JackT wrote:Not really.
Don't get all butt hurt just cause I hate the Beatles. I still think your Amazon "Revolver" review is the cutest thing ever!
Hey look at me! I'm writing a review for The Beatles' "Revolver"! After this, I'm going to review the Atlantic Ocean and St. Peter's Basillica.
Let's get serious: this musical work is too large, too ingrained in our culture to be rated in a useful way. This record is "great" in an objective sense; it is pervasive and persistant in its influence.
Have you ever heard the question, "What's the Greatest Rock Band Ever, NOT COUNTING THE BEATLES"? I have. This question illustrates the problem with rating the transcendantly great; the rating systems is devised to handle the normal range of art from very good to very bad. There simply is not enough dynamic range to fit the extreme outlier into the system. If the Beatle's get 5 stars, then who else can you give that rating to?
You already know all about "Revolver", my personal favorite Beatle's album. For any other band, this could be a Greatest Hits, but it was just one of the Beatle's best offerings. "Eleanor Rigby" and "Tomorrow Never Knows" on one album? Are you kidding me?