Key To Music Grades

A - You will never be whole without it
B - Highly recommended
C - Flawed, but still pretty good
D - It's your money, not mine
F - Why couldn't this have been burned in Fahrenheit 451?

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

AC/DC - Back In Black (1980)












I'm listening to this album right now. The crunchy tones, the gritty vocals, the oomph that makes an Oompa Loompa bounce. I mean, is "Hells Bells" not one of the greatest openings to an album ever? Mourning aside, these guys said bon voyage to Bon Scott and hello to Mr. Johnson, and then some. Ok, I'm being crass now. Perhaps my reasoning arises from a sincere inability to express everything all the time, but I must say, if you don't own this album, you mustn't give a fupenny tuck for straight-up rock & roll. "Hells Bells," "Shoot To Thrill," "You Shook Me All Night Long" and "Back In Black" are all radio staples, but they're also ridiculously good, no matter how often you hear them. Yet, four great and amazing songs don't make a great and amazing album, although it is better than the bait-and-shit single tactics record companies use now to get you to recoup losses on egregious bands. Instead, with AC/DC, we are treated to all of the songs having been done extremely well. Nice! And have you given the dog a bone lately? He deserves one, assuredly. Definitely not noise pollution. Definitely not for the background. Listen and relish oh my brothers and sisters, and all that cal. A-

4 comments:

Jon Talisman said...

Give your dog a good bone every day and it will likely never roam. ;-)

AC/DC News

bob_vinyl said...

Now I know you love to slaughter sacred cows and for the life of me, I can't figure out why this isn't one of them. While AC/DC was never much better than a bar band, at least with Bon Scott they had the swagger to be a good bar band. On Back in Black, they replace Scott with Brian Johnson (what do you call a singer who can't sing?) and he doesn't have any of the magnetism. On top of that, they become slick and commercial. When Metallica did the same thing, you ate them alive, but AC/DC, a band nowhere near as good as Metallica, gets a pass? I don't understand. This is probably the most overrated record that wasn't recorded by the Rolling Stones.

The Mad Hatter said...

You know what Bob -- you're right. Except I didn't listen to reason and bought the overrated Jag anyway. I don't think these guys did anything worthwhile after this, but for some reason, in my no-room-for-schtick brain, this fits in there nicely. Call me weak, or occasionally indulgent -- or worse -- poppy, but I really like this album. I think they tried to reproduce it over and over again like ZZ Top did with Eliminator and failed miserably, but I still like it. Granted, the Bon Scott era was much better musically. And no, I don't see Load and Reload as equivalent in quality to what AC/DC did with Back In Black -- maybe in spirit, but definitely not in output. E-mail me a list of your sacred cows and I'm bound to abhor one and I'll make it up to you, okay?

Master Cianan said...

Good or bad, Bon Scott or no, (and I do like Bon Scott) This is just a solid record. Even shake a leg is good, whatever that song's about.
"double dipped skin flicks tricky dick's on the chemistry"? Rad.