The Official 'Classic Album' Discussion Thread

[360dagod]

I think the standard has to be lower the more recent the album gets because people's opinions are more settled on older albums and it's less controversial to say a 90's album is classic versus a 00's or '10s album.

Like at 80 or 90% the most recent albums you'll get being called classics on The Coli are Late Registration/Carter 2/Food & Liquor. Nothing after that will meet the threshold.

If you can get 60% of The Coli to say that a 2010's album is classic, it probably is.

Pre 2000 - 90%
2001-2005 - 80%
2006-2010 - 70%
2011 on - 60%

i've seen quite a few thug motivation mentions in here...not that i agree/disagree..

but nikkaz push that thug motivation 101 hard

 

[Scoop]

Em might have the lowest replay value and influence of anyone who is considered in the top tier category......

Well with Em you're going to have the militants look at his skin color and be like "nope, never had influence."

The Eminem Show can be ran straight through no issues today.

 

[Scoop]

We can't drop standards because then we are devaluing the word. If it's only 3 albums, so be it. That's the true mark of an elite album.

Plus, we're only going up to 2001 at this point, as we've agreed an album needs about 15 years to determine its true status to see whether it really stands the test of time.

I understand that. It's just you're going to be missing at least 1/3 of hip hop's history in your list. No one is going to agree on anything after ~2005.

75% is too low for 90's albums.

 

[Inspect Her Deck]

@Scoop

well shall I stick with 90% then?

I mean you say about not agreeing but maybe perhaps that's because the standard itself has dropped since then, it is no coincidence. Plus I think what people argue about now won't be an argument when the albums turn 15 years old or more, so if they really are cemented as classics, it'll show. I don't think it's a decade bias but rather we are entering an era now where we can finally look at the entire 90s decade and decide what is classic or not. In about 10 years we can look at the 2000s in their entirety and so on.

 

[Scoop]

i've seen quite a few thug motivation mentions in here...not that i agree/disagree..

but nikkaz push that thug motivation 101 hard

101 had classic songs but yeah it's def not a classic album.

 

[Scoop]

@Scoop

well shall I stick with 90% then?

I mean you say about not agreeing but maybe perhaps that's because the standard itself has dropped since then, it is no coincidence. Plus I think what people argue about now won't be an argument when the albums turn 15 years old or more, so if they really are cemented as classics, it'll show. I don't think it's a decade bias but rather we are entering an era now where we can finally look at the entire 90s decade and decide what is classic or not. In about 10 years we can look at the 2000s in their entirety and so on.

Well right that's why I proposed a changing scale to compensate for that.

Pre 2000 - 90%
2001-2005 - 80%
2006-2010 - 70%
2011 on - 60%

If you can get 60% of The Coli to say that a 2010's album is classic, it probably is.

 

[Inspect Her Deck]

Well right that's why I proposed a changing scale to compensate for that.

Pre 2000 - 90%
2001-2005 - 80%
2006-2010 - 70%
2011 on - 60%

If you can get 60% of The Coli to say that a 2010's album is classic, it probably is.

Oh I see what you mean my bad lol. I was kinda looking at it as a leniency thing but in reality you're accounting for how people on here will react because of the stigma of newer albums being inherently worse.

Ok I like the idea.

But that being said, I'm going up to 2001 on the basis that we've decided that an album needs to stand the test of time to be deemed a classic, and that arbitrary number selected was 15 years. If you wanna discuss the years count, by all means, but so far it's 15.

I'm personally happy with 10 but nothing before that.

 

[JayBaldacci]

Well with Em you're going to have the militants look at his skin color and be like "nope, never had influence."

The Eminem Show can be ran straight through no issues today.

really? you like those eminem beats?

 

[wingstop]

Well with Em you're going to have the militants look at his skin color and be like "nope, never had influence."

The Eminem Show can be ran straight through no issues today.

that production and then there is a good amount of skippable tracks, easily not as good as his first two albums

 

[Scoop]

really? you like those eminem beats?

Overall I don't like Em as a producer but he did well on TES

 

[Scoop]

that production and then there is a good amount of skippable tracks, easily not as good as his first two albums

All I skip are the skits

 

[Inspect Her Deck]

Ok guys and another thing I need to reach realistically since i'm new to the forums I won't be as aware.

How many peoples' votes should I consider for each artist before I add albums to my list? I was thinking 40 but I only have 11 so far lol...at this rate we might be finished in 5 years!

 

[mortuus est]

a classic can be personal too

 

[RichForever]

This is a great framework to consider the definition of "classic" for me although I don't necessarily agree with all points.
- high quality music for me is probably the most important aspect of defining a classic album, but not only that but I believe that at the very least most classic albums in my mind have at least one track that transcends the era, defines a certain point in time for hip hop, etc. I understand that this isn't always the case as less well-known artists may not have had the push of say a Nas, Biggie, Jay-Z and and might not have the same degree of recognition on a mainstream stage.
- On another note, I don't think albums need to be "perfect" in order to be considered classic either. Ready to Die has "Friend of Mine" which I hate, yet I wouldn't say it takes the classic stamp away from that album.

- similar opinions with regards to points 2 and 4. I think that some albums have also been deemed classics not necessarily strictly based on the quality of the music, but also for the simple fact that sales, success on the charts (singles), etc, but they are classics nonetheless. (e.g. Get Rich or Die Tryin', etc)

The one area that I think things get overstated is with the idea of cohesion. What makes an album cohesive "thematically cohesive vs. sonically cohesive"?

- For instance, Illmatic for me sounds like a collection of random songs, but I don't think that keeps it from being classic.
- Does having the same producer on the entire album provide sonic cohesion? Does making an entire album about a certain topic make it thematically cohesive?
- Do we overlook lower-quality tracks because they fit into the theme of an album?

In summary, I think there are classics that are labeled so because of the quality of the music, the amount of success that they had, or some combination of both.

1) I agree that an album doesn't need to necessarily be flawless to be classic. I was merely saying that generally an album I consider classic shouldn't have a bunch of skippable tracks or songs that don't really belong on the album. I can overlook one weak or out of place song.

2) Thematically cohesive meaning: Do the songs have a general theme or similar lyrical content?

Example: I'd expect a mafioso rap album to generally have themes and lyrical content about typical mafioso rap topics.

I'd say thematic cohesion is especially important in concept albums.

Sonically cohesive meaning: Do the songs have generally similar sound?

This generally has more to do with the production and what sound the album is going for. If the album is something really dark and hardcore like The Infamous, it should generally have some dark and grimy instrumentation/beats behind it.

Having the same producer would generally help with sonic cohesion. It helps give a uniform sound to an album. I'd imagine it would be hard to create a uniform with 5-6 different producers.

I'd say yes that. Making an album with a particular concept/topic and sticking to it helps add thematic cohesion.

And to the last question: yes and no. For me it would depend on how “low quality” we're talking about. If it's album that's a bunch of 9s and 10s, and one track happens to be 7 or even a 6 and it fits with the theme, I could overlook that, but obviously I couldn't forgive something that was unequivocally trash just because it happens to fit in with the rest of the songs theme-wise.

One thing that I should add in when talking about cohesion is sequencing. Sequencing is an important thing that I think gets overlooked by a lot of fans. Good sequencing can transform a bunch a random songs into a cohesive piece. Cohesion makes an album seamless. Which is a good thing.

 

[BlackMamba824]

1) I agree that an album doesn't need to necessarily be flawless to be classic. I was merely saying that generally an album I consider classic shouldn't have a bunch of skippable tracks or songs that don't really belong on the album. I can overlook one weak or out of place song.

2) Thematically cohesive meaning: Do the songs have a general theme or similar lyrical content?

Example: I'd expect a mafioso rap album to generally have themes and lyrical content about typical mafioso rap topics.

I'd say thematic cohesion is especially important in concept albums.

Sonically cohesive meaning: Do the songs have generally similar sound?

This generally has more to do with the production and what sound the album is going for. If the album is something really dark and hardcore like The Infamous, it should generally have some dark and grimy instrumentation/beats behind it.

Having the same producer would generally help with sonic cohesion. It helps give a uniform sound to an album. I'd imagine it would be hard to create a uniform with 5-6 different producers.

I'd say yes that. Making an album with a particular concept/topic and sticking to it helps add thematic cohesion.

And to the last question: yes and no. For me it would depend on how “low quality” we're talking about. If it's album that's a bunch of 9s and 10s, and one track happens to be 7 or even a 6 and it fits with the theme, I could overlook that, but obviously I couldn't forgive something that was unequivocally trash just because it happens to fit in with the rest of the songs theme-wise.

One thing that I should add in when talking about cohesion is sequencing. Sequencing is an important thing that I think gets overlooked by a lot of fans. Good sequencing can transform a bunch a random songs into a cohesive piece. Cohesion makes an album seamless. Which is a good thing.

Cool. Makes sense. Would you say that there are any albums that have high-quality tracks that aren't necessarily cohesive that others award the classic label that you might not?