# Top 100 Rock Albums of All Time



## Sonnie

http://www.avrev.com/rock-albums/album_rotate.gif
*AVRev.com's Top 100 Rock Albums of All Time*

In a world where record companies seem happy to sell consumers songs by the single via a low-resolution, non-surround sound download - AVRev.com wanted to point out the importance of the album concept.

Inspired by the Sabermetric system used by Bill James in his baseball abstracts that attempt to make seemingly subjective elements more scientific in comparison - the AVRev.com staff compiled a set of categories to rate the Top 100 Rock Albums of all time. We offer a link below for readers to download the same sheet to see how your favorites do. 




*The Judges*
The team of judges include: AVRev.com publisher Jerry Del Colliano Jr., AVRev.com Music Editor Charles Andrews, 5.1 music executive David Delgrosso, Xhifi's President Howard Schilling, Definitive Audio's Eric Ward, Bel Canto's President John Stronczer and record industry veteran and high-resolution enthusiast, Ted Cohen.

*The Categories*
Performance: (100 Points) Simply put, how well did the band or artist play on the record? Technical ability, soul and beyond.

*Songs and Songwriting*: (100 Points) How good are the songs on the record? Were they great originals, killer covers, reinterpretations that were better than the original? All would spike the score in this category.

*Sound*: (50 Points) - How good does the record sound? Did it ever get released in a high-resolution or surround sound format? If so, that would get a few extra points. Was the record a breakthrough record for recording techniques or does it just plain sound good on a CD? These are all factors in a high score for sound.

*Production*: (50 Points) - Great sound doesn’t always match with great production (think Wall of Sound from Phil Spector). Slick production, unique instrumentation, development of important "sounds" all factor into a high score in this category.

*Staying Power*: (50 Points) - To be a truly great album, the record needs to be as relevant today as it when it came out.

*Concept/Continuity*: (50 Points) - This is the X Factor category where albums that are great from the first note to the last get the highest grades. Think of The Police's Synchronicity and the stiff song "Mother" as an example of a great record with one bad track. Records that are great from top to bottom receive the best grades here.

Source: AVRev.com

And wouldn't you know... Pink Floyd tops the chart... :T





































Judge for Yourself
http://www.avrev.com/rock-albums/logo_excel.gifDownload a template in Excel here
so you can create your own list.


----------



## Fincave

Interesting list, I actually have quite a few of the albums on it. IMO there are some very surprising ommisions: Nirvana, Bob Dylan (though he does get an honourable mention), Black Sabbath, Elvis, The Clash to name but a few. I would not include Madonna and Michael Jackson as they have nothing to do with 'ROCK' music. Rolling Stone also have their Top 500 list and it is quite interesting comparing the two, Sgt.Peppers comes in at number one, DSOTM only at 43. The Beatles actually have four albums in the top 10!!!

Here is a link to the Rolling Stone Top 500, purely for comparitive reasons.


----------



## jvc

At one time, I had that issue of Rolling Stone. I think that's the one that had a free sacd sampler (very nice) in it. Seems like, but I can't swear to it, that Rolling Stone's list was determined by sales figures, instead of personal opinions of judges.

I agree with a lot of their list, but agree that Michael Jackson and Madonna don't belong there. They are pop, not rock.......... ) But, that's just disagreeing with someone's else's opinion.


----------



## Sonnie

One thing to consider it who determines the rankings. There is a vast difference between how these judges ranked the above and even who they are and Billboard's methodology...



> Currently, Billboard utilizes a system called Nielsen Soundscan to track sales of singles, albums, videos and DVDs. Essentially, it's a system that registers sales when the product is purchased at the cash register of SoundScan-enabled stores. Billboard also uses a system called Broadcast Data Systems, or BDS, which they own as a subsidiary, to track radio airplay. Each song has a musical "fingerprint" which, when played on a radio station that is contracted to use BDS, is detected. These detections are added up every week among all radio stations to determine airplay points. Arbitron statistics are also factored in to give "weight" to airplay based on audience size and time-of-day.
> 
> Each of Billboard's charts use this basic formula. What separates the charts is what stations or stores each chart uses - each musical genre having a core audience or retail group. Each genre's department at Billboard is headed up by a chart manager, who makes these determinations.
> 
> For many years, a song had to be commercially available as a single to be considered for any of Billboard's charts. At the time, instead of using SoundScan or BDS, Billboard obtained its data from manual reports filled out by radio stations and stores. In 1990, the country singles chart was the first chart to use SoundScan and BDS. They were followed by the Hot 100 and the R&B chart in 1991. Today, all of Billboard's charts use this technology.
> 
> Before September 1995, singles were allowed to chart in the week they first went on sale based on airplay points alone. The policy was changed in September 1995 to only allow a single to debut after a full week of sales on combined sales and airplay points. This allowed several tracks to debut at number one.
> 
> In December 1998, the policy was further modified to allow tracks to chart on the basis of airplay alone without a commercial release. This change was made to reflect the changing realities of the music business. Previous to this, several substantial radio and MTV hits had not appeared on the Billboard chart at all, because companies chose not to release them as standalone singles, in hopes that their unavailability would spur greater album sales. Not offering a popular song to the public as a single was unheard of before the 1970s. Among the many pre-1999 songs that had ended up in this Hot 100 limbo were Nirvana's "All Apologies," the Cardigans' "Lovefool," Smash Mouth's "Walking on the Sun," OMC's "How Bizarre," Harvey Danger's "Flagpole Sitta," Jamiroquai's "Virtual Insanity," Everclear's "Santa Monica," Stone Temple Pilots' "Interstate Love Song," Fastball's "The Way," the Smashing Pumpkins' "Disarm," Veruca Salt's "Seether," and The Cranberries' "Zombie," as well as numerous Green Day, Live, Offspring, No Doubt, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Mariah Carey, Alanis Morissette and Foo Fighters tracks.
> 
> Starting in 2005, Billboard changed its methodology to allow paid digital downloads from digital music stores such as iTunes to chart with or without the help of radio airplay.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Seems to be a lot of Zepplin fans on that panel…

I’m surprised Chicago made the list. They seem to be perennially underappreciated in polls like this.

Also – Lyle Lovett? Beastie Boys? When did they do any rock?

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## trainCatcher

Though everyone is entitled to their own opinion, the Metallica albums are definitely ranked incorrectly.  I mean how can anyone rank Master of Puppets as the 4th best Metallica album (below Ride the Lightning and the Black Album? :thumbsdown Speaking of metal, Slayer's Season's in the Abyss probably should be up there with Reign in Blood.


----------



## lcaillo

> Wayne A. Pflughaupt;54339...Chicago...perennially underappreciated


Gulp!:unbelievable: I would have to have included Sabbath, for sure, and 2112 was a great rock album, better than MP IMO.


----------



## jwesenick79

trainCatcher said:


> Though everyone is entitled to their own opinion, the Metallica albums are definitely ranked incorrectly.  I mean how can anyone rank Master of Puppets as the 4th best Metallica album (below Ride the Lightning and the Black Album? :thumbsdown Speaking of metal, Slayer's Season's in the Abyss probably should be up there with Reign in Blood.


:hail:totally agree with you! i figured the black album would've beat all of their others, based on its popularity, not my personal prefference, if it were me, master of puppets all the way... and Prince, michael jackson, etc.???? i do not quite classify them as any form of rock... :coocoo:


----------



## lcaillo

Also, Aja was not the Dan's best album, Pretzel Logic for one was better. A notable omission is Tales of Mystery and Imagination by The Alan Parsons Project.

Another possible due inclusion for its influence is The Crazy World of Arthur Brown, though I have not seen a copy in about 30 years. Without his influence we may never have seen much of the theatrical and concept rock of the 1970s.


----------



## TCinGA

What, no Who's Next ? 

Did not even get an honorable mention :boxer:

The 1995 Remaster CD is one that I often use when auditioning speakers. I just find the clarity and power of that disc to be a good reference for listening.


----------



## MatrixDweller

I think a lot of the categories are merely the opinions of the judges. Like Performance, Sound, Concept/Continuity and Production are biased by the listeners taste in music. They can be driven slightly by record sales and song ranking, but for the most part it's the judge's opinion.

Staying Power and Songs and Songwriting can be gauged off of record sales and song ranking however.

Are we to trust that the opinions of the AVRev.com staff, Xhifi, Definitive Audio and Bel Canto's presidents are unbiased? I really doubt it as they tend to push ultra high end equipment and $1000 speaker cables. Basically it was AVRev and a bunch of their advertisers getting together. I find the fact that they put scores beside the listing is funny. 

I really doubt that they spent much time actually listening to all of the songs on all of the albums. If the average album was 40 minutes (there are a few double albums in there too) it would take them well over 100 hours to listen to everything back to back non-stop. For the most part I think they were going off of memory which again boils down to personal preferences.

How did they rate technical ability? Did they go for the singers vocal range? Did they look at the difficulty of the guitar and bass riffs (where's Primus)? If they were going to use the pseudo Sabermetric system they would need to break it down further than what they did. They would need to involve some music and musical instrument teachers. Sabermetrics is also based 100% on statistics. This ranking system doesn't use statistics really to form the judgments (Thriller would be up at the top because of sales). Just them mentioning Sabermetrics totally discredits them as being intelligent, unbiased judges.


----------



## lcaillo

If you don't like the judges, the criteria, or the choices, you are welcome to come up with your own list. It is just an opinion.


----------



## MatrixDweller

Sonnie said:


> Inspired by the Sabermetric system used by Bill James in his baseball abstracts that attempt to make seemingly subjective elements more scientific in comparison


It's just that this statement tries to state that they were trying not to be subjective. They don't understand what a Sabermetric system is. All of the categories they listed are subjective and not objective.

Music is art and in that you can't not be subjective to some degree. If I said that I liked Monet better than Van Gogh that's one thing, but if I said Monet's work was a 99 and Van Gogh's was a 96 that not scientific or Sabermetric by any means, it's just my personal opinion of their work as a number and is not objective by any means.

A Sabermetric system involves looking at cold hard statistics and coming to conclusions by looking at the stats from different angles. The whole basis of the Sabermetric is supposed to get rid of biases or ranking things high because they are popular. Art doesn't have a measurable unbiased stat that can be used in a Sabermetric system. Even sales is not a true measure. High sales means people like it, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's high quality. Budweiser is the best selling beer in the world...need I say more.

Note: I do agree that the album concept (or concept album) is something that should not be forgotten.


----------



## lcaillo

He said "more scientific." There is nothing wrong with attempting to take subjectivity out of a judgement. It would be misleading to claim that there was none, as is the case with any scientific work. The result was interesting and sparked some debate. My point is that none of us are putting together a more objective analysis, and since it is obvious that no such studycan be completely objective, it is more interesting to see others opinions on the matter. It would be equally interesting to see your attempt at a more objective solution.


----------



## MatrixDweller

You have to like the "I'd like to see you do better" type of response. I just might take you up on that challenge.

There's nothing scientific about their approach. They lead us to believe that they objectively determined the quality of the albums using a non subjective system. Like rating the picture or sound quality of a DVD or Bluray movie but even that is not really objective anyway.

There is no way to even remotely rate music scientifically other than by sales. But as I pointed out sales is not a true measure of quality. Also with a changing world population and economy structure it can be skewed, just like using box office grosses to grade the performance of a film.

All you can really do to compile a list is post a complex poll and let more than 7 people create their top 100 list. Then you would get a little more empirical data. It still doesn't dictate the actual quality or technical merit of the albums.


----------



## OvalNut

Aww, I appreciate scientific pursuits as much as the next guy :nerd: , but on my list I gotta put the following near the top:

Molly Hatchet - "Flirtin' with Disaster" :yay:
and
Judas Priest - "Screaming for Vengeance" 

We're talking about rock music. :bigsmile:


Tim
:drive:


----------



## lcaillo

MD,

It is obvious that a scientific approach is not going to give results that are meaningful outside of a small context. Arguing that point is silly. Just give your opinion on what should be on the list rather than pecking away at the method by which it started.


----------

