7 ms·
Seriously. If you make a list called "The 500 Greatest Albums OF ALL TIME" and it doesn't include Beethoven's 9th Symphony, or anything before 1960 for that mat
by awo84tjwao 6y ago
Seriously. If you make a list called "The 500 Greatest Albums OF ALL TIME" and it doesn't include Beethoven's 9th Symphony, or anything before 1960 for that matter, or anything in languages other than English, it's clearly a garbage list. Rolling Stone is and always has been just another money-making echo chamber.
- johndill 6y agoWell have I got an excellent record for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1000_Years_of_Popular_Music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1000_Years_of_Popular_Music
- Balgair 6y agoThat would be amazing if it were 'professionally' done and not just one dude on a guitar.
- galaxyLogic 6y agoBut Rolling Stone is about Rolling Stones -like music only, they don't cover classical
- avip 6y agoJust to clarify the magazine is not named after the band.
- Phillipharryt 6y agoThough funnily enough named after the same Muddy Waters track
- galaxyLogic 6y agoAnd we also know that Papa was a Rolling Stone :-)
- lm28469 6y agoOne could argue Beethoven never dropped an "album" I guess
- CydeWeys 6y agoThe rebuttal to this is simple: Symphonies aren't albums. Only actual albums are in scope for this list. The modern album as a musical concept is pretty recent and only dates back to the early 1900s at most (so roughly a century old), hence everything on this list is younger than that. Symphonies are sheet music. An album is a recorded/edited collection of specific performances. There are for sure lists of the best symphonies/classical music of all time if that's what you're interested in, but that's not what a best albums list covers.
- touristtam 6y agoBy your own definition this interpretation of Vivaldi's Four Season is an album: https://www.discogs.com/Vivaldi-Europa-Galante-Fabio-Biondi-Le-Quattro-Stagioni/release/5567711 https://www.discogs.com/Vivaldi-Europa-Galante-Fabio-Biondi-... The previous comment stands.
- slg 6y agoMusic is art. There is no objective way to rank art. Any ranking of the "greatest" art is inherently just opinion. People reading this list who get worked up about it are just as bad as anyone at Rolling Stone who thinks this list is definitive. Just treat the list as a fun piece of entertainment.
- geocanuck 6y agothere does exist partial subjectivity in judging the aesthetics or beauty of art, but are not fully subjective in aesthetic judgment. beauty has levels of objectivity. as such, "good" or "beautiful" art exists, and "bad" or "ugly" art exists. ranking could naturally emerge from this distinction. "beauty is truth, truth beauty"
- slg 6y agoArt isn’t simply about aesthetics though. There is meaning, metaphor, context, intent, and all sorts of other nebulous characteristics that matter. This means that ugly art can still be good art.
- geocanuck 6y agophilosophically, aesthetics is the study concerning the nature of beauty and taste. art is the field of human interest with beauty as its transcendental ideal. ugly art cannot be good art as beauty is what is good. metaphor, meaning, context, intent could be factors in the definition of beauty as it pertains to the art's integrity, harmony, and clarity.
- slg 6y ago>art is the field of human interest with beauty as its transcendental ideal. I have no idea where this definition is coming from. I don't think many people would agree with it. The most obvious counterexample that comes to mind is Picasso's Guernica[1]. It is one of the most renowned pieces of art of the 20th century. It is also ugly. There is no color. The characters are distorted in grotesque ways. It is too large, too chaotic, and almost confusing to look at. This is all intentional, it is after all a depiction of a war crime. It is a work of art that isn't meant to please its audience, it is meant to upset and challenge them. Is it bad art? [1] - https://www.pablopicasso.org/images/paintings/guernica3.jpg https://www.pablopicasso.org/images/paintings/guernica3.jpg