Viewing Thread:
"Q top 100 albums"

How the hell did the strokes get to number 10? it just shows how today's generation are so pop cultured and only enjoy trendy music Led Zepplin were the only pre 1990 band in the top 10 i think. Now that's pretty gay. Prolly only voted for by fans of the strokes, because the strokes prolly reckon that led zepplin were there inspiration to music. I don't how led zepplin inspired terribly bad music and songs that sound the same

Yeah I guess you're right

It is my joint favourite album and is a classic... and came out in 1997 yeah.

Ah well

Strokes number 10 though? Give us a break

i see wat u are saying, and yes those albums rnt some of the best of all time. Yet sometimes it can happen that an album is released that year that is truly amazing. I see u r a radiohead fan (from another topic), so how did u feel when q did the same vote in 1998 and ok computer came number 1. that was the same year it was released, and by ur logic shouldnt of been allowed in the chart. Yet in my, and many other peoples eyes ok computer is one of the greatest albums of all time.

and ur right about these charts being pointless. Oh well. just my two cents.

I'm only suggesting that because an album had been out in the last year and it was fairly good:

Is This It?
Highly Evolved
A Rush of Blood to the Head etc

They're all good... but they're in the public eye recently so when votes are cast they might be slightly biast... since it is 100 best...

Ah nevermind, lists are stupid.

The Strokes are alright, but there's older stuff similar and better.

yes i was being sarcastic

yeah but people prefer depressing crap rather like coldplay "the manics are so 'crap' i mean wat have they ever done, except change the face of rock music"

SHEEPY wrote:
> A Rush of Blood to the Head beat Everything Must Go
>
> *smashes face off desk*
>
> Recent albums shouldn't be allowed in

Ive agreed wiv pretty much most of the stuff uve said, but to say that no recent albums should be let in is pretty dumb. I mean if an album comes out that is absolutely fantastic, why shouldnt it be included in the top 100. When some albums come out u can just tell they r class, and will become one of the all time great albums. But i do agree that that the manics being beaten by coldplay is an outrage.

How did U2'S Joshua Tree not get in the top ten? Disgraceful.

Insane Bartender wrote:
> what purpose exactly does reading a listing serve?

See also 'The Greatest 100 Brits' and all Channel 4's 100 Greatest crap. I hate this sort of thing, but especially with music. "This album is the 33rd best, but this album is only the 38th best."

THANK YOU at at least sum1 understaND