OK Computer

>OK Computer
>The Dark Side Of The Moon
>The Velvet Underground & Nico
>KID A
>Wish You Were Here
>In the Court of the Crimson King
>Loveless
>Abbey Road
>Pet Sounds
>Revolver
>Led Zeppelin [IV]
These albums are ranked higher than Kind Of Blue. Do you agree these albums deserve it?

>implying kind of blue deserves to be that high at all

Almost all of these albums are overrated (good though), and I'd say Kind Of Blue is overrated too. That said, the only one that comes even close to it is In The Court, and that's not even the best KC album.

Why the hell is there two Radiohead albums in the Top 10?
RYM's average algorithms suck dick and so does it's community of retarded hipsters.

Hm. Kind of Blue is a fantastic record and just being a Miles Davis record makes its influence on jazz unquantifiable. You could argue that ITCotKC, and TVU&N are more important for their respective movements and genres than KoB. As far as the music itself goes I prefer KoB to any album there.

OK computer being rated the best album of all time tells you everything you need to know about that shit site

Kind Of Blue is literally background music.

>Led Zep IV
So sick of this album's reputation as the most incredible album ever. It's got really good stuff on it but I'd put Physical Graffiti, Houses of the Holy, and possibly even III above IV.

>In the Court of the Crimson King
>Revolver
>TVU&N
>Loveless
I reckon those are the only ones where them being above Kind of Blue might make sense given their arguments, and maybe Pet Sounds (not too sold on that one). But anything else, while definitely great, shouldn't be that high compared to Kind of Blue. Even if Kind of Blue is also sort of overrated.

whatever jazz artist should be happy that he is in top 100 (like any rapper should)

woah! yuo have to have amazing music taste!

16 year old detected

t. redditor

>Radiohead is shit
>Not even their best album
>deserved
>see number 1
>Ehh, very good but maybe not top 10
>deserved
>my bloody memetine
>deserved
>Good album but not top 10
>deserved
>Led Memelin

...

Sorry to break the hive mind, but Kid A is literal miles ahead of anything made by King Crimson, The Beatles, and the Velvet Underground.

How so?

Radiohead sure doesn't. I'm okay with the others. There is better jazz than A Kind of Blue.

Aesthetically dense, tonally certain, thematically ubiquitous. The only ones that I think are close are White Light / White Heat and Sgt. Pepper.

>Aesthetically dense, tonally certain, thematically ubiquitous.
Yes these are things that describe King Crimson, The Beatles, and the Velvet Underground.

Now answer my question please

not really a fan of most of those albums, I only enjoy In the Court of the Crimson King, Loveless and Pet Sounds.
But then again, RYM is a democracy/popularity contest so what do you expect? If it was only made by certified critics I still think a few of those will remain on the best, but Radiohead or The Beatles would take the biggest hit

le adjective man. none of that means anything.

>Radiohead sure doesn't
Why not?

Radiohead, the most hyped and probably the most over-rated band of the decade, upped the ante for studio trickery. They had begun as third-rate disciples of the Smiths, and albums such as Pablo Honey (1993) and The Bends (1995) that were cauldrons of Brit-pop cliches. Then OK Computer (1997) happened and the word "chic" took on a new meaning. The album was a masterpiece of faux avantgarde (of pretending to be avantgarde while playing mellow pop music). It was, more properly, a new link in the chain of production artifices that changed the way pop music "sounds": the Beatles' Sgt Pepper, Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon, Fleetwood Mac's Tusk, Michael Jackson's Thriller. Despite the massive doses of magniloquent epos a` la U2 and of facile pathos a` la David Bowie, the album's mannerism led to the same excesses that detracted from late Pink Floyd's albums (lush textures, languid melodies, drowsy chanting). Since thee production aspects of music were beginning to prevail over the music itself, it was just about natural to make them "the" music.

Oh what instrument do you play again?

Don't say that to Scaruffi again thanks.

the brain

OK.

How long has he been studying music theory?
Then he's not a very good musician

Piano, Guitar, Percussion (in particular standard drum set-up, timbales, congas and Pleneras, drum machine), Saxophone, and Bass.

6 years.


Radiohead is incredible overrated and none of their records beling anywhere near top 10 anything. They're great though.

Prove it. Chart out Paranoid Android and demonstrate

No lol

no

This

A lot of albums should be higher than Kind of Blue, honestly.

Thanks for playing pleb

Kek how else would he explain it without an essay on music theory

I (and I assume most RYM users) rate stuff based exclusively on personal opinion, so you shouldn't really interpret the charts as an objective ranking at all.

Honestly all those albums are pretty close in decent-ness to the point that you could probably arrange them in whatever order and it would still be ok

No, it doesn’t. To be aesthetically dense, it has to inherit a fully realized world. The Beatles and TVU rarely reach that, and King Crimson NEVER reaches that.

If you can’t read, maybe so. Do you want to talk about actual music theory? Because Kid A is more complex than all 3 as well (yes, that includes King Crimson).

This one can’t think for himself.

why not?

>no reply

>it has to inherit a fully realized world. The Beatles and TVU rarely reach that
Why not? Prove it
> it has to inherit a fully realized world.
What world of Kid A? explain

this

music made by blacks (or niggers as I prefer to call them) is only ranked high because of affirmative action

I’m not going to prove it. It’s something you have to feel for yourself. I’d suggest intently listening to all three with non-personal subject mattern in mind.

White people shouldnt be allowed to make any form of music derived from africans music though. Rock is black music. Whites should leave and go back to your zero rhythm German Dances.

>I’m not going to prove it
Then it's not true, sorry

Kind of Blue is the definition of an overrated album. 90% of people who call it one one their favorite just says so because they feel like they have to like it. The worst is seeing charts on here with 49 rock records and Kind of Blue in the "other favorites" section

kek

Or maybe, its just one of those albums who's appela crosses over. You dont have to be a jazzhead to like Kind of Blue. It has a wonderful mood that anyone can appreciate; normies often refer to it as "movie music" as oppose to what they refer to most jazz, "elevator music". However, it's also a classic for those who normally like that kind of music. Kind of Blue was a hit when it came out and Jazz fans all over enjoy whether they are fans of straightajead, fusion or free jazz. It's a record made by a musician who was already at a position of mass influence and fame within the genre. By the time Miles Davis released KoB, he had already released 4 essential jazz classics in Birth of the Cool, Vol. 1, Miles Smiles and Milestones. And then he would go on to develop an entire new form of Jazz (post-bop) thatw as heavily influence by his Modal period in Kind of Blue. So KoB is not only influential on its own but its twoway influentialby its impact in Miles later developments. The personnel for also the album is an all-star cast. In Jazz it doesnt get bigger than Coltrane and Bill Evans. Plus Cobb, Chambers Adderley are legends on their own right producing and playing in many classic records on their own. Kind of Blue is also the most commercially succesful jazz record as result most people have early access to it as oppose to many other records. Its probably one of those records people start of with when starting listening to jazz as holds a special place in many people's hearts. It's undoubtedly one of the best Jazz albums ever made period.

Or not

Round About Midnight>Kind of Blue

>I’m not going to prove it

Kind of Blue isn't even Davis' best, Kid A > OK Computer and 100% deserves its spot, King Crimson is fair, all the rest are solid but debatably not top 10. Also not the best Pink Floyd albums.

Definetly not. Maybe Vol. 1 or Relaxin'

wonrg

Not an argument

That’s not how truth works.

Why bother? I’ve been around long enough to see when something plays the curious intellectual game, all aimed at the point where they can say they’re right. Simply put, TVU, Beatles, and King Crimson don’t have the same weight.

Not even the best Radiohead album, let alone better than any of those.

>That’s not how truth works.
It must be because how would you know it's true or not? I could just say the opposite of your claim and say "oh it's the truth!". Who would be right?
>Why bother?
Why bother posting?
>don’t have the same weight.
What weight? How are you measuring it?

One of the most pointless comments ever. All opinions on music are personal opinions

That's debatable.

Pseud.

Ooops you didn't seem to answer the question! Try again

he's right, you know