|
Post by sayne on Jul 30, 2008 9:34:01 GMT -5
new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/yradish/15499/the-top-20-albums-of-all-time-for-real
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Jul 30, 2008 9:42:54 GMT -5
I'm Thinking of Linking...
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jul 30, 2008 11:43:33 GMT -5
I'm Thinking of Linking... Uh . . . well . . . okay. Are you a top or a bottom? ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by marcm1441 on Jul 30, 2008 15:42:26 GMT -5
Been a long time since I saw a top 20 album collection that revolver was not a part of
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 30, 2008 21:17:15 GMT -5
For our ease in reference, here is the list sayne kindly turned us onto including the rather lengthy explanation as to how these were picked:
The Top 20 Albums of All Time (For Real) Posted Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:21pm PDT by Robert of the Radish in The Y! Music Playlist Blog I completely understand the frustration of "best of lists", and I can assure you that I read hundreds of comments here on the Yahoo Music blogs whenever we post one. Many times our "best album" lists generate thousands of comments. And although many of the remarks are ridiculous, many are valid in a subjective sort of way.
For this playlist I wanted to find the true top 20 albums once and for all, but to do this I needed to clear my mind of all opinion and approach it as a science. My own personal taste did not influence this list in any way. In fact, I would have made many different choices, but the time I put into collecting the data and crunching the numbers leaves no doubt in my mind that this is the most accurate top 20 album list in existence.
To begin with I had to set the parameters, and I have set them as follows:
1. The list is based on the American market - I did this only because I had mounds of detailed data on the American music market at hand- to include the whole world or even Europe would increase the complexity of the analysis greatly - So this is really the "Top 20 Albums of All Time (To Americans)"
2. "Greatest Hits" albums and live albums were not eligible. The idea here was to identify the very best true albums, not compilations that cherry pick the best songs from an artist's career.
3. The following mathematical formula was used:
"Album Staying Power Value + Sales Value + Critical Rating Value + Grammy Award Value"
Now if you wish to argue, I welcome intelligent comment on how to hone the formula further, but please try to control the passionate fan-speak that drives so many of the comments. Remember, the idea is to completely remove your personal opinion from the process.
To offer a bit more detail on the components of the formula:
The initial group of albums selected was based solely on sales. Please know that I believe sales alone are probably the worst measure we have of an album's quality and I will speak to how I addressed this problem in a few. But as a starting point sales made the most sense. Sales are by no means the only measure of a "great album", but without big sales an album doesn't have much footing on which to claim the moniker "greatest". A vote with a dollar is a much stronger indicator than any other.
I looked at the biggest selling albums of all time in America based on actual RIAA data - this produced 71 non-Greatest Hits/Live albums that have all sold over 10 million units. Any of these that sold more than 10 million units received a 1% Sales Multiplier for every 1 million units sold over 10 million.
Sales Value = Sales Multiplier X Staying Power Value
Next, I determined what the Staying Power Value (SPV) was of all 71 albums. To determine Staying Power Value I looked at used CD sales data to determine how well each album's value has held up over time. For example, in the secondary market you can expect to pay around $9.50 for a copy of Rumours by Fleetwood Mac, but you would only pay $1.38 for a copy of Cracked Rear View by Hootie and The Blowfish. The Staying Power Value is important because it shows what the current value of the album is in the marketplace. So it's a good reflection of supply and demand. Rumours sold 19 million copies and Cracked Rear View sold 16 million. Rumours gets more points for selling more units, but even more important than the higher overall sales figures is that people want to hold onto their Fleetwood Mac CD, but don't mind parting with their Hootie CD. SPV captures this. In simple terms, Staying Power Value reflects current supply and demand for each album. *Please note that for double albums we reduced the SPV to align with a standard-length album.
So if we take the previously mentioned SPV of Fleetwood Mac's Rumours album and multiply it by that album's Sales Multiplier of 9% (1% for each million sold over 10 million) we get $10.38. But this only shows us how much people still desire the album + how many have sold at retail.
The next part of the formula takes into account critical acclaim.
I would agree with anyone who says a critical review means nothing, but when you start to see a pattern among the critics the data becomes much more reliable. If ten out of ten reviewers give an album 5 stars chances are good that the album is a winner. Basically the more reviews you average the more reliable the rating.
For the Critical Rating Value I looked at multiple reviews for each album from a diverse cross section of music magazines, newspapers and music review websites to come up with the average review number for each based on a 5 star scale. From these ratings I assigned a Critical Rating Multiplier to each album ranging from 0% to 10%.
So now our formula has factored in critical acclaim making the end result more reliable.
Ratings Value = Sales Value X Rating Multiplier
The final portion of the formula is the Grammy Award Value and it simply looks at how many Grammy Awards each album has won. Our formula already has the voice of the people (Sales Value) and the voice of the critics (Critical Rating Value) so the only missing component is the acclaim each album holds among it's peers. The Grammys are an industry specific award and are the best reflection we have of how the music business itself feels about an album. I would agree that this is the least important of the components in our formula, and as such each Grammy award adds only a .5% bonus. So an album that wins 4 Grammys would receive an extra 2% to it's value. This in my estimation is a fair weighting to give for a Grammy award.
So now I give you The Top 20 Albums of All Time based purely on the analysis provided above and devoid of any personal opinion. If you would like to see the complete analysis you can download the Microsoft Excel version here: (Top Album Analysis.xls).
#20. Faith - George Michael Play Album Year: 1987 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $9.19 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 1 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.79
. #19. Appetite For Destruction - Guns N' Roses Play Album Year: 1987 Units Sold: 15 Million SPV: $8.81 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.81
. #18. Purple Rain - Prince Play Album Year: 1984 Units Sold: 13 Million SPV: $8.74 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 2 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.82
. #17. Houses Of The Holy - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1973 Units Sold: 11 Million SPV: $9.10 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $9.93
. #16. Born In The U.S.A. - Bruce Springsteen Play Album Year: 1984 Units Sold: 15 Million SPV: $8.91 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.29
. #15. Nevermind - Nirvana Play Album Year: 1991 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $10.07 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.67
. #14. Van Halen - Van Halen Play Album Year: 1978 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $10.23 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $10.84
. #13. Rumours - Fleetwood Mac Play Album Year: 1977 Units Sold: 19 Million SPV: $9.52 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 1 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $11.47
. #12. The Wall - Pink Floyd Play Album Year: 1979 Units Sold: 23 Million SPV: $10.20 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 1 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $12.51 . #11. The Joshua Tree - U2 Play Album Year: 1987 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $11.50 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 2 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $12.54 . #10. Metallica - Metallica Play Album Year: 1991 Units Sold: 14 Million SPV: $12.08 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 1 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.38 . #9. Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1969 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $12.83 Rating (Stars): 4 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.60 . #8. Hotel California - Eagles Play Album Year: 1976 Units Sold: 16 Million SPV: $12.00 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $13.81 . #7. The White Album - The Beatles Play Album Year: 1968 Units Sold: 19 Million SPV: $12.00 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $14.39 . #6. Led Zeppelin IV - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1971 Units Sold: 23 Million SPV: $12.42 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $15.44 . #5. Abbey Road - The Beatles Play Album Year: 1968 Units Sold: 12 Million SPV: $14.94 Rating (Stars): 4.25 Grammys Won: 1 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $16.23 . #4. Physical Graffiti - Led Zeppelin Play Album Year: 1975 Units Sold: 16 Million SPV: $14.31 Rating (Stars): 4.75 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $16.38 . #3. Thriller - Michael Jackson Play Album Year: 1982 Units Sold: 27 Million SPV: $13.49 Rating (Stars): 4.5 Grammys Won: 4 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $17.39 . #2. Dark Side Of The Moon - Pink Floyd Play Album Year: 1973 Units Sold: 15 Million SPV: $16.08 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 0 Calculated value per unit based on the formula: $18.57 . #1. Songs In The Key Of Life - Stevie Wonder Play Album Year: 1976 Units Sold: 10 Million SPV: $16.84 Rating (Stars): 5 Grammys Won: 2
|
|
|
Post by johnpaulharstar on Jul 30, 2008 22:30:50 GMT -5
I can safely say that is the worst top 20 list I have ever seen!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 30, 2008 23:59:28 GMT -5
I think that from a popular standpoint, at least 19 of these albums sure show up in a lot of record/c.d. collections throughout the Western World. Whether in a geezer's collection or in a college student's, you'd find many of these albums.
I can't believe, however, that Faith will have the staying power of the 19 other albums because even some of the "newer" acts represented here like Nirvana, Guns And Roses and Metallica have cult-like followings and I know kids who dig these very three albums.
I don't know any young people seeking out George Michael.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jul 31, 2008 0:12:44 GMT -5
I can safely say that is the worst top 20 list I have ever seen! That's you're right to say, and I will not say you are wrong. But, what's YOUR basis? I thought this would stimulate discussion and perhaps ire, since emotions, biases, and subjectivity would rear their heads. If it is possible to create an OBJECTIVE measure for the "greatest" album, how would you determine it or how would you make this guys formula work for you?
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Jul 31, 2008 3:27:29 GMT -5
The first thing that struck me is the presence (pardon the pun) of four Led Zeppelin albums. Nah! Much as I like the mighty Zep, that's just plain wrong. Secondly, even though many of the acts are British, the chart still had an American feel about it (as acknowledged by the author). The inclusion of 'Hotel California', 'Born in the USA' and anything by Van Halen stand out in this respect. No Radiohead. I think the 'formula' needs tweaking a bit! Finally, I don't agree with the choice of Beatles albums. White Album still rules the roost in many of thses polls, but as I said in my Sgt. Pepper thread, I'm waiting for the day when Pepper storms back into public esteem. Personal favourites? I would always go for Rubber Soul / Revolver / Pepper trilogy with Let it Be....Naked thrown in as a wild card. Interesting, though......and it's always nice to slag off someone else's top twenty.
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Jul 31, 2008 8:15:54 GMT -5
If it is possible to create an OBJECTIVE measure for the "greatest" album, how would you determine it or how would you make this guys formula work for you? I don't think one can be done--using the various critical ratings and getting an average would probably be the closest thing one could do to translate the subjective into the objective. I like the idea this writer used, but there was two huge flaws in his working method that he should have seen and modified before publishing the piece. First, using the price per album as a measure of worth was just wrong when double albums like SONGS IN THE KEY OF LIFE, THE WALL, PHYSICAL GRAFFITI and The White Album were tossed into the mix. The price for those should have been halved in the equation. Second, his system did not take into account the arc of the history of purchasing records. Note there were no albums before 1968. That's not surprising, because the pool for purchasing albums was still growing at that point; the baby boomers in 1966, for example, ranged from 2 years old to 20; by 1978, they were 14-32, and the number of units moved by the major artists were much greater than a decade before. True, many of those albums remained in print and available, but then another issue raises its ugly head--the honesty of the reporting to RIAA as to the number of sales. On the other end of the arc, the peak time for purchasing albums passed about 10 years ago with the advent of Napster and then ITunes. That doesn't mean that good albums aren't being done, they just don't SELL like they used to. And I guess there is a third element, although he addressed it in the set-up, but albums like OK COMPUTER didn't fare well because they weren't as huge here as in their homeland. Bottomline--when something like THRILLER, FAITH or PURPLE RAIN made the list and ARE YOU EXPERIENCED, RUBBER SOUL or WHO'S NEXT didn't, the compiler should have recognized his methodology was probably flawed and gone back to the drawing board. He didn't need to try to make an objective measure to meet preconceived notions, but still, when the results look like this, the formula has to be questioned. As I did! JcS
|
|
|
Post by revolver66 on Jul 31, 2008 10:44:24 GMT -5
If it is possible to create an OBJECTIVE measure for the "greatest" album, how would you determine it or how would you make this guys formula work for you? I don't think one can be done--using the various critical ratings and getting an average would probably be the closest thing one could do to translate the subjective into the objective. I like the idea this writer used, but there was two huge flaws in his working method that he should have seen and modified before publishing the piece. First, using the price per album as a measure of worth was just wrong when double albums like SONGS IN THE KEY OF LIFE, THE WALL, PHYSICAL GRAFFITI and The White Album were tossed into the mix. The price for those should have been halved in the equation. Second, his system did not take into account the arc of the history of purchasing records. Note there were no albums before 1968. That's not surprising, because the pool for purchasing albums was still growing at that point; the baby boomers in 1966, for example, ranged from 2 years old to 20; by 1978, they were 14-32, and the number of units moved by the major artists were much greater than a decade before. True, many of those albums remained in print and available, but then another issue raises its ugly head--the honesty of the reporting to RIAA as to the number of sales. On the other end of the arc, the peak time for purchasing albums passed about 10 years ago with the advent of Napster and then ITunes. That doesn't mean that good albums aren't being done, they just don't SELL like they used to. And I guess there is a third element, although he addressed it in the set-up, but albums like OK COMPUTER didn't fare well because they weren't as huge here as in their homeland. Bottomline--when something like THRILLER, FAITH or PURPLE RAIN made the list and ARE YOU EXPERIENCED, RUBBER SOUL or WHO'S NEXT didn't, the compiler should have recognized his methodology was probably flawed and gone back to the drawing board. He didn't need to try to make an objective measure to meet preconceived notions, but still, when the results look like this, the formula has to be questioned. As I did! JcS Great Summary! It was nice to see that the Beatles made the list based on his equations. No Stones Albums?? Also as you mentioned No Hendrix,No Who?? Interesting list and I like and own many of the Lps but as noted his intentions are flawed. That being said many of these do make the other 100 Greatest lists(but not all of them).
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 31, 2008 11:05:55 GMT -5
I don't think one can be done--using the various critical ratings and getting an average would probably be the closest thing one could do to translate the subjective into the objective. I like the idea this writer used, but there was two huge flaws in his working method that he should have seen and modified before publishing the piece. First, using the price per album as a measure of worth was just wrong when double albums like SONGS IN THE KEY OF LIFE, THE WALL, PHYSICAL GRAFFITI and The White Album were tossed into the mix. The price for those should have been halved in the equation. Second, his system did not take into account the arc of the history of purchasing records. Note there were no albums before 1968. That's not surprising, because the pool for purchasing albums was still growing at that point; the baby boomers in 1966, for example, ranged from 2 years old to 20; by 1978, they were 14-32, and the number of units moved by the major artists were much greater than a decade before. True, many of those albums remained in print and available, but then another issue raises its ugly head--the honesty of the reporting to RIAA as to the number of sales. On the other end of the arc, the peak time for purchasing albums passed about 10 years ago with the advent of Napster and then ITunes. That doesn't mean that good albums aren't being done, they just don't SELL like they used to. And I guess there is a third element, although he addressed it in the set-up, but albums like OK COMPUTER didn't fare well because they weren't as huge here as in their homeland. Bottomline--when something like THRILLER, FAITH or PURPLE RAIN made the list and ARE YOU EXPERIENCED, RUBBER SOUL or WHO'S NEXT didn't, the compiler should have recognized his methodology was probably flawed and gone back to the drawing board. He didn't need to try to make an objective measure to meet preconceived notions, but still, when the results look like this, the formula has to be questioned. As I did! JcS Great Summary! It was nice to see that the Beatles made the list based on his equations. No Stones Albums?? Also as you mentioned No Hendrix,No Who?? Interesting list and I like and own many of the Lps but as noted his intentions are flawed. That being said many of these do make the other 100 Greatest lists(but not all of them). And no Dylan!
|
|
|
Post by superhans on Jul 31, 2008 11:20:05 GMT -5
On reflection, I think the only genuine contenders from that list are:
Thriller Dark side of the moon Led Zep IV Joshua tree Rumours Nevermind
I also quite like the fact that this shortlist covers quite a few musical bases - dance, 70s pop & rock, 80s FM and grunge.
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Jul 31, 2008 13:03:27 GMT -5
John, good point about the lack of a Dylan album--that would be another warning sign to the one trying to come up with some objective measures that what he was using wouldn't work.
JcS
|
|
ImBigK
Very Clean
Take a sad song and make it better
Posts: 66
|
Post by ImBigK on Aug 2, 2008 13:16:59 GMT -5
I also question counting Grammy awards as a representation of 'peers' opinions. There are some albums (or groups) whose influence on their peers is unquestionable... but I can't think of a practical way to quantify that influence. Dylan is a good example, as his influence on generations of songwriters is undeniable, and well out of proportion to his overall popular sales. The methodology used to create the above list is interesting, but trying to reduce such a list to a formula seems futile to me.
-Big K
NP - Jimi Hendrix - WILD BLUE ANGEL (Live at the Isle Of Wight)
|
|