Bands with large discographies but only a handful of great songs

File: christgau4.jpg (39KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 300x225px

Crime of the Century [A&M, 1974]

The claim that this is the rock and roll of the future depresses me in spite of the amalgamation being a (moderately) smart one, and admittedly, "Bloody Well Right" does display a gift for the killer hook. Now if only the song weren't an impassioned plea for complacency. Maybe if we close our eyes and ignore them, they'll go away. B-

Even in the Quietest Moments... [A&M, 1977]

Most progressive rock is modest schlock that sounds good when played in the background. This is modest background schlock that sounds good when slipped in the ear. I guess we should thank Babaji, whichever one he is. C+

Breakfast in America [A&M, 1979]

I enjoy a hooky album as much as the next guy, so when this one elicited vague grunts of pleasure, I looked forward to listening in detail. But the lyrics turned out to be glib variations on the usual "Star Romances" trash, and in the absence of a vocal personality (as opposed to accurate singing) or rhythmic thrust (as opposed to a beat), I'll wait for this music to be covered by artists of substance--say, Tavaris or the Doobie Brothers. C+

Everything Rocks and Nothing Ever Dies [1990s]

File: stat_8011.png (128KB, 264x346px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 264x346px

>listening to supertramp

The Rolling Stones
AC/DC
Metallica

>>70902575
Iron Maiden

Aerosmith

>>70902984
Do Aerosmith have any good songs? All I've heard are those awful romantic ballads on the radio and they make me so mad I never checked them out.

>>70903049

https://youtu.be/d1AaCy-yU9c

Literally their only good song, and im a white trash dad rock enthusiast

>>70903049
They're like a more frustrating version of The Rolling Stones, in that they are incredibly talented with a real ear for musical complexity but have zero interest in actually pushing that talent to its full potential.

Sweet Emotion and Seasons of Wither are my favs.

Dadrock staples, for sure, but both are proof positive that when Aerosmith wanted to, they could write complex-yet-listenable dadrock that would make Pete Townsend and Jimmy Page jealous.

Rolling Stones, granted, when they're good, you'll get masterpieces like angie or paint it black

File: 98t98.jpg (94KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x600px

>>70903225
>Angie
>masterpiece

>>70903200
I love their cover of Think About It. No idea why people trash it so much.

>>70903049
Any Aerosmith you hear on the radio is probably their awful momrock from the 80s-90s, not the 70s stuff when they were actually good.

>>70903200
Aerosmith fucked themselves with drugs and wasted a huge chunk of their prime career years.

Deff leppard
every album after 1992 is garbage

>>70903362
My dad knew them tangentially in the late 70s. They practiced next door to where he worked and they loved to shoot the shit with their neighbors.

Part of Aerosmith's problem is that they're all really good, down to earth guys who got Rolling Stones/Bruce Springsteen-huge despite deep not really ever wanting to be that deep down inside.

I think that if they had their druthers, they would have stayed a reasonably successful AOR niche band like J Geils, Blue Oyster Cult, Cheap Trick, The Cult, etc where they would have retained the freedom to dick around making the music they wanted to and never had to deal with the corporate pressure to succeed and go mainstream that came with being coronated as the American Rolling Stones.

That outcome would have been much more in line with their IRL personalities.

>>70903049
Walk This Way, Dream On, Sweet Emotion, and the cover of Come Together are the only ones you need to know.

File: 640px-Robert_Christgau_08.jpg (20KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 640x425px

>>70903506
Done With Mirrors [Geffen, 1985]

Their knack for the basic song and small interest in guitar-hero costume drama always made them hard rock that deserved the name, not to mention an American band. Still, with almost a decade of bad records collective and solo behind them, there was no reason to expect a thing from this touching reunion. And against all odds the old farts light one up: if you can stand the crunch, you'll find more get-up-and-go on the first side than on any dozen random neogarage EP's. B+

Christgau sums up Aerosmith very succinctly here. They were never the kind of guys who aspired to be Van Halen or U2.

>>70903268
Angie is an awful, syrupy momrock ballad.

Buckethead

I can't think of a more prolific artist

>>70903444
Every album after the first two is garbage.

File: 78_logo.jpg (47KB, 534x382px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 534x382px

Handful of good albums, but man, what a downward spiral.

>>70902894
Kill em All, Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, ...And Justice For All, Black Album. That's like half of their discography and it's all good.

>>70905435
Only Kill em All and Ride the Lightning is good.

Are later Public Enemy albums good? I never really listened to any other than the three after the debut.

The Fall

>>70903225
>Paint It Black
wasn't that the... huh, guess not, I could've sworn it was another band

>>70902575
Basically all of Crime of the Century is great. It's easily one of the best popular rock records of the mid 70s.

>>70902575
The Who
also, not a band, but Prince

Jamiroquai

>>70907741
Their first two albums are golden honestly, I love them. Their third album was when they started to spoil. Then when Zender was kicked and Jay scrapped their 4th album, they turned to complete horseshit. Throwing away songs with Roy Ayers, Stevie Wonder, and Quincy Jones were the biggest mistake this band made.