Obviously some albums get clear critical acclaim, mainstream/wide public acclaim, commercial power, and awards, and are large cultural moments/ aged well/influence , like GKMC, MBDTF, etc. But that rarely comes together.

But that rarely happens, some albums people argue are classics lack the critical acclaim, or the wide public love, or the large cultural moments.

Like I see 2014 FHD as one people argue about. I personally think its a classic, but someone could pull the lack of critical acclaim or awards or whatever, but it was a large cultural moment, commercially powerful, etc.

or Take care, thats one that gets argued about, it has almost everything on that list imo( I dont know what awards it had or anything), or Earl Sweatshirts music, which lacks the commercial power, maybe the large cultural moments, definitely amazing quality and critical acclaim, and people argue whether some of his albums are classics.

Plus, at this point it seems if you drop a really good album, people will label it a classic (if you're a notable artist)

So has the "classic"label lost meaning? do you think there's only a handful of classics (in specific genres), per decade?

it lost its meaning when everything Kendrick lamar released was being labelled as classic.

classiccore actually became a genre in hip hop. pitchfork pandering and tapping into a fetish culture around supposed classic hip hop records.

whoever started calling everything classic in hip hop

that was weird man

classic used to be a word awkward white dudes called things that were funny in high school

somehow it became the byword for every hip hop record ever.

young thug is not classic. future is not classic. they're contemporary not classic.

I would struggle to call lil Wayne's output "classic". everything he did refuses to fit into narrow bubbles of what is popping.

in a way, something being classic is derogatory.

it has a connotation that you "bowed to the expectations".

infinite jest is "classic" but it left its author feeling empty inside

screwtape letters is "classic" but it had a mainline objective in something that was not adulation.

anything crafted intentionally to appear "classic" is classiccore, classic fetishism, not actually classic.

is it bad to want to make a classic?

but TPAB and GKMC are both classics through and must listens for anyone which likes the genre

kendrick and kanye stans ruined the term classic in rap but publications also contributed to this. It's no coincidence some of the most uninformed rap fans tend to be people who have similar takes to publications such as pitchfork.

I think an album needs like 3-4 years before it gets a classic stamp.

The new generation of easy-bake rap where rappers will release two albums a year has people labeling any album they enjoyed a classic on the first listen.

yes and no.

if you want to make a piece of art that will be cherished for generations, that's a valid drive and inspiring.

if you just want the praise and adulation of being a "classic" creative, you've lost sight of why you're creating in the first place.

DS2 is a classic. Everybody knows and accepts it.

Influence

Conversation its able to make

Memorability

Context

People here be talking bout how an album is a classic just cuz they enjoyed it. A classic is an album that has stood the test of time, was very popular (meaning great if not amazing sales stats) and had great critical acclaim. Same could be said for classic songs.

Critical acclaim should not be a barometer for what constitutes a classic.

I think it shouldn’t be too important but it can be telling. High majority of widely accepted classics are critically acclaimed

the problem is that stans just wanna call any album that they like a classic

A classic is a project that is commercially successful that is also well received by fans. One of the most popular projects of that time

standing the test of time

I'd also add well received by non-fans as well. By non-fans I mean those outside the fanbase that felt like they just had to buy the album. That's very telling.

You mean as in sound wise or public appreciation wise ? For example, an album that was extremely popular and acclaimed but aged really badly( as in it sounds really outdated), but people still widely recognize it’s impact/cultural moment, is that a classic to you?

ooh, that's a good question. I know you asked them but I gotta think about it and find a answer myself lol

yea a good example of that would be MMLP the subject matter surely doesn't fit the current times anymore but people still see it as a classic, rightfully so.

The only critic that people value is pitchfork and they’ve become a parody of themselves.

For example, Eternal Atake received an 8.4– higher score than a number of records in the last decade that are highly regarded (Daytona and Rodeo are two examples that immediately come to mind). Are we really supposed to consider that when evaluating these projects?

True, pitchforks whole rating system is kinda f***ed up tbh regardless. But yea it shouldn’t matter but the truth is when some artist get brought up critical acclaim comes up too, for example Danny Brown or Kendrick sometimes. It shouldn’t truly matter

I guarantee nobody is going to care about the 30 songs on Eternal atake 5 years from now. The album was all speculation, memes and hype but super mid and forgettable. Didn’t do anything new with the sound of hip hop. I don’t think it even had a decent single like all classics do.

I’d also add your mum well received by me as well.