1985. That guide failed to include "Birth of the Cool", "Round 'bout Midnight" and "Sketches of Spain" by Miles Davis, "Time Further Out" by Dave Brubeck, and omitted the entire Buddy Rich discography. Yikes! It also gave different ratings to indentical collaborations which appeared twice in the guide. Rolling Stone guides are usually life-savers. I have had wonderful luck using their rock music guides. Why can't Rolling Stone get it together with jazz?
An invaluable guide to American music.......1999-09-25
I found the previous Jazz Guide a valuable resource that was way ahead of its time. This update expands the scope of the original to include blues and roots music while making a convincing case for blues and jazz as the cornerstone of American popular music.
excellent resource for any Jazz buff........1999-08-09
It's about time RS updated this 1985 volume. It's great to read reviews of all the old masters and the young lions. The reviews are fair and well written. The text even steers you to deleted items that sometimes are better then the albums in print.
Many hidden treasures are found here. Up to date thru 4/99. Wish RS allowed buyers to download updates from the net.
Why can't Downbeat put out a book like this?
Scratch n' Sniff.......1999-07-31
Didn't bother checking their take on Jazz given the dismal effort on Blues. While I love Stevie Ray, I didn't realize that his output was such a cut above Albert and Freddie King's. Turns out "Live at the Apollo" ain't very special. Gee, maybe Elmore James is mediocre too.....I may be biased in having heaved so shortly after opening. Ought to be on perforated paper. These guys really should stick to hair-do rock and cologne.
Useful but flawed.......1999-07-24
This book is a noble but flawed effort. The omissions are inexcusable. No Furry Lewis? No Jimmy Rogers? While the task of compiling such a guide is monumental, this book would have benefitted from better editing.
Average customer rating:
- Nice gift for a Rolling Stones fan
|
Rolling Stones: It's Only Rock and Roll: Song by Song (Classic Rock Album Series)
Steve Appleford
Manufacturer: Schirmer Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| Composers & Musicians
| Arts & Literature
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Rock
| Composers & Musicians
| Arts & Literature
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
History & Criticism
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Rock
| Musical Genres
| Music
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 082567221X |
Customer Reviews:
Nice gift for a Rolling Stones fan.......2003-02-11
This is a nice gift for a Rolling Stones fan. My brother saw it on my coffee table and commented on how he liked it. I sent it to him for Xmas. Nice price, decent pictures, okay text, but a nice, reasonably priced gift book. Too bad I couldn't find it in hard cover!
Books:
- A Diver's Guide to Reef Life
- A Photographer's Life: 1990-2005
- A Thousand Names for Joy: Living in Harmony with the Way Things Are
- Aftermath: World Trade Center Archive
- Alfred Stieglitz: Photographs and Writings (Alfred Stieglitz)
- Andrew Wyeth: The Helga Pictures
- Architects of Peace: Visions of Hope in Words and Images
- Arsenio Rodriguez and the Transnational Flows of Latin Popular Music (Studies In Latin America & Car)
- Ask and It Is Given - Part II: The Processes (Ask and It Is Given)
- Beyond World's End (Bedlam's Bard)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Zhukov's Greatest Defeat: The Red Army's Epic Disaster in Operation Mars, 1942
- The Great Hunt
- My Cousin, My Gastroenterologist: A novel
- Schooling with Ground Poles: Flatwork Schooling for Every Horse, Every Sport
- Planet Earth: As You've Never Seen It Before
- The Divine Matrix: Bridging Time, Space, Miracles, and Belief
- Software Quality Assurance: Principles And Practice
- Wisdom of the Elders: Sacred Native Stories of Nature
- On the Trail of Mary Queen of Scots
- An Undiplomatic Diary
The Greatest Album Covers of All Time
Rolling Stone 1,000 Covers: A History of the Most Influential Magazine in Pop Culture
1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die
STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN: THE FINAL RESTING PLACES OF ROCK'S LEGENDS
The Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll (Revised and Updated for the 21st Century)
