Another list is wrong

I just get excited every time I see that some media outlet has come up with a list of the all-time top hundred (or ten or forty or whatever) list of pretty much anything. Lists are what I'm all about.

This time the list comes from Time magazine and collects the top hundred albums of all time. Thankfully, the list isn't in order. Those lists are always a disaster.

My thoughts...

• Four of the finest albums of the 2000s come from long dead artists: Hank Williams, Sam Cooke, Elvis, and Muddy Waters. Seems a little odd to me as I think there have been some outstanding albums this decade so far. Why do we have to flash back thirty or more years to find the good stuff.
• I hate the ideas of words of Eminem, but his Marshall Mathers LP really is outstanding.
• Time Out of Mind by Dylan isn't all that great. It's a good album, sure, but one of the 100 greatest of all time? I doubt that.
• I don't get Achtung Baby. It certainly belongs in the hall of very good albums, but I don't get the "greatest of all time" gig there.
• Again with the flashbacks in the 90s: Wlvis, James Brown, Phil Spector all make the list in the 90s.
• Good to see that Paul's Boutique is in from the 80s. It's the greatest thing that one of my couple favorite groups have ever done. Outstanding album.
• Two Prince albums show what phenomenal highlights he had: Purple Rain and Sign O' The Times.
• I love London Calling but hate, can't stand Rumours or Hotel California.
• Five of the top hundred are Beatles albums? Three are Dylan albums? Two Van Morrison? Two Bowies? Two Sinatras?
• Appretite for Destruction got absolutely ripped.