5 Stars In Rolling Stone

[i_hate_avril]

I just got the new Rolling Stone yesterday with Ray Charles on the cover, and they gave the new CD 5 stars, which I have only seen 4 times (outside the "Greatest Albums Of All Time" segment) since I began reading the magazine about 5 years ago (Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, Beck, and Beasties).

[mat_payne]

I'm really getting into the new album, but is it really a 5 star album?

[i_hate_avril]

I was expecting the album to recieve 4 stars, but the more that I listen to it the more I agree that it's a 5 star album. I think that it's right up there with Paul's Botique, which, on a side note, was reviewed in RS's "Greatest Albums Of All Time" segment this year, also getting 5 stars. I will probably end up holding Burrows up there with my favorite albums.

[mat_payne]

I remember when Pauls came out, it got so slagged off and didn't shift too many units at the time. Now it gets held up as 'genius' Was it ahead of its time? I'd think, as the Beasties popularity wasn't in vogue then, and it became so later. It was the 'cool' thing to say people thought the album was great at a later date...

Anyway, Pauls is a great album.

Also when Hello Nasty came out, I wasn't that keen either.

But the new one isn't 5 star in my opinion... But thats just my opinion. I read a review in the Metro newspaper here in the UK which also gave it 5 stars too. I'll try and get a copy and post it on here for all you non UKers...

[zoejones]

I usually agree with Rolling Stone's reviews, with a few exceptions, and I do think in a few weeks I will think this album is 5 stars (right now I'd say 4), Rolling Stone does tend to rate albums using more than just the music. The politics might also have played a part. The timing was very good for the messages on the album and that probably stood out for the people working at Rolling Stone.

Or maybe the album just really is a 5 star album.

[3stooges]

to give PB 4 stars and this one 5 is lame. this album is nowhere near as good. I give it 3 stars. rolling stone is fucking retarded

and looking back, me and my friends all thought PB was brilliant from the very beginning. the amazing thing is that it's still brilliant today ! it will always be.

the new album is good, but it aint no paul's boutique. it just ain't

[bgirl1929]

I was glad for the five stars but the review was cheesy. Hope they're on the next cover!

[Cap'n Crunch]

TT5B is a 5 Star album...what's there not to like? Maybe some of you just don't like rap..I dunno.

[seurat]

The review is right on. To take old school rap, with new school production, infuse socially and politically divisive issues, while maintaining your trademark humor and lyrical genius, without the bling, guns and bitches, and still make a top notch, top selling album, is very impressive. This is one of the most catchy, creative, and meaningful albums they have put out, if not in the entire hip hop industry. To get a 5 star rating, you have to show another side and versatility other groups or artists haven't. Too many pump out album after album of nothing but the same shit. There's no true gowth in their work. A classic rating doesnt come with the footnote everyone loves the album, only that the work stands out where others have not been, or failed trying.

[i_hate_avril]

Yeah you're right I think...

[BeastieBau]

Originally Posted by seurat

The review is right on. To take old school rap, with new school production, infuse socially and politically divisive issues, while maintaining your trademark humor and lyrical genius, without the bling, guns and bitches, and still make a top notch, top selling album, is very impressive. This is one of the most catchy, creative, and meaningful albums they have put out, if not in the entire hip hop industry. To get a 5 star rating, you have to show another side and versatility other groups or artists haven't. Too many pump out album after album of nothing but the same shit. There's no true gowth in their work. A classic rating doesnt come with the footnote everyone loves the album, only that the work stands out where others have not been, or failed trying.

Nicely put, I couldn't agree more.

[Cap'n Crunch]

There's a new album out?

[ggirlballa]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Crunch

There's a new album out?

this thread is from 2004 when TT5B came out...

reading this thread i'm mildly surprised TT5B got 5 stars....its a sucky to decent album on b-boy standards but a great album compared to the mainstream rap that came out in 04' & now

[dave790]

Originally Posted by 3stooges

to give PB 4 stars and this one 5 is lame. this album is nowhere near as good. I give it 3 stars. rolling stone is fucking retarded

and looking back, me and my friends all thought PB was brilliant from the very beginning. the amazing thing is that it's still brilliant today ! it will always be.

the new album is good, but it aint no paul's boutique. it just ain't

it's not meant to be.

that review, and the NME one (which gave 8/10), for me were absolutely spot on. those reviewers got TT5B, and for me the RS one fully justifies the 5-stars. which were richly deserved in my opnion. for me, nothing touched TT5B in 2004. we're not in 1989, different times mate.

edit: and seurat put it nicely. i don't think anyone else could have made that album.

[madchild]

pauls boutique definitely deserved 5 stars. TT5B did not. enough said. the production was weak. and by weak i mean they sound like they were produced on a fifty dollar casio keyboard. the lyrics sucked dog nuts. its' pretty bad when mca is spitting rhymes about cheese and mike d is talking about mr. belvadere. that's the type of shit that makes legends like biggie roll over in his grave.

[Laver1969]

Originally Posted by madchild

pauls boutique definitely deserved 5 stars.

I think PB did get 5 stars. I have the RS issue, i should dig it out.

[ggirlballa]

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...the_5_boroughs

to the 5 boroughs got 5 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...pauls_boutique

paul's boutique got 4 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...icensed_to_ill

licensed to ill got 3 1/2 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/..._communication

ill communication got 4 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...heck_your_head

check your head got 3 1/2 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...16/hello_nasty

hello nasty got 4 stars


interesting huh?

[paulb]

Originally Posted by ggirlballa

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...the_5_boroughs

to the 5 boroughs got 5 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...pauls_boutique

paul's boutique got 4 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...icensed_to_ill

licensed to ill got 3 1/2 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/..._communication

ill communication got 4 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...heck_your_head

check your head got 3 1/2 stars

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/...16/hello_nasty

hello nasty got 4 stars


interesting huh?

thanks for that...that is pretty interesting. I love TT5B, i dont think its 5 stars, but definitly 4 or 4.5

PB should be 5 stars. and CYH is waaaay underrated. 5 stars too. HN and IC i think are rated finely.

[canucklehead200]

TT5B is at absolute most a 3.5 star album i'm shocked that RS gave it 5 stars, that's absolutely ludicrous, as much as i love the boys

[EastcoastJL]

You have to take into consideration that each album was reviewed by a different person. You also have to consider what was going on in the music scene at the time. When LTI came out in 87 "hair metal" was still big. Check Your Head is a favorite amongst many fans, but A LOT of good stuff came out in '92, like a little band called Nirvana. That could've very well influenced the reviewers.

[gorilla]

Can't take Rolling Stone seriously anymore after rating tt5b a five star album.
it's so not.