The 500 Greatest Albums of All Times [Hardcover]

Editors of Rolling Stone (Author), Joe Levy (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 16, 2005

From the editors of Rolling Stone magazine comes a new book, The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time—a tribute to the finest popular music of all time. Whether you’re looking for advice to round out your music collection or just inspiration for a heated argument, Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Albums of All Time is the essential guide to the best music of modern times from the world’s greatest music magazine.

The albums included in this comprehensive book were chosen by 273 of the world’s pre-eminent musicians and critics ranging from Fats Domino to Moby. From the Beatles’ Sgt. Peppers to Nirvana’s Nevermind, Ray Charles’ The Birth of Soul to the White Stripes Elephant, this book is packed with classics. Behind-the-scenes stories of the making of these albums are included, as well as rare photos of legendary recording studios including Abbey Road and Muscle Shoals. Topping the list of 500 are Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (the Beatles, 1967), Pet Sounds (the Beach Boys, 1966), Revolver (the Beatles, 1966), Highway Revisited (Bob Dylan, 1965), Rubber Soul (the Beatles, 1965), What's Going On (Marvin Gaye, 1971), Exile on Main Street (the Rolling Stones, 1972), London Calling (the Clash, 1980), Blonde on Blonde (Bob Dylan, 1966 ), and The White Album (the Beatles, 1968 ).

Editorial Reviews

From the Publisher

"This is a must have for the serious music collector, young and old."

-—Joe Levy, Deputy Managing Editor, Rolling Stone Magazine

About the Author

Joe Levy is a deputy managing editor of Rolling Stone Magazine where he has overseen the magazine's music coverage since 1997. A former editor at Details, Spin and the Village Voice, he is also a frequent on-air contributor to VH1 and MTV.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 224 pages
• Publisher: Wenner Books (November 16, 2005)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1932958010
• ISBN-13: 978-1932958010
• Product Dimensions: 11.5 x 11.3 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 3.7 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (33 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #604,147 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

91 of 105 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Good for discussion, but flawed in several ways, November 28, 2005

By 

Jim Mann (Pittsburgh, PA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The 500 Greatest Albums of All Times (Hardcover)

Like the various "top 100" movie lists, this wonderfully illustrated list of the top 500 albums is a great source of discussion: what belonged, what didn't, what was too high, what was too low, and so on. Since much of this is a matter of taste (though some of the perspective on what is historically important in that it influenced what was to come is a bit more objective), I'll refrain from commenting on individual albums. However, there are two bigger problems that are worth commenting upon.

The first is that the editors seem to not like and not value what is sometimes called "art rock." I first noticed this when I thumbed through looking for the Moody Blues' Days of Future Passed. I assumed it would be somewhere in the top 50, but it wasn't even in their top 500. Neither were any other Moody Blues albums, when I would have thought that at least three (Days of Future Passed, For Our Children's Children's Children, and Seventh Sojourn) belonged (and, for my tastes, I would have included more). But as I looked around, I noticed that the whole subgenre seemed to be missing. There was no Genesis, no Yes, no Emerson, Lake, and Palmer. Even if, as a matter of taste, the editors didn't care much for this type of music, there should have been some representation of these artists. (I don't like Eminem, but I understand why he was included.)

The second problem is one of scope. The book includes a small number of jazz albums -- a few by Miles Davis and John Coltraine. This is either too many or way too few. The either should not have taken on jazz or should have given it it's rightful place. If this were the best albums of all time and jazz was included, where is Dave Brubeck's Take Five? There is some Miles Davis, but where is his very important rendition of Porgy and Bess? Where are the works of Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Thelonius Monk, Billie Holliday, Ellah Fitzgerald, and so on. Either do jazz right or don't do it at all. Don't pretend that only a half a dozen jazz albums belong on the list of 500 best albums.

26 of 33 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Alrighty then..., July 29, 2006

By 

D. Lee (Baltimore, Md United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The 500 Greatest Albums of All Times (Hardcover)

I've read through Rolling Stone's "500 Greatest Albums" guide and it has some real problems, all of which add up to it being extremely unhelpful for someone honestly looking for great albums. I considered giving this guide a higher rating simply because I agree that many of the albums included really are great, but the writing (or really, the lack thereof) is so bad that this book couldn't possibly be helpful to anyone who was not already familiar with the albums. This book gets off to a preposterous start when the editor claims that the Beatles' first album should be the number one album because it is the first one that HE bought, and getting all nostalgic about it makes him feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Wha?! And this guy is the editor?! That's not a basis for an argument for an album's position on a list ranking greatest albums! That should have told me what I was getting myself into by continuing to read. If you were to ask yourself whether or not you know anything new about the music after reading the article for any given album in this book, most likely the answer will be no (especially for 11-500). You may know that the drummer spilled beer on his drum kit while recording the big hit single, or some other piece of at best marginally useful information, but that's about it. And they don't even put much effort into providing much in the way of that level of information beyond the first 10 albums, the rest only get a paragraph of completely obvious and/or useless information. For a while I was under the impression that "Rolling Stone" was a music magazine that was knowledgeable about and understood and appreciated music (well, rock music at least, in the most narrow definition of the term, and perhaps blues, the father of rock). This book and other publications such as their brazenly mindless album guide, truly show what little respect and appreciation that they have for music. I almost get the impression that they want to show that they are too cool to take music seriously enough to put any thought or effort into what they write. They rarely even attempt to make a convincing argument as to why the albums hold the positions that they do in this book. It's clear after reading this guide AND their magazine review section for a while that the critics at Rolling Stone do not thoroughly listen to albums, and that they rate music based on things that have nothing to do with the merits of the material. They rate music based on type and image more than anything else, being much more concerned with shaping and pushing their idea of "cool" than with the actual merits of the music. It's obvious that they don't even understand jazz (which I guess goes hand in hand with not understanding even the fundamentals of music theory), but there are many areas of music that they don't seem to understand or appreciate. I don't see how it is at all helpful to judge music by how closely it adheres to aesthetic characteristics that are generally specific to the type that you like. Those that fit the mold will likely be overrated and those that don't will likely be underrated. Rolling Stone takes this unbelievably self-indulgent approach throughout this book. So this guide ends up being really unhelpful. But hey, where else are you going to find a book with so many pretty and glossy artist and album cover photos :-)? Unless that's what you're looking for though, you're better off saving your money. The ONLY consistently helpful and reliable expert critical review source that I'm aware of is "Wilson & Alroy's Record Reviews", so you should go over there and check out their site and their "5 Star Records" page in particular if you want a truly helpful guide to some great albums.

11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Proceed with caution!, July 21, 2007

By 

finulanu ""the mysterious"" (Here, there, and everywhere) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The 500 Greatest Albums of All Times (Hardcover)

Okay, before I go on, I would like to say that this is not a subjective review. I am not trying to beat the fact that the Eagles and Led Zeppelin (though, in the latter band's case, good) are gruesomely overrated while Herbie Hancock and The Allman Brothers Band are gruesomely underrated into anyone's heads. I am stating my opinion, which I know quite well differs greatly from fact, because opinion by nature cannot be fact.
Rolling Stone pompously declares the 500 albums in this list to be the 500 best ever. In this case, there'd be a lot more jazz on this list, right? Well, according to the good folks at Rolling Stone, "jazz" consists of Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Ornette Coleman - don't get me wrong, some of jazz's greatest artists. But doesn't Charles Mingus deserve some credit, if only for widely influential works like Mingus Ah Um or The Black Saint and the Sinner Lady? Similarly, Thelonious Monk's Underground, widely considered one of the genre's greatest albums, is totally neglected. How about Herbie Hancock's tremendously influential Head Hunters, Empyrean Isles and Maiden Voyage? They're gone too. And if they wanted a rock spin on jazz, shouldn't the Mahavishnu Orchestra's Inner Mounting Flame been included? Alas, no, that is rejected too. To say nothing of the works of Duke Ellington or Louie Armstrong. You can bet they don't give that a second look. Stupid, it is. Oh, and there are six jazz albums out of these 500: three by Miles (Kind of Blue; B*tches Brew; Sketches of Spain), two by Coltrane (A Love Supreme; Giant Steps), one by Ornette (Shape of Jazz to Come). By contrast, Eminem (a lightweight, obnoxious shock-rapper whose material isn't even that shocking at all) is fawned over - three of his albums are included on this list, which I believe was his complete discography at that point. Similarly, two albums by the Eagles? Ha. And Green Day's Dookie? Again, ha. Also MIA are some more influential and just plain good albums: Jeff Beck's Truth (the original metal album - you'll note how much praise they place on Led Zeppelin's head, who, while a good band, were essentially imitating Jeff Beck) and Wired; Traffic's John Barleycorn and self-titled; Alice in Chain's Dirt. And no matter what this list would want you to believe, there is far more to Joni Mitchell than Blue and Court & Spark.
Wh
ich leads directly into my next point: no dark horses I can think of. A seasoned music fan could probably smell the contents of this list from a mile away. All they offer us is the usual cascade of albums that have been met with floods and floods of praise. I, for one, would rather see them stick up for a relatively unknown album like Joni Mitchell's Hissing of Summer Lawns or the Rolling Stones' Goats Head Soup (or the Allman Brothers' Eat a Peach and Idlewild South!!!) than see yet another list with Hotel California or Led Zeppelin IV on it.
I give this album 2 stars because I do agree with several choices this book makes, though I would argue their positioning (I, for one, would put Abbey Road at #1). However, there are too many fundamental flaws, and the scope of this list is too limited, to make it truly definitive.
Oh, and anybody looking to contest my claim about Led Zeppelin IV, Dookie Hotel California, or any other albums I claim do not belong on this list (e.g. Pet Sounds - god, what a boring album)... if you say what you wish to in a polite, civilized manner, I will listen to your claim and debate it in similar polite, civilized terms. On the other hand, if you wish to confine your comments to pointless immature sniping, I believe you know where I will instruct you to stick it, because I've heard it all before. So to all flamers, don't bother, as your flame will be ignored.