this is not your 1st album by him of course ?

harvest would be the place to start, i'd have though.

Neil Young is more of a singles artist. Just get a greatest hits compilation (I'm lying)

Id disagree with that, but in reference to what I know about Mitch, you might be correct.

Eh, I think a comp may be the better thing actually. Decade is an excellent package, even if its short on his later career.

congratulations, this is the most retarded thing i have read on the internet all day. and i've been skimming over 4chan and reddit so that's saying a lot man

Some artists release lots of non-album singles? Some artists don't have any albums that stand out on their own but have lots of songs worth attention? Some artists produce so much stuff that it's hard to wade through for the beginner? Plenty of reasons.

and i think you took my dig at you too seriously

what isn't? you made a really dumb sweeping statement regarding artist compilations. what happens in case of artists who have released brilliant material but only on singles and label compilations? what about artists who have recorded material but have never released them due to lack of funds? or what about artists that release material only digitally via mp3/mixes? or what about artists who are so prolific that they release 5-6 albums a year and have a good 40 or so albums in their discography (and sure as heck, no one wants to sit through 40 albums to find 20 good tracks)? or what about artists that have released good material on non-transferable medium (see:cassette tape underground) that has all but perished in this day and age and is begging for someone to compile and remaster them?

i think you know what i'm getting at

because best album of the 1970s:



who cares that it's a greatest hits album? It's a collection of songs on an LP, it's an album. Every song on here is solid gold, and flows as well if not better than their studio albums.

1) you don't have your entire life to get into an artist, because not all artists are immediately accessible and their music lies under a vast array of genres. so listening to a song on youtube gives you only a glimpse into what a song sounds like, but not the artist. also, life is short and there's too much good music out there.

b) youtube doesn't have a shit ton of artists.

2) fair enough. though you could save yourself a ton of money and buy well placed/compiled compilations/boxsets instead of albums. i own heart and soul with the bonus notes, footage, sleeves and sleeves of peter saville's artwork and JD photography. why would i bother buying unknown pleasures and closer now?

- fuck ddd. who cares if you're 'that guy'. listen to things in a way to maximise the efficiency of listening, both in terms of what the artist intended and what you want to get out of it. albums are dying out, you'll be missing out on a lot of music if you just stick to listening to 'albums'

Well it's all songs from 1970ish to 1978. If you listened to an album that took eight years for the artist to complete, would you be upset that you didn't know when they recorded each specific song? Besides, shouldn't the flow of the album mean more than the chronology? EWF has had a 40-year career so far, so isn't it enough to know that the songs were from the first eight years of their career?

Another advantage of that album is that it's the only album that features "Got to Get You Into My Life" and "September," two of the group's best tracks.

this should be it
-http://www.mediafire.com/?bzzintnorza

that's perfect! did they choose that night because of the song, or was it a coincidence and then they realized they had to go with that song?

While I'm pretty meh regarding your other points, they don't really bother me. This one does.

For me, DDD is a means to an end, not the end itself (the discovering and love of music).

Holy shit. I used that Terminals link Dreamcoil posted. That album is fantastic. Nearly every track is pure gold and this is coming from someone who is normally uninterested in indie/alternative music. Wow. Just wow.