There's more than a few artists who are consistently above average, but there's only been two in my lifetime that have been consistently amazing--meaning back to back to back classics.
Eminem had 3 insanely successful albums in a row (Slim Shady LP, Marshall Mathers LP, Eminem Show). You have to agree with that no matter how you define successful; MMLP and Eminem Show are the two highest selling albums in hip hop history, and all three of those albums are 4.5 stars and higher at respected hip hop review sites. Those albums define a generation. He ruined his streak with Encore though, and the Slim Shady EP wasn't a real album so he didn't reach the 4 in a row mark like the title asks for.
Kanye had 3 in a row, too (College Dropout, Late Registration, Graduation). I mean, everything Kanye has ever put out under his own name has been classic, except for 808s & Heartbreak, which was just so awful it's not even funny. Take that out of his catalogue and he would have 4 classic solo albums and a classic duo album with Jay-Z. Still, even with that blemish on his record he's the most consistent artist of my lifetime.
OK. as someone who was, in his formative years, a HUGE King fan (one of the bands I was in would cover about half of Abigail during practice), you really think "The Eye" holds a candle to what came before it? I just remember being really let down by that album when it came out. Maybe I should give it another listen.
The Eye, yes. Everything that came after, no, though I do enjoy a lot of it.
---------- Post added 2012-10-26 at 01:35 AM ----------
Originally Posted by poser765
Except they really aren't though. Granted this is my opinion and the opinion of a LOT of other people.
I hear this all the time and it's usually from one of three people.
1. people who only know some of the Beatles early work. Songs like Help, and Ticket to ride. Love me Do does NOT represent what the Beatles accomplished musically. Something like Abbey Road or the White Album, really shows their musical talent and how much they allowed themselves to grow.
2. People who are young and still in their formative years. I once hated the Beatles. Now I feel they are the single greatest contributor to popular music in the last 150 years. Again...opinion.
3. People who really feel they are over rated. Not sure how to respond to them.
I'm 31, I've heard their early work, and their later work. They were innovative and influential, sure, and yes, they certainly grew as artists over time, I don't dispute that. But I don't find their music pleasing to listen to regardless of the era. I am not fond of their vocals in particular.
I was gonna say Zep from Led Zeppelin III, Led Zeppelin IV, Houses of the Holy and then Physical Graffiti, but meh, the correct answer came to me.
Pink Floyd takes the cake for me. Meddle, Dark Side, Wish You Were Here, Animals and then finally The Wall. Seriously, that band couldn't be beat.
---------- Post added 2012-12-18 at 07:43 PM ----------
Originally Posted by The North Remembers
Led Zeppelin are nothing compared to the Beatles to be honest, in terms of legacy, popularity and genuine song writing talent.
I dunno about that... haha. Led Zeppelin basically did what The Beatles, except with more finesse, imo. The Beatles wrote amazingly catchy tunes, had great lyrics, and came together well, but Zep.... Zep has by far one of the most amazing singers to ever grace this Earth. Jimmy Page is a virtuoso on the guitar, and produced and mixed most of the Zep albums... John Bonham is a BEAST on a drums, like seriously HOLY FUCK! John Paul Jones... mother fucker can play basically every instrument known to man. Put all four together, and you've got Zep. The band that started the whole idea of Stadium Shows, the ones that helped bring in a harder edge to music (along with Sabbath and King Crimson). Basically, they did just as much for music as The Beatles did.... just, just.... well, to be frank they were all just better musicians than The Beatles, imo.