|
| Headline | Rolling Stone Record Guide |
|
Page:
[1] |
| Author | Comment |
mog
Dec-09-2010, 04:11 GMT
Unknown
 | Hi folks,
Minor point here: have you ever consulted or read the Rolling Stone Record Guide ? It was their 4th edition in 2004.
It is just I am bit piss*d by the rankings given to almost every Simon effort since ROTS.
SFTC is given 1 star (Disastrous: Albums in the range of one star or less are wastes of vital resources. Only masochists or completists need apply.); YTO, 2 stars (Fair to Poor: Albums in the two-star category either fall below an artist´s established standard or are, in and of themselves, failures).
I am puzzled by this because in theory, RS gave 4 stars for each of these albums when they were released. Could be explained by the lack of popularity of these albums versus of other great albums of his (although H&B appears almost as a masterpiece in their view) I guess...
I don´t know...I mean on STFC, despite the failure of the musical, I hear an artist almost at the top of his game, still pushing for an original sound. It does not deserve 1 star. YTO was nominated for Grammy Album of the Year, it was not that bad I guess.
Anyhow, if I have 10 minutes, I will write to the editors. They sound a bit amateurs to me.
|
| | |
Mike
Dec-09-2010, 05:18 GMT
USA - United Staates America
 | That just goes to show you that there´s not much value in what "experts" have to say. We appreciate Paul´s music so much and can see the talent that goes into it. Look at how underrated as he is in the public´s eye compared to how overrated mediocre pop "artists" are. Politics and money are what drive the music industry and Rolling Stone is part of that corruption. OK, they gave a good review of GRFCD, which I Love, but their review isn´t why I like the song. |
| | |
Forum guest
Dec-09-2010, 06:20 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| There has been no Love lost between Paul and Rolling Stone, and if I am correct, some kind of a long ago issue between Paul and Jann Wenner (sp?) I read a little blurb where Paul mentioned in response to some question that he never read "random notes" a feature in rolling stone, so if they don´t like him, he doesn´t seem to like them either, but, all does seem recently to be smoothing out. |
| | |
Forum guest
Dec-09-2010, 06:22 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| here is a link about the root of this relationship, believe it or not, I don´t knowhttp://books.google.com/books?id=jQGOxvDsF-kC&
pg=PA80&lpg=PA80&dq=paul+simon+jann+wenner
&source=bl&ots=QGmJDZfHmY&sig=k9dIu-WR
IlC1B2XHw9StkLnrE6g&hl=en&ei=NWcATZDZJYTUt
QPQ4IywCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=resul
t&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAw#v=one
page&q=paul%20simon%20jann%20wenner&f=fals
e |
| | |
Pelle
Dec-09-2010, 12:32 GMT
Sweden
 | so happy we other shall be at that man who give that ranking not are a doctor.
I Must say to give those record 1 or 2 stars out of 5 is misconduct, there must be som personal felling behind not objektive reason. |
| | |
deleted_user
Dec-09-2010, 12:37 GMT
Unknown
| Rolling Stone demonstrated their absurd values to me when they listed the so-called "Greatest Singers of All Time." That list was an unfunny (and completely uninformed) joke. |
| | |
Jay
Dec-09-2010, 21:43 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| I remember the greatest singers list.. It was hilarious! They had Bob Dylan ranked number 1 or 2. Bob Dylan is a great songwriter, but lets face it, he can´t sing. Rolling Stone mainly bases their ratings on popularity not talent. |
| | |
Jay
Dec-09-2010, 21:49 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| BTW here is the original reviews, before the early 2000´s when things in music went corrupt. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/reviews/album/74
80/37467
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/reviews/album/74
80/37805
And here´s a link to a great documentary about the corruption and downfall of mainstream music.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNtZ_x5OHpc |
| | |
mog
Dec-10-2010, 02:43 GMT
Unknown
| Yeah, you proved my point. They gave 4 stars when released, and then, they agregate the stuff for that book, and then it became 1,2-star stuff !
I know the author for the book Simon article is not Decurtis, but it does not preclude them from being coherent with themselves ! |
| | |
|
Page:
[1]
|