ITT: Albums that have nothing wrong with them.
you start
>>61164616
Who ever told you there was something wrong with that album?
>>61164616
uhhhh
>Octopus's Garden
>Maxwell's Silver Hammer
>>61164711
>>61164616
Octopus Garden is the only good song on Abbey Road.
>>61164745
I wish they had kept the track order the same with this one.
>>61164746
But you probably prefer Ringo's solo music to anything The Beatles released.
>>61164782
No I just like the chord progression. It's nice.
>>61164781
It's better than the original m8
>>61164802
Really, you should check out Ringo's stuff
>>61164695
>>61164804
I liked having Two of Us as the opener.
>>61164711
>>61164745
Let It Be is the worst Beatles album. Get Back wasn't even that good. That whole period for The Beatles was sparse with creativity, so I prefer Abbey Road.
>>61164928
>Beatles for Sale* is the worst Beatles album
ftfy
>>61164646
People on /mu/ say that Side 1 of the album isn't as good as side 2, the Medley. Which is horseshit, by the way. Some of the album's most popular tracks, including George and Ringo's, are on side 1.
>>61164782
inb4
>>61164782
ringo is legit good though
listen to blast from your past and tell me it isnt full of tunes
>>61165056
>>61165056
>attempting to discuss quality of an album
>the album's most popular tracks
>most popular
>popular
God damn it I fucking hate beatles shills.
Only thing bad is album art.
>>61165370
I don't know if you are aware of this, but The Beatles were a pop band. Their most popular tracks, the singles they put out to promote the album, often had the tightest songwriting and most studio trickery.
Thats why mu hates it.
>inb4 zero "(you)'s"
This album is a flawless work of art
>>61165056
who fucking cares, popular doesn't mean it's better, and Ringo's song is the reason they only let him write 2 songs
>>61165447
My nigger.
>>61165056
B-side is superior, but "Something" is the greatest love song ever written.
>>61165373
I actually like the album art.
Kiss my ass
>>61165220
It's not too bad. A tad too quirky. Is that John singing backing vocals on the second track?
>>61165477
>B-side is superior,
Why is Side 2 superior, again? It doesn't have any good Lennon songs on it. I Want You is on Side 1.
>>61165565
B-side is superior because of the meddley. Those songs aren't meant to be listened seperately, but in succession.
You Never Give me Your Money, Sun King, and Carry that Weight are highlights.
>>61165645
And Golden Slumbers of course. I mixed that up with Sun King.
Golden Slumbers
pretty sure most artists wouldnt release a project theyre not completely satisfied with, so lots of them
>>61165739
But some artists have better taste than others
>>61165804
Yup. I agree with this one. Not a single track out of place.
>>61165804
DSOTM has a lot wrong with it namely Speak to me, Breathe, On the run and Any colour that you like all suck. Plus that saxophone bit in Money is so out of sync with the rest of the song.
>>61165645
>>61165667
Again, there are no good Lennon songs on it. It's mostly a Paul McCartney outing. Because and Sun King, Mr. Mustard, are B side throwaways. I'm not saying Come Together is a very complex song but its more interesting sonically. Also, again, I Want You is easily Lennon's best contribution to the album and is on Side 1.
>>61166128
>being this wrong
>>61166128
>Breathe, On the run and Any colour that you like all suck.
>having taste in music this bad
>>61166128
For me, and I imagine a lot of other people, DSOTM has value beyond simply being a really fucking good album. I first heard it when I was ~14, and it was my introduction into rock, psychedelia, and "good" music. Maybe it's just nostalgia, but I can never find any fault with this album. Listening it brings me to a place I just can't seem to reach with anything else, memories of smoking pot for the first time with my high school friends, dropping acid for the first time with said friends the summer after junior year, etc.
>>61164616
>>61164616
angles
>>61164616
I love Abbey Road, but I def wouldn't call it a perfect album (even by Beatles standards). The first half has its share of filler, the consistancy between sides is astronomical and it tries to shoehorn a bunch of new tech that makes it sound dated
>>61166519
3 hour cuckold monologues nd nicki minaj
>>61167209
nice buzzword
>>61164616
Maxwell's Silver Hammer and Her Majesty are just plain stupid
>>61164745
Worst post-Rubber Soul Beatles album
>>61165804
There is really something off in Any Colour You Like
>>61164616
Nothing except the music.
>>61167466
I think the same thing about DSOTM, though it's probably because I heard the Pulse version first (which is the best)
Do live albums count?
>>61167466
>There is really something off in Any Colour You Like
>The song used advanced effects for the time both in the keyboard and the guitar. The VCS 3 synthesizer was fed through a long tape loop to create the rising and falling keyboard solo. David Gilmour used two guitars with the Uni-Vibe guitar effect to create the harmonizing guitar solo for the rest of the song.
this song is about thinking you have a choice but you really dont. this is expressed by more than just the title. the first half of the song repeats the same few notes on the keyboard except they play it faster, slower, backwards and forwards to create the illusion of listening to different things. it cleverly shows how people are mislead into thinking they are decididing how their life will run but that is not the case as societies pressures force you to take a certain path.
people like this stuff because it mirrors reality and its timeless distortion...modern society is a simulation, something that appears authentic....
>>61167657
That fucking Yamaha DX7 on every song
>>61167547
>>61167661
I wasn't talking about something off like an intentional studio gimmick or some sort of distortion, but like in quality.
>>61167704
