A list of reviews I’ve written about music released originally in 1982, the year I turned 1.
1. Lenny Breau: Live at Bourbon St. (10/10)
This is about as good as it gets for jazz guitar. Though it is fairly traditional (as opposed to anything free) given the era, that doesn’t matter as Breau’s technique is just absolutely amazing. He conquers both fairly traditional ballads and some relatively recent and more forward thinking (’60s) material. He manages to make it sound all of a piece, while constantly amazing with his abilities (like when he plays chords and lead at the same time). Young is no slouch either. Definitely one of the best jazz guitar albums I have ever heard.
1. The Dream Syndicate: The Days of Wine and Roses (10/10)
Yes, they rip off the Velvets. But in the ’80s people needed to do that. This album rules.
1. Glenn Gould: The Goldberg Variations by JS Bach (10/10)
Yes, again. The slight differences force you to think about the first version, and about adaptations in general (like the first version did). I mean, should we treat all these classical composers as so sacred you can’t alter their music? How can we even perform this music as they would have? Isn’t the truly musical thing to be inspired by them, to use them as a basis for further new music, as Gould does?
1. Sofia Gubaidulina: Sieben Worte (10/10)
“Seven Words” is, I think, one of the landmark chamber pieces of the 1980s. The piece manages to encompass multiple recent trends in music – touching on ‘Holy Minimalism’, other drone-oriented music and Gubaidulina’s own tradition, which seems vaguely “sonoristic”, and more traditional forms, all while using an accordion! And despite its semi-radical nature, it manages to be so emotionally resonant (in a way that so few avant garde pieces are). I have never heard anything like it. Amazing.
1. Mission of Burma: Vs. (10/10)
Somewhere in the mists of time, I wrote the following:
This is definitely a little overrated. I’ve heard about this band way too much to avoid preconceptions. The most shocking thing for me is how not particularly noisy they are. I mean they are noisy, but they are noisy in a contextual way only. I had heard so much about how loud they were I sort of imagined they were louder.
They are also far more post-punky than I had heard. I really don’t know where I got this information but I had these preconceptions.
So this is very solid and relatively loud American post-punk. I’m not sure it’s quite as important as everyone seems to think it is, as lots of bands were doing a slightly more jittery slightly less noisy thing in Britain at the time (and slightly earlier). And the Feelies were doing a much more jittery, far less noisy thing just down the interstate.
Anyway, I like it and I get its role in the 80s, but I can’t say that I’m blown away as yet.
That was flat out wrong. This record, and the EP that preceded it, are basically the invention of Alternative Rock, along with the Dream Syndicate and, to an extent, REM. This album is the point where post punk stopped being something recognizable as “punk mixed with some other stuff” and turned into the thing we know as alternative. It’s impossible to overstate this record’s importance.
6. Kate Bush: The Dreaming (10/10)
Probably the best “art pop” album of its era, if you can call this pop. Read the review.
7. Iron Maiden: The Number of the Beast (9/10)
The most Iron Maiden of Iron Maiden albums, this is practically a greatest hits collection. Unlike their first two albums, this feels a little more mature or developed, though it’s also less novel sounding.
Still, I feel like this is probably the band’s strongest album, even if they are merely perfecting their formula here, rather than inventing it.
9/10 because it’s probably their most essential, seminal record, even if they’re doing their thing at this point.
8. Album: Generic Flipper (9/10)
Even if you’ve listened a fair amount of hardcore, the sheer noisiness of this record likely comes as a shock. At this point in my life I have heard this record 8-10 times and it’s still noisy to my ears. Something about slowing down hardcore makes it sound worse somehow. And, believe me, this is one of the poorest sounding records you’re ever going to hear. It tests your commitment to DIY and to amateurism as art.
But the lyrics are pretty good compared to the sound of the music. And that sound is nothing if not deliberate (they are really committed to sounding awful). And “Sex Bomb” is a true classic.
More about the sound: this album probably helped invent grunge and sludge metal (and anything else that prizes slowness and noise at the same time). Its influence is kind of incalculable.
9. The Fall: Hex Enduction Hour (9/10)
There is so much post punk that sounds like other post punk (specifically, like Joy Division) that it can get exhausting. The Fall are one of the few British post punk bands to have charted a truly unique course. This is the earliest record of theirs I’ve heard and so, as far as I’m concerned, it’s probably their essential statement.
Krautrock plus punk seems so obvious once you hear The Fall (especially if you’ve heard Neu!) that you wonder why someone didn’t think of it before. The repetitive nature of the genre feels tailor-made to the kind of grand sociopolitical statements punks (and Mark E. Smith in particular) want to make.
The Fall very much created their own niche, and though I am partial to This Nation’s Saving Grace because I have heard it way more times, this feels about as coherent an expression of their particular, original sound as anything of theirs I’ve heard.
10. Angry Samoans: Back from Samoa (9/10)
Maybe this is too high for this record, the only virtue of which is offensiveness, but I suspect it’s a landmark. Read the review.
11. Prince: 1999 (8/10)
Maybe 8/10 is too low. Prince likes different music than I do, but his amalgam is incredible. Read the review.
12. Elvis Costello and the Attractions: Imperial Bedroom (8/10)
Though I haven’t heard the couple previous albums to this one, this still feels like a pretty big stylistic left turn for Costello. The production and arrangements are both noticeably different from the first Attractions record (or his first few solo albums). It’s a brave move (if it is indeed a move) as he could easily have just put out a new set of songs without deliberate messing with his style.
I quite like this – I might like this the most of his early records – and appreciate the risk. Good set of songs, interesting arrangements.
13. Bruce Springsteen: Nebraska (8/10)
Somewhere in the mists of time, I wrote the following:
This is the only Springsteen album that really stands up to any of the hype. Springsteen has got to be one of the most overrated figures in rock music. I once listened to an interview where a critic said Springsteen single-handedly saved rock. This reviewer apparently was still stuck in the boomer generation and had never heard of punk. But that’s just one man’s opinion and another story altogether.
Here on Nebraska, he strips all that ridiculous extra stuff that had made his past albums sound orchestrated and gets straight to the songs. Now, I think there are far better songwriters in rock music than Springsteen, but this is his best collection. Every one is pretty decent to quite good; there are no songs that you skip over because they suck.
To me, this is how Springsteen’s songs should sound: it should be him and a guitar, with the occasional overdub where appropriate. His music recalls an earlier, supposedly simpler era and it should reflect that. As for the lyrics, on Nebraska they are very much concerned with the average person, and his/her lot in 70s America. To load these up with the same kind of overproduction as his previous albums would take away much of the meaning.
Anyway, the hooks are good, the lyrics are fine (though really not that exceptional), and he really does sound better singing into this tape recorder. In my opinion (though I’m sure all Springsteen fans will disagree) this is the only relevant album he ever made. And it’s the only one worth having.
So, that is harsh but I don’t know that it’s wrong. I have tried and tried to listen to The Boss and I find I come up against the same thing over and over again: Springsteen is a good songwriter (I don’t know that he’s one of the greats) but his instincts often give the worst of him, in terms of his sound. Nebraska is the only record I’ve heard of his where he doesn’t indulge his worst instincts as an arranger/producer.
I like these songs. They are good songs. Springsteen is a great storyteller and he likes to tell easily understood stories about the average person. This is why he’s so damn popular.
But my idea of great songwriting is not stories about regular people. That can be great – Springsteen has some great songs, including a few of these – but the truly great songwriters tell stories that aren’t just strict narratives, they get at you in other ways as well. Springsteen is a narrative storyteller pretty much entirely and rarely uses anything like the kind of complicated wordplay that Dylan made available. And I guess that’s why Springsteen’s songs have never completely won me over – he doesn’t speak to me like Neil Young does (or any number of other songwriters then and since) and he doesn’t advance the craft, rather he just works on his style and perfects it. For me to consider Springsteen an All Time Great, he would have to do something more than he does (or I’ve heard him do).
One other thing I’d like to address: I read a critic who claimed that Nebraska was one of the riskiest moves ever undertaken by a major artist. This is yet another (likely boomer) critic indicating his utter lack of listening breadth while extolling The Boss. Just listen to Kate Bush’s The Dreaming for just one example from 1982 of a major artist taking a much bigger risk. There are likely a legion of other examples not from 1982. Honestly, I probably wouldn’t struggle with Springsteen so much if I hadn’t been brought up in a society that decided he was The Greatest of All Time.
14. Siouxsie and the Banshees: A Kiss from the Dreamhouse (8/10)
It’s not JuJu, but it’s still pretty good. Read the review.
15. Raven: Wiped Out (8/10)
Imagine a faster, louder Judas Priest, or a faster Maiden with a little more diversity to their sound – if, say, Maiden’s sound were more rooted in earlier metal. That’s what Raven sounds like to me and it’s awesome.
I hear that their first record is the best one and so now I really want to listen to that one. But this is great stuff, before this kind of thing became an awful cliche.
16. The Cure: Pornography (8/10)
I did not enjoy Faith, this record’s predecessor and the first Cure album I ever heard outside of their singles collections. I found it lacking in songs and seemingly caught between two disparate impulses. And from the get-go, the reassuring thing about Pornography is that it is absolutely not Faith. It barely sounds like the same band.
Everything here is longer, weirder and more willfully obtuse. When you read about this time period in the band’s history, they talk about how they thought they were breaking up, and you can really hear the general lack of fucks given in the music, which seems to be made entirely for themselves. (I don’t actually mean that as a criticism.)
This is one of those records that takes a lot of time for you to get into it: the melodies are not as typically catchy as Smith’s catchiest songs, and the production is super dense. And I’m not sure I’m there yet in terms of really loving it. But I appreciate it on an aesthetic level as a sort of emotional nadir on record. Even if I don’t really remember the songs when I’m done (except “Hanging Garden,” which I’ve heard many times), I feel like they did a pretty great job of conveying their general sense of ennui and despair.
17. King Crimson: Beat (8/10)
Beat really does feel like a retread of Discipline to me. I don’t quite mean that as a criticism as nobody else was making music like this at the time and it’s still very, very well performed, but it sort of feels like Discipline 2. 70s Crimson gets you used to the idea that every record will be different.
I still like this a lot, it just feels like it’s not quite breaking new ground.
18. Dead Kennedys: Plastic Surgery Disasters (8/10)
Too similar to their debut for me to rate higher. Read the review.
19. Mauricio Kagel: Furst Igor Strawinsky (8/10)
I do not know Stravinsky as well as I should. So I have a hard time judging this requiem for him as a tribute to him, as opposed to just a requiem. It certainly has the weirdest opening of any requiem I’ve ever heard, starting with knocks on what sounds like wood. It gets much more requiem-like about a minute 40 into the piece, when there is a mournful vocal on top of the knocks and some reeds, which almost always sound mournful. My guess that there are some quotes of his music, but I honestly have no idea. It’s probably the most radical requiem I’ve ever heard but it’s still successful, I think. It’s not goofy like some of his other pieces, much more sombre.
20. The Birthday Party: Junkyard (8/10)
Junkyard is arguably every bit as loud, violent and theatrical as its predecessor. It is, perhaps, slightly more rooted in blues than Prayers on Fire but, beyond that, it’s pretty much equally unconventional. As fans of Cave and the Bad Seeds will discover, this band is much, much worse (in a good way).
But I think Prayers on Fire has the strong set of songs and the novelty of that record – the novel combination of punk with cabaret, blues and other influences not typically found in post punk – is no longer novel.
This is still excellent post punk, it’s just not quite as trailblazing as its predecessor. It’s easy, in hindsight, to see why they moved on to something else.
21. Andy Summers and Robert Fripp: I Advance Masked (8/10)
22. Bad Brains (8/10)
23. Joe Jackson: Night and Day (8/10)
I found myself being pleasantly surprised by Joe Jackson, a man I knew nothing about aside from “Is she really going out with him?”
Not only is Jackson a witty songwriter – I certainly had no idea he had such comedic/satirical lyrics (though some of those lyrics haven’t dated well) – but I love how out of step with the era the arrangements are. Synthesizers are used sparingly and mostly the album is based in a heavily percussive, piano-dominated sound..
I like this and it makes me want to listen to other records.
24. Chrome: 3rd from the Sun (8/10)
My first exposure to Chrome; I’m surprised how melodic it is, as I was expecting a lot more of the noise side of things, though I guess that’s a different era of the band. There’s a strong krautrock influence filtered through an almost gothic sensibility. (Others have said “doomy,” which also feels appropriate, though I guess that would be “proto doom.”) A number of the instruments are a little too treated for me, and I think that’s the barrier I find between seeing this as interesting music and classic. If the production had dated better, I might be a little more into it than I am.
I don’t mean to put it down as this is a unique approach to post punk that I haven’t been exposed to much. And the connections between this and later “industrial” music feel a little bit more obvious than some of the more extreme industrial of the era. (This is actually rock music, not just noise.)
I would like it more (rather than just respecting it) with less of-its-time production.
25. Thomas Dolby: The Golden Age of Wireless (8/10)
I kind of dreaded listening to this record; I don’t love “She Blinded Me with Science” and always thought it was a gimmicky novelty number. So maybe it’s because my expectations were so damn low as to why I really like this.
Yes, Dolby is derivative. If Bowie had decided to go New Wave he might have sounded like a more interesting version of this music. But Dolby doesn’t just imitate Bowie – he imitates Devo (as every second wave New Wave artist does) and he really imitates David Bryne’s delivery a couple of times.
But despite how derivative this record should feel, it doesn’t feed that way to me. One reason is the strength of the songs: the songs are surprisingly good (no hit single on the original UK edition by the way, as usual) and nowhere near as goofy as I was expecting. And Dolby’s lyrics are fine, which was a huge relief.
This really is one of those “don’t judge the record by its hit single” records.
26. Richard Thompson, Linda Thompson: Shoot Out the Lights (8/10)
Everything I read tells me this is the best album Richard Thompson made with his wife Linda. Perhaps that’s why it’s taking a while for this one to sink in.
Perhaps it’s because I like I Want to See the Bright Lights at Night so much that I’m just annoyed that this isn’t part 6 of that record. I don’t know.
The songs are strong and the production is thankfully mostly free of any signs that it was recorded in 1982.
I find it hard to understand how a woman could sing songs her husband wrote about their marriage, but I’m a writer myself and would never accept another’s interpretation as my own. Maybe people who do not write, do not write much or feel they cannot write (for whatever reason) are okay singing lyrics written about their life by someone else.
Anyway, this is good! I just hope I can listen to it more so I can appreciate it more.
Is this a pre-breakup album? I haven’t confirmed whether or not they split personally as well as professionally after this record.
27. Roxy Music: Avalon (8/10)
I prefer the original, bonkers Roxy Music. That’s much more my cup of tea. In fact, you might say I love that version of the band. And so I was expecting to hate this, without really knowing what it sounded like.
But Ferry is such a good songwriter and singer that this already starts out ahead of much synthpop (if it can be called that). Additionally, the remaining members of the original band, though completely reigned in here, remain extremely good musicians. Though they are very much “tasteful” here, which is not something I’m familiar with from either Manzanera or Mackay, their contributions elevate this above standard synthpop as well. (As do the army of session musicians recruited to make this sound like a real band and not just a Ferry solo album.)
I can’t say that I like it – it’s not my thing at all. But I think it’s quite good in spite of it not being my thing and I don’t see any reason to criticize it save for the fact that I will likely never listen to it again because I would just rather listen to the batshit crazy early 70s Roxy.
28. The Psychedelic Furs: Forever Now (8/10)
This album is likely better than this rating but, so far, it’s failed to move me. That being said, I think it’s probably pretty important. Read the review.
29. Captain Beefheart and the Magic Band: Ice Cream for Crow (8/10)
A pretty good point to approach The Captain, actually. Read the review.
30. Slapp Happy with Faust: Acnalbasac Noom [Recorded 1973] (8/10)
So apparently this is the original album, which was rejected by their label and then re-recorded and released as the appropriate name. Then the original recordings were released in the early ’80s, or something like that.
I haven’t heard the polished second version of this record (self-titled Slapp Happy) so I cannot judge whether or not it was the right decision by the record company but my personal bias would say ‘probably not.’ What we have hear is catchy but odd-enough pop rock with utterly unique vocals and enough quirks to keep things interesting.
It’s hard to know what a record company would have been expecting from a trio backed by Faust, but this is remarkably commercial for that description. It’s very solid stuff, though it’s hardly as progressive as I was led to believe.
A note on the bonus tracks: at least one of them sounds like it was recorded in the early ’80s and doesn’t belong at all.
31. Adam Ant: Friend or Foe (7/10)
I like this. Just not sure if it’s that original. Read the review.
32. Accept: Restless and Wild (7/10)
Not sure if this should be higher, or lower. Read the review.
33. Philip Glass: Glassworks (7/10)
Glass freely admits that he wrote this set in order to attract a more diverse, perhaps even younger crowd, and that it was geared towards people being able to listen to it on walkmans – i.e. it would have to fit on a single tape, which would be a major problem for much of his work. And you can really tell, as this is the most accessible work of his I’ve heard outside of some of his film score music.
This is both a good thing and a bad thing. On the one hand, it’s an excellent entry point for anyone not sure whether or not they are interested. (However, the film scores are also pretty accessible.) And the music is pretty compelling.
On the other, maybe it’s because I started into Glass’ oeuvre by listening to more intense stuff, but this definitely feels slight – it feels like it was indeed intended to be accessible, and it feels sort of tossed off – pop Glass almost.
Though I’d recommend this to someone unsure of whether or not they want to listen to Glass’ bigger compositions, personally I feel those are far more rewarding listens.
34. The [English] Beat: Special Beat Service (7/10)
I like this, I’m just not sure how original it is. Read the review.
35. John Cale: Music for a New Society (7/10)
This might grow on me. Until then, I don’t love it. Read the review.
36. Lou Reed: The Blue Mask (7/10)
Reed abandons art and pretension (for the most part) for a series of earnest and honest songs about ageing, settling down, his feelings and the odd more obscure song.
Its directness is refreshing, if at least a little jarring, and presages much of his later work (that I’ve heard). As with a number of his later albums, I find him also emphasizing prose verses more and more than he did in the ’70s. This is both a good thing (it’s relatively unique) and, sometimes a bad thing (sometimes it feels at odds with the music).
The music itself vacillates from pretty easy going rock music to some relatively extreme feedback. The great Robert Quine is here and is sometimes his incredible self (though on the quieter numbers his presence is less obvious).
I liked the arty Lou Reed so, for me, his non-arty albums have to have really strong songs. The only one of those that really does it for me so far is New York. Many of the songs here are good, but the set as a whole isn’t of that quality.
37. Tank: Filth Hounds of Hades (7/10)
The opening of “Shellshock” made me think I was in for a crazy, crazy record. The chanting seemed so far outside of what I was expecting from metal from 1982, that suddenly I had all these expectations.
Unfortunately, most fo the record is basically Motorhead with a better singer. That’s an over-simplification, but if feels like an accurate one on at least half the tracks.
There’s perhaps a little more variety here but, in the end, it does really feel like second wave NWOBHM, rather than anything truly original.
38. Culture Club: Kissing to Be Clever (7/10)
Kind of impressed. Read the review.
39. Yazoo (aka Yaz): Upstairs at Eric’s (7/10)
Soulful, yes. But not my thing. Read the review.
40. Rush: Signals (7/10)
41. Mauricio Kagel: Rrrrrrr… [excerpts] (7/10)
The pieces from Rrrrrrr… are all over the place in terms of style, starting with ragtime and running the gamut of styles, through pretty traditional to really avant garde stuff (a prepared piano, a “raga”). I like how Kagel turns music on its here but here I have to say I’m slightly confused; the idea of a piece that can be performed in parts or in wholes, by different instruments, confuses the hell of me. That’s the intention. But for once I feel like I’m the butt of the joke rather than in on it, which is a weird feeling. I like the music though.
42. The Clash: Combat Rock (7/10)
Combat Rock may be just as weird, flawed and imperfect as Sandinista! but it has two huge advantages over its predecessor.
The first is rather obvious: Combat Rock is slightly less than 1/3 the length of Sandinista!, which is just insane as it’s not like this record is particularly short. It’s a lot easier to listen to this uneven experimentation when it’s one LP long.
The other thing is that the best songs on Combat Rock are just better than the best on Sandinista!.
Both of those things add up to a lot. It’s as if the band had an editor this time (even if the reality is that they just didn’t have a lot of material).
As an aside: it’s so weird that Strummer felt like Jones and Headon were a problem musically when it feels like his contributions were just as mixed.
43. Descendents: Milo Goes to College (7/10)
A glimpse into the future of the California punk scene. Read the review.
44. Michael Jackson: Thriller (7/10)
Not my thing, but decent for what it is. Read the review.
45. Judas Priest: Screaming for Vengeance (6/10)
Every time I listen to Priest I get a different feeling than I do with their NWOBHM contemporaries (I am not saying Priest is NWOBHM), and that is that they are a little more concerned with selling records. Maybe that’s because Priest were always interested in doing that – I have never heard any of their early albums – but Priest always strikes me as more accessible than Maiden or some of the other bands of this era. There’s just something about them.
And it’s present here as much as it was (maybe not quite as much) on British Steel. And added to it is some shitty production. And I find myself having no desire to listen to this again, like I would with lots of other contemporary metal bands. There’s just something about these guys I don’t like as much. Can’t put my finger on it.
46. The Jam: The Gift (6/10)
The Jam go from ripping off post punk (particularly PIL and Gang of Four) and David Bowie (and the Beatles!) to ripping off soul. I don’t know Northern Soul, so I don’t know if this is derivative of that, but you can hear echoes of southern (American) soul as well as the usual Jam influences.
Because this is the Jam, there are plenty of good songs. But this feels like a new set of clothes after they got tired of the previous set they donned for Sound Affects.
I could take this or leave it.
47. George Clinton: Computer Games (6/10)
It’s a Parliament record, really. Read the review.
48. Marvin Gaye: Midnight Love (6/10)
Dated and a little long on the jammy parts. Read the review.
49. ABC: The Lexicon of Love (6/10)
I don’t like synthpop particularly and I also really don’t enjoy the New Romantic stuff. I find much of it sterile.
But ABC has a lot more passion, a lot more “soul” (not the genre) behind its music. It feels like there’s genuine feeling behind music that kind of lacks for feeling. This feels like the exception to me, and so much of the music of the Second British Invasion is usually a lot less passionate and vaguely quirky.
I will still never listen to this again, as it’s not my thing. But it could be worse.
50. Twisted Sister: Under the Blade (6/10)
Much better than I was expecting. Read the review.
51. Led Zeppelin: Coda (6/10)
As a teen, I was just happy for another Zeppelin album. But if I’ve fair, this is not only merely a rarities album (albeit one with mostly pretty good stuff) but it is a rarities album that somehow managed to omit some major rarities. For example, “Hey, Hey What Can I Do.” And at least five other songs that could have been released in place of a live version (or soundcheck or whatever) of a song we’ve already heard.
52. Lionel Richie (5/10)
Slick as fuck, and sappy too. Read the review.
53. Duran Duran: Rio (5/10)
This is the kind of record where I need the virtues extolled to me. Unless some Duran Duran Evangelist tells me why this is good, I will never discover it on my own.
The title track and “Hungry Like the Wolf” are catchy, sure. The other songs aren’t particularly though. So that’s not good.
And the sound of this record is so clearly a pop version of more interesting music being made by other, less accessible bands: we have the funk obsession of post punk and the synthesizer obsession of sythpop, but this feels like music for people who don’t like either of those things – it’s far, far, far more catchy (and loungey) than post punk and far more rock than synthpop. It’s a mystery to me why whitewashed version of post punk and synthpop would be appealing to anyone.
54. The League Unlimited Orchestra: Love and Dancing (3/10)
This is a series of “instrumental” remixes of the Human League’s Dare which aimed to capitalize on that album’s success. It’s not really instrumental – the vocals are kept on some songs – and the songs don’t really sound that different (though I guess that’s most remix albums).
It certainly doesn’t have a reason to exist. There’s nothing about this that is better than the original album, and there’s nothing about it that’s revelatory either. It feels like a cash grab and it’s boring.
1. REM: Chronic Town (9/10)
I cannot be objective about this EP.
REM was the first contemporary band I ever got into after spending my childhood listening to oldies; the first band that was still recording in my lifetime. (That’s not entirely true: I listened to The Nylons and Weird Al, so you could say the first “serious” band.)
I first heard this, like many fans who came to the band during their ’90s heyday, on Dead Letter Office. It quickly became my favourite early REM album.
I cannot divorce that experience of my youth from an attempt to review it now. It’s too important to my own personal musical journey for me to ever be critical of it. But in attempting to do that, I still think all five songs are classic early REM songs and, moreover, it is literally the epitome of the “punk Byrds” sound that REM introduced to the world. Really, you don’t need to listen to another REM album between this and Document if you’re wondering what the deal is. (I would encourage you to listen to those albums, but if you’re not a fan of the band and wonder why people were, just listen to this and think “1982.”)
I’m not sure it’s the birth of American alternative rock – there are too many other bands who participated in that (The Dream Syndicate and Mission of Burma, to name two) but it’s still a pretty important record.
In addition to being important, it’s great.