Forrest Gump 1 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 a rolling stone list where the beatles aren't number one  #shocker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Gump 1 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 But "Greatest Debut Albums of All Time" based on what?  I mean what is the criteria? their favorite debuts i guess Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envi 765 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 :clap: ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrappy 302 Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I don't think the Fame deserves a very high place in the ranking... for me it's good but not great (let's say 7/10). But it could be a BIT higher (in my opinion should be higher than Madonna; as much as I adore her, I think her debut album is generic) But yay for Cyndi Lauper being #63! :party: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teo 609 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 their favorite debuts i guess And that's what makes the list irrelevant. Cause it's just some person's opinion and he's stating it behind the name of Rolling stone.  no, thank me later was a better album i know all these albums Well nobody except for you then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Gump 1 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 And that's what makes the list irrelevant. Cause it's just some person's opinion and he's stating it behind the name of Rolling stone. well that's how all critics and lists work  it's always gonna be subjective and everyone is never gonna be completely satisfied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teo 609 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 well that's how all critics and lists work  it's always gonna be subjective and everyone is never gonna be completely satisfied. But I am satisfied Gaga is on the list after all. I'm just stating that I don't respect that kind of so called critic. I just hate these lists. :haha: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Gump 1 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 But I am satisfied Gaga is on the list after all. I'm just stating that I don't respect that kind of critic. I just hate this kind of lists. :haha: yeah but all lists are like that. end of the year lists are voted among critics, reviews are just subjective opinions with college styled writing (sometimes :roll: )  i think people take critics too seriously Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teo 609 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 yeah but all lists are like that. end of the year lists are voted among critics, reviews are just subjective opinions with college styled writing (sometimes :roll: )  i think people take critics too seriously That's exactly what I meant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla 660 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 You guys act like Gaga is the only artist from our generation who deserves to be on the list.. Â Â ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT GAGA ISN'T THE ONLY ONE FROM HER GENERATION WITH TALENT? GET OUT #PAWSDOWN I won't die, but I can't live without you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla 660 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Could a they rape you any more with such nonsense in one list?  Oh btw rolling stone magazine stop being relevant decades ago.   Can I just say, this. This is not an attack on you, bu rather the second part of your post that seems to be a trend running within this fanbase so please, don't take this as an attack.  It seems that whenever Gaga does bad in something (say, VMAs) they'll be plagued as irrelevant and reductive. But, if she excells then the people who give her the award are suddenly relevant again. It's like, when they named Gaga as the Queen of Pop, no one would have sat here saying "OMG IT'S IRRELEVANT ANYWAY" .  Just an observation, and obviously I'm not ignorant enough to think this is always the case. I won't die, but I can't live without you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
My Little Phoney 658 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 where's The Family Jewels though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doogi 1,097 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 @Vanilla it's so trueee :lmao: I'm Chloe. Except the C and the L are silent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stra 6 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Can I just say, this. This is not an attack on you, bu rather the second part of your post that seems to be a trend running within this fanbase so please, don't take this as an attack.  It seems that whenever Gaga does bad in something (say, VMAs) they'll be plagued as irrelevant and reductive. But, if she excells then the people who give her the award are suddenly relevant again. It's like, when they named Gaga as the Queen of Pop, no one would have sat here saying "OMG IT'S IRRELEVANT ANYWAY" .  Just an observation, and obviously I'm not ignorant enough to think this is always the case. Good point, but I am not a 16 year old crazed fan that only listens to pop music or Lady Gaga. and My comment had NOTHING to do with Lady Gaga's position in the list. More like, the top 20.  And the VMAs are irrelevant to talent, only relevant to what teens find popular since you brought is up. The Grammys is the best measure we have of talent.  Now that being said, I know the history of rolling stone magazine. Its nothing today, just another magazine in the stands. I would wager a music list on TIME magazine would be more relevant because it would probably be done by people who actually have worked in the industry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanilla 660 Posted March 23, 2013 Share Posted March 23, 2013 Good point, but I am not a 16 year old crazed fan that only listens to pop music or Lady Gaga. and My comment had NOTHING to do with Lady Gaga's position in the list. More like, the top 20.  And the VMAs are irrelevant to talent, only relevant to what teens find popular since you brought is up. The Grammys is the best measure we have of talent.  Now that being said, I know the history of rolling stone magazine. Its nothing today, just another magazine in the stands. I would wager a music list on TIME magazine would be more relevant because it would probably be done by people who actually have worked in the industry.  I agree with you, I was just using your post as an example of what some fans are like to sort of prove a point :P Some people called the Grammys irrelevant when she didn't win last year I won't die, but I can't live without you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trending Now
New Threads
Trending Now
New Threads
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.