Thriller got 4 and that was suposed to be the greatest album ever ..right?


I don't think thriller was the best album ever. I prefer Bad anyway...by the way
[Edited 9/27/09 9:31am]

though i enjoy reading reviews from time to time, i do know that it's one person's opinion. i'll make my own decisions when i hear it. to many, it may be the best album ever. but i wouldn't let it get to you too much.

oh yeah. i've heard that before though, about them never giving a 5 star rating. beats me. i think billboard magazine gave decent reviews. no star ratings. and they seemed pretty fair.

i think they do it pretty often, there has been a joke going on that whenever Dylan puts out a record its a given that he gets five stars, or Springsteen etc... But i think they have done it quite alot, im more concerned when they give a John Mellencamp album 3 stars and then the new Vanessa Hudgens four stars?? i mean, shes hot but thats not what the stars are rating, or is it?

.. is the last time I remember them awarding an album five stars.

Oh wait! And this one too!

L0tusFl0w3r said:

They gave 5 stars later. They also gave 3 stars to nevermind.

i like reading reviews. but i think the problem is that they are usually written at the time of release. there are albums thatlove right off the bat on the first few listens and might rave about them for a couple of weeks and then go back and hear them again (or not at all) and i'm kinda about them. or even hate them. getting caught up in the freshness of a new release from someone i'm really into or whatever, and then getting over it pretty quickly.

on the other hand, there are albums that leave me completely nonplussed on the first couple of listens and then days, weeks, months, years, even decades later, might end up being one of my all-time favorites.

reviews for new music are really only useful as a snapshot of one person's opinion about an album after hearing it 2 or 3 times when it's brand new.

Critics are barraged with new releases and requests for reviews, they do not even listen to full tracks, they get a lyric sheet, a bio of the recording, players,producers,writers on the cd, and then they play about a minute of each song, they do not sit there and digest an album start to finish. So for the most part, good or bad its hard to put stock in someones view of snippets

L0tusFl0w3r said:

No. Thriller was the greatest SELLING album of all time. Don't confuse it.

L0tusFl0w3r said:

My fav. review ever on thriller was the one that said the album was going to be a flop.

According to this site, these are the albums that rolling stone has alloted five star reviews this decade. I don't know that this is completely accurate, but it seems right.

Two of the albums listed are reissues of 80s-era records, and one is based on material written in the 60s.

2008-03-28 – Added ALBUM: Let It Be; ARTIST: The Replacements.
2008-03-28 – Added ALBUM: Smile; ARTIST: Brian Wilson.
2008-02-15 – Added ALBUM: Thriller 25 Deluxe Edition; ARTIST: Michael Jackson.
2008-02-15 – Added ALBUM: Magic; ARTIST: Bruce Springsteen.
2007-02-16 – Added ALBUM: Modern Times; ARTIST: Bob Dylan.
2005-08-31 – Added ALBUM: Late Registration; ARTIST: Kanye West.

ernestsewell said:

L0tusFl0w3r said:

'THriller' is not 'The Greatest Album Ever.'
How do people confuse sales with quality?
Selling more, doesn't make it any better than an album that didn't sell. Just more popular.
I guess 'Titanic' must be the Greatest Movie Ever Made?

I know Dangerous got 4.5 stars on Rolling Stone.

recently i remember U2's No Line On The Horizon.

Rolling Stone can go to hell in burnin' drawrs if they gave Paris Hilton's album 4/5 stars, you know they're helpless

Harlepolis said:

Rolling Stone should be called Rolling Tiger Beat.

Tortilla said:

one of my favorit albums ever, by any artist

P2daP said:

That's when it first came out, it wasn't even suppose to outsell OTW which at the time was the best selling ablum by a black artist. Talk about getting it very wrong.