Pitchfork Top 200 Best Albums Of The 60s

[JJ88]

http://pitchfork.com/features/lists-...-1960s/?page=1

An expansive list but as ever, I have reservations with some of these early-mid 60s soul/pop inclusions which are often very much 'hits plus filler', nothing more than product. It seems some are being included just because of great singles being on them.

The Gilded Palace Of Sin at 132...far, far too low IMHO. A hugely important, influential album.

[Facelift]

A top *200* album list of the '60s that doesn't include any Frank Zappa/MOI other than Freak Out? Weak. Very weak.

[Zaragon]

Lists such as this are only as valuable as the knowledge behind them, which is often minuscule if you have a roomful of people with entry-level knowledge, yet a dogged set of narrative biases (i.e. ChriBa generalism.) — such as the case with a lot of these clickbait music sites.

Personally, I'm only interested in a Top 200 list if the albums in question represent the top 10% to 15% of a pool of some 2,000 albums assimilated by the listener/s responsible. The vast majority (95% minimum) of those 2,000 albums would need to receive sufficient assimilation time (three to five listens or more) from each listener involved. When the topic at hand spans a full decade, the sufficient assimilation of 2,000 albums would not be too much to expect from a writing staff that expects to court a mass readership.

Of course, in order to offer fair, balanced assessments, the listener/s in question will also need to demonstrate competence and show that their ears are trained for the breadth of musical ground covered. Often times, you just won't find those critical attributes in best-of lists of this nature; you merely get cobbled together laundry lists of ChriBa sacred cows and generalist assumptions — "album x is the most significant (loaded trope alert) release in this ChriBa-approved genre, blah blah blah..."

For anyone with the intellectual curiosity to explore things in depth, a top 10% list made by one individual — someone who has demonstrated an open-mindedness and listening-ear for a range of musical styles and periods — is far more valuable than a collective laundry list of generalist assumptions from a roomful of click-baity sub-ChriBa's.

[JJ88]

That Nina Simone album is compiled out of left overs from various sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Is_the_Wind_(album)

Number 5, really?? Rightly or wrongly, I prefer the idea of an album with a sense of a unified whole. Jazz artists and what could be deemed 'adult pop' singers (Sinatra, Nat King Cole, Peggy Lee etc.) had been doing that for many, many years by then.

[Zaragon]

That Nina Simone album is compiled out of left overs from various sources.

There you go, a case of lumpen, self-declared "experts" making do with a compilation LP — a standard cop-out among music typical's.

A compilation should only be included if it represents a collection of recordings made within the time-span that an album might cover. An example could be any collection of singles released within a 12 to 18-month period by an artist with no album proper.

[Facelift]

There you go, a case of lumpen, self-declared "experts" making do with a compilation LP — a standard cop-out among music typical's.

A compilation should only be included if it represents a collection of recordings made within the time-span that an album might cover. An example could be any collection of singles released within a 12 to 18-month period by an artist with no album proper.

You don't know anything whatsoever about the people who made that list and the "rule" about what should constitute an album is something you just invented out of thin air.

And aren't *you* a "self-declared expert?"

[JJ88]

I think with certain lists, especially ones that encompass 60s pop/soul, I would understand if compilations had been included. It does reflect that certain artists were fundamentally singles acts. With 50s rock 'n' roll, I would say the same thing.

I don't have the Nina Simone album in question but know various songs on it. It is not a compilation per se as it was all unreleased at that time, but it is obviously not designed as a stand-alone album because of its make-up. Some of it is even live, like the title track.

[Zappathustra]

I browsed very quickly - it seems like a more than decent list, without horrific omissions and with some cool inclusions. At least "our" music is fairly represented, meaning not completely ignored. To have the velvet banana on the numero uno spot is as predictable as dying is to the living. The hipster agenda is merciless on these issues.

[Facelift]

I browsed very quickly - it seems like a more than decent list, without horrific omissions and with some cool inclusions. At least "our" music is fairly represented, meaning not completely ignored. To have the velvet banana on the numero uno spot is as predictable as dying is to the living. The hipster agenda is merciless on these issues.

If I'm going to get one of the oft-repeated warhorses, I'd rather see that one at No. 1 than Sgt. Pepper. The baby boomer agenda can be merciless too, and it's way less interesting.

[Scrotum Scissor]

Is there a particular reason why the f'n scroll won't let me pass further than the page beginning with Stockhausen's Kontakte at no. 80?

Anyway; a pretty good run of 119 records up 'til that point. I've heard some 3/4 of it (and obviously not too much of the soul/pop stuff), and I own surprisingly many titles included - but I disagree about the order. The Shaggs' Philosophy of the World hardly makes for a better or more relevant album than The Notorious Byrd Bros.

But it's a mighty eclectic list, I'll give 'em that. One main general objection, though; while I absolutely agree on and love their inclusion of Brazilian stuff (Gal Costa, Jorge Ben, Mutantes etc.), this attitude actually contributes in revealing a major weakness in the list; 'global acts' are included due to hipster cred and little else. Where are the legendary names from Argentina, Poland, Australia or the African continent? Sorry, but in the end Pitchfork are Pitchfork. A bit fun still, tho'.

[Zappathustra]

If I'm going to get one of the oft-repeated warhorses, I'd rather see that one at No. 1 than Sgt. Pepper. The baby boomer agenda can be merciless too, and it's way less interesting.

Agree

[walt]

Somewhat surprised that a list this eclectic doesn't include even one Indian classical music album.

[Zaragon]

...a major weakness in the list; 'global acts' are included due to hipster cred and little else. Where are the legendary names from Argentina, Poland, Australia or the African continent?

That's the simplified generalist approach, where genres and nations are scraped at the surface for "most notable" (trope alert) releases, with little actual knowledge for the overall breadth and depth of the styles/areas in question. "Diversity" in its most facile form. It's a typical corner-cutting tactic behind these click-baity "best-of" lists.

[miamiscot]

It's a ridiculous list. But their top albums of the 70's is even worse: not one Yes album.

[Facelift]

It's a ridiculous list. But their top albums of the 70's is even worse: not one Yes album.

Because Yes isn't going to get lots of votes from multiple staffers. Pitchfork has/had some people on its staff who are into Yes, but that's not going to be the majority at a place like Pitchfork. Pitchfork reviewed the entire Yes catalog several years ago and gave glowing reviews to the highest-rated albums.

[Scrotum Scissor]

Pitchfork reviewed the entire Yes catalog several years ago and gave glowing reviews to the highest-rated albums.

They'd still flay and slay Deyss, though - so their immanence as part of the overall anti-prog conspiracy prevails and endures.

[Zaragon]

It wouldn't surprise me if a site of 'fork's ilk has conceded on the prime basics of the Big Five, as this would be in line with the shifting of goalposts toward prog in ChriBa circles over the past 18 years.

While the shift was likely prompted by the music's enduring popularity among serious listeners, I also suspect that a sinking feeling was felt among Christgauian/Bangsian types after Ed Macan single-handedly called ChriBa's bluff on its anti-prog/anti-maximalist hubris in Chapter Eight of Rocking the Classics, in which the author exposed ChriBa's neo-Marxist/anti-culturalist sociological slant — an irrelevant metric by which to assess musical quality. Macan's thesis presented a far more salient and persuasive take-down of ChriBa dogma than any supplicatory protests that magazines like Rolling Stone and Cream had fielded from prog fanboys for years prior to the book's publication.

Fanboys protest with their own little opinions, and are laughed at in return by those with cushy platforms. Macan broke the argument down on epistemological grounds, and in doing so shook ChriBa to its core.

[Facelift]

Fanboys protest with their own little opinions, and are laughed at in return by those with cushy platforms. Macan broke the argument down on epistemological grounds, and in doing so shook ChriBa to its core.

More laughable nonsense, from perhaps the most laughable and non-sensical individual to post here in quite some time.

[JJ88]

Some pointing out online that UK folk music (Fairport Convention/Pentangle and their alumni etc.) is entirely absent from the list. This was absolutely an albums genre as well.

[spacefreak]

I expected the list to be worse than it actually is... The most serious ommission for me is the non-inclusion of other countries seminal records. You can't pretend "expertise" and miss a Group 1850 album. Plus the unavoidable hipster factor: including The Shaggs and missing Ammmusic f.e. Not to mention Pet Sounds at No2 and nothing by Incredible String Band or Fairport Convention.

[ronmac]

These lists are silly, seem to be limited to the record collections of the reviewers, and appear to be only made to get people to argue.

Plus, any list that doesn't have my favorite album at #1 is bogus.