How young are you? How old am I?

Continuing my trip up Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Albums Of All Time...

#158 : Mama's Gun - Erykah Badu (2000)

Richly direct and meditative, Erykah Badu’s second album took no prisoners. Mama’s Gun gave us an even more personal version of the neo-soul brilliance she displayed on her 1997 debut, focused by a few more years of life experience (including the dissolution of her relationship with OutKast’s André 3000 and the time off she took to welcome their son, Seven). On the J Dilla-produced “Didn’t Cha Know,” she’s luminously lost; by “Bag Lady,” she’s made peace with her past emotional baggage. With contributions from like-minded artists like Questlove and Roy Ayers, Badu created a wildly free, deliciously ambitious song cycle out of her own hard-won truths.

I'd listened to one Erykah Badu album before (I can't remember whether it was this one) and found it OK but unnecessarily challenging in places, with little to draw me back in - so I never went back.  So whilst I was happy to listen to this, I wasn't expecting too much.  But, in places, I really liked it - it blends jazz, soul and funk well and her voice shines through.  However, in other places the blend isn't quite so listenable and her voice just grates.  So, I suspect we're in the same place as we were before - I think I'd agree with Rolling Stone's description of "wildly free, deliciously ambitious" but I guess I just wasn't feeling that wild, free, delicious or ambitious.  At 71 minutes, it feels a bit long - but not as bad as some of the other 70 minute horrors I've had to endure.  I'm also not convinced he lyrics to "Green Eyes" are scientifically accurate - "My eyes are green because I eat a lot of vegetables".

Wikipedia makes the point that this is more accessible than her debut, Baduizm - which, assuming it was the one I'd previously listened to, I would agree with.  However, it was also not so successful either critically or commercially - apparently it is "plagued by a reactionary pseudo-sophistication that too often substitutes good taste for good tunes" (according to Entertainment Weekly, anyway).  Although, if I didn't know better, I'd suggest that's just bollocks.  Her Wikipedia page is quite lengthy and oh-so-serious - she's a very serious person, you know.  So obviously, the first thing I looked for was what stupid names she'd given any other kids she'd had - and you can probable imagine I was enormously pleased to see that little Seven has been followed by Puma and Mars (both girls - OBVIOUSLY!).  I also learned that she and her mother were the subjects of Outkast's hit "I'm Sorry Miss Jackson" after her and André 3000 split up.  Erykah had mixed feelings about the song, but she admits her mum loved it - "Baby, she bought herself a 'Ms. Jackson' license plate. She had the mug, she had the ink pen, she had the headband, everything."

"Customers also listened to" D'Angelo, Jill Scott, Angie Stone and Lauryn Hill - which feel to be in the same part of town to me.  All in all, I mostly didn't mind it but there was enough annoyance there to prevent me returning.

#157 : (What's The Story) Morning Glory - Oasis (1995)

With their second album, the fighting Gallagher brothers embraced their Stones and Beatles comparisons, then went ahead and established themselves as a rock & roll force in their own right with barnburners (“Roll With It”) and epic tunes, like the glorious “Wonderwall.” “The whole of the first album is about escape,” Noel Gallagher told Rolling Stone in 1996, of 1994’s Definitely Maybe. “It’s about getting away from the shitty, boring life of Manchester. The first album is about dreaming of being a pop star in a band. The second album is about actually being a pop star in a band.”

Oh Oasis, what are we going to do with you?  Or more accurately, what to do with the intensely annoying Gallagher brothers? (yes, we get it - you don't like each other).  I know and quite like this album (although I'd have to say it's not one that I revisit often) and I think it's good in places - but it's not nearly as good as both it and they think it is.  The high points - "Wonderwall", "Don't Look Back In Anger" and, at a push, "Champagne Supernova" - are undoubtedly timeless classics, but the rest of it is very same-y guitar noise which gives me a headache before the end of the album.  However, taken in reasonable doses it's very sing-along-able (that's a word, right?) same-y guitar noise.  I have seen Oasis live once and it was VERY karaoke -   don't worry, I've learned my lesson and it won't happen again.

Wikipedia both agrees and disagrees with me - the critical reception at the time was lukewarm, but it's gone on to become regarded by many as a milestone album in British music with the global sales of over 22 million being considered to be a persuasive argument here.  It's the fifth best selling album of all time in the UK (and the third best selling studio album - only 21 and Sergeant Pepper have sold more).  It's also influential because it's considered to have started the loudness war, which is an interesting technical read if such technical things interest you.  As I previously mentioned, the critical response was muted - an amusing comment from one critic noted musical references on the album from Gary Glitter, The Beatles, R.E.M. - and the theme tune from You And Me (although to be honest, I'm not sure it's that good!).   To finish, I'd have to say I find myself very much agreeing with these words from another critic - "What's the Story''s lasting place in '90s folklore is less about the quality of the album, and more about the celebrity status and faux imagery attached to it."

"Customers also listened to" Blur (of course - they always pop up!), The Verve (I wonder if we'll see that album on the list?) and Green Day (not an obvious choice for me).  Overall, I like this album when broken down into digestible chunks but find the whole thing a bit too much and am also annoyed by the, in my opinion, not entirely deserved reputation of greatness.

#156 : Let It Be - The Replacements (1984)

Copping a Beatles title was cheeky; attaching it to a post-punk masterpiece was a sign of maturity. Said Paul Westerberg, “This was the first time I had songs that we arranged, rather than just banging out riffs.” Mixing punk, pop, and country with wry lyrics, his songs describe heroes (the gender-bending couple in “Androgynous”) and villains (an unsanitary dentist in “Tommy Gets His Tonsils Out”; MTV in “Seen Your Video”), and pack in quips about the group’s lack of success (“Fingernails and cigarettes, a lousy dinner”) with swagger and pride. The coup is “Unsatisfied,” a pained howl of unhappiness that forced people to take this ratty band seriously.

Before I started this whole thing, I'd never heard of The Replacements but they've popped up a few times in the "customers also listened to" section - mostly in relation to albums that I've absolutely hated, so I had some reservations about listening to this.  But the kind Mr Hitchins assured me "they've got tunes and everything", so I bravely took the plunge and I'd pleased to announce that they do indeed have "tunes and everything".  I quite liked it - there's some reasonably well constructed songs on here backed up by some instruments making the sounds you feel they're intended to make (which sounds harsh, but has been unfortunately rare on some of its contemporaries).  Having said that, I'm not entirely sure "Gary's Got A Boner" is going to be included in the Library Of Congress archive of recordings of national and historical importance any time soon.  If you're not aware of them I was reminded of The Alarm, Bruce Springsteen and Dookie-era Green Day so if that's your sort of thing you might like it.  It's also a very pleasingly tight 33 minutes - if anything, I would have encouraged them to stick another track or two on.  And how often have I said that over the past 344 albums?

Wikipedia doesn't have an awful lot to say about the album other than giving the impression that this was the first time that they'd actually tried to make a proper album and people quite liked the results.  The band's entry is only slightly more informative, but does include the following amusing summary "Part of the mystique of The Replacements was the fact that the audience never knew until the start of a concert if the band would be sober enough to play" - apparently they were banned from Saturday Night Live after a particularly "impressive" performance.

"Customers also listened to" a load of people I'd never heard of six months ago but I've now learned I don't like.  But as I was warned, The Replacements do indeed have "tunes and everything" and if I remember to listen to this more, I suspect I'd grow to like it.

Another tricky one.  Do I reward the album which I know and like in places, but isn't half as great as it thinks it is - or do I go for the album which I suspect I'd like more, but I've only heard the once?  I considered playing the joker, but again that wouldn't have helped matters in the slightest - so this time I'm going with The Replacements, partly for potential but mostly just to annoy the Gallaghers.

#161-159 - So the winner is the album you liked the least?
#155-153 - One not so scary man vs two properly scary ladies