Having reviewed more than 1200 records from the first - and best - two decades of rock music (not counting the Fifties, of course, which are also a great decade but aren't exactly subject to LP selection), I have decided to finally give in to the Ultimate Temptation, which is, to put up a static 'best-of' list.

This is, however, not so much a 'best-of' list, I think, as a brief 'course' whose aim is to outline rock's gradual development from 1963 to 1976 (since I'm no expert on Eighties and Nineties rock yet I'll leave that be for the moment; the list will include everything up to, but not including, the punk & New Wave era) and present a wholesome picture of its many stages, variations and styles as possible. If you just want to see my 'favourites' list, the best choice is to visit the General Ratings page and just lift the first hundred or so records off the list, starting from the beginning. This here album list will work on slightly different principles. The basic principle will be this: no two albums on the list should be too similar to each other (with maybe just a couple exceptions for records not rated any less than 15). For instance, Sergeant Pepper will definitely make the list, but not Magical Mystery Tour, because that album, unbelievably great as it is, was just a follow-up to Pepper that never represented any kind of true 'departure' for the Beatles. One Procol Harum album will definitely make the grade, but Procol Harum were such a stable and formulaic band that one is the absolute maximum for the list - even if that formula was one of art-rock's greatest achievements.

In this way, I hope that the list will be as full and - most important - as diverse as possible, a true eclecticist paradise. Of course, I have to put up the necessary disclaimer - I can't pretend to cover everything, and as I myself dig deeper into Sixties' and Seventies' culture, I'm bound to still be discovering new albums, bands and even entire styles that are hardly covered on the site. So the list is probably subject to future change and further additions (after all, why the hell should we revere these round numbers so much?). Reader comments with any additional ideas are also welcome, as long as you motivate your particular choices.

On the other hand, this list is supposed to have a real practical aim. Anybody who's not yet an expert on rock music but would like to grope in as many directions as possible to find out what suits him or her the best should buy all of these albums to see which styles are thrilling and which are boring. And if you're going to be eclectic and open minded, I insist that sooner or later you gotta have ALL of these albums in your collection, whatever your actual feeling towards them might be (even I myself don't really like all of this stuff). You'll hardly be able to like all of them, but you gotta have 'em anyway.

So here we go (links on here refer to my full reviews of the album, NOT to CDNow! Not yet, at least!).

If you like this album you're well-advised to delve deeper in the often beautiful pop world of the early Sixties. Other early Beatles records are all even higher in quality (particularly A Hard Day's Night), and same goes for some of their worthy successors, most notably the Hollies. Plus, there are also minor bands like the Dave Clark Five, etc., which you should approach with caution because of a huge percentage of filler. Speaking of the States - the early Beach Boys are very recommendable.

If you like this album you should certainly check out the rest of Dylan's acoustic albums (most notably Another Side Of Bob Dylan), and chances are that - unless you're one of those folkie purists that chastised Bob for going electric - you'll just fall in love with Bob and want to purchase everything he ever put out. Plus, this really opens the singer-songwriting route for you, from Simon & Garfunkel to Joni Mitchell. Welcome aboard.

If you like this album you will definitely want to get all the other early albums by the Stones (particularly Now! and Out Of Our Heads), as well as those other early Sixties bands that preferred to follow in the Stones' 'dirty' footsteps rather than in the Beatles' 'clean' ones - among them, the Animals and the Pretty Things, or even the Kinks, inane as they were at that early period.

If you like this album check out their 'sequel' - Turn Turn Turn (a bit weaker, but essentially the same), and you might also want to sniff out other 'folk-rock' efforts from the early Sixties, the Searchers in particular, who actually employed the "jangle" some time before the Byrds, but weren't quite as effective with it. And, of course, this also paves the way to all kinds of 'intelligent roots rock', as I call it.

If you like this album check out its predecessor, Bringing It All Back Home, which I didn't include in this list simply because it's very similar to Highway, but somewhat rawer and more of a 'water-treading compromise', with one side completely acoustic (although it's beautiful anyway). And if you don't like this album, chances are you just weren't born for rock music.

If you like this album you should probably invest more in garage rock and proto-punk (even if the proto-punk stuff actually came later). Unfortunately, the Who never experimented with this kind of sound in the studio any more, switching to psychedelia and artsiness (not a bad thing either), so if you only like 'aggressive' side of the Who, stick to their live records.

If you like this album you can try to check out other records by the Beach Boys, but you gotta remember, Pet Sounds isn't really all that typical for the band - it's more of a solo Brian Wilson revelation. Don't discriminate their post-66 stuff, either: you'll have to wade through fluff for sure, but there's a significant amount of pure beauty in their 1967-73 albums. On the other hand, liking Pet Sounds means the listener is open for further immersion into various kinds of art-rock, which is alright by me.

If you like this album you don't actually have that much to do, because you will never, never ever hear anything even remotely close to it. It's extremely difficult to establish the scientific formula of its uniqueness, but for some reason, this particular style just proved impossible to recreate by anybody, including Bob himself (not that he ever tried, to be fair). Essentially, there's not even any guarantee that it will open the road to later Dylan - later Dylan is great in his own way, but far less elaborate as far as arrangements and atmosphere go.

If you like this album check out its successor, Younger Than Yesterday, somewhat less innovative but even more consistent and well-written as far as melody is concerned. Plus, there's all the rich American psychedelic scene like the 13th Floor Elevators, of course (Psychedelic Sounds Of and Easter Everywhere are both quintessential), and lots and lots of exciting stuff on the Nuggets compilation.

If you like this album be sure to check out its predecessor, Rubber Soul (1965), not included here exclusively because I consider it to be a tad weaker and sounding more or less in the same vein - although, granted, it might have been even more groundbreaking at the time of release. However, Revolver is, without doubt, the more 'serious' effort of the two, even despite (or maybe due to) the inclusion of one of the band's silliest songs ever.

If you like this album there's no guarantee you'll be able to get further deep into acid rock a la Airplane or a la Grateful Dead, but you could try them - in the case of the Airplane, Crown Of Creation is particularly recommended. Plus, there are always more obscure ensembles like the Moby Grape or Quicksilver Messenger Service who have also produced their share of interesting music.

If you like this album you'll want to check out everything else by the Velvets - those who were more moved with the experimental and noisy side, stick to the even less compromise-offering White Light/White Heat, those who like the poppy and introspective side of the band more (like me), check out their later output (The Velvet Underground, Loaded).

If you like this album feel free to get more Hendrix - if it's his poppy/psychedelic side that interests you more, Axis: Bold As Love is a must, if it's the technical and 'conceptual' side, scoop up Electric Ladyland, and, well, everything else. As for the 'Hendrix school', Robin Trower is probably the most worthy Hendrix disciple, although every hard rock guitarist is a Hendrix disciple in some way...

If you like this album (and you should, although nobody forces you to acknowledge this as the rock record to end all other rock records, of course), don't forget about its twin brother, Magical Mystery Tour, which is of the absolute same quality songswise and could have well been included in the list instead. Nothing else to recommend though - the Beatles are so darn unique it's frustrating.

If you like this album rush out and grab all of the Stones' 1966-67 records (bar Their Satanic Majesties Request, which belongs in a different category), and don't forget to add a few Kinks albums of the same epoch on the way. I do know a few people who are only wishing to acknowledge this period of the Stones' history; they're wrong, of course, but doesn't that say something?

If you like this album you'll hardly find anything like it in the rest of Floyd's catalog, as this was Syd Barrett's only complete recording with the band (although you should at least try Saucerful Of Secrets), but you can check out Barrett's own solo albums if you're interested in the guy's psycho Ego. Otherwise, the closest to this album in style, I'd say, is the Stones' Satanic Majesties' Request.

If you like this album be sure to check the band's debut, The Psychedelic Sounds Of, with shorter songs, a much stronger pop/garage presence, but apparently a much muddier sound (just try and disregard the pretentious, hilariously dated liner notes). Some real connoisseurs also swear by Roky Erickson's solo albums, the ones he made during temporary bouts of saneness in the early Eighties or something like that, but I've never heard them.

If you like this album the Doors are a must for you - all of their studio albums before Morrison's death have at worst some redeeming qualities and at best manage to nearly match Strange Days' level of sophistication, memorability and convincing force. Of course, there is a group of people who finds too much 'cheese' in the Doors, but I don't recommend anybody to stick to those.

If you like this album check out more Cream in general, although liking the 'poppier' side of the band doesn't guarantee that you'll like their rougher, bluesier, more generic edge of Fresh Cream or Cream's hour-long live excesses. However, Cream's importance to the development of rock music can't really be underrated. And don't forget about Cream's 'inheritors' - Blind Faith and Mountain.

If you like this album you're certainly open to all kinds of symph-rock and pomp-rock, but, most specifically, you would easily fall for everything else the Moodies put out up to 1972 (the famous 'core seven'). Albums like To Our Children's Children's Children and A Question Of Balance are particularly recommendable, but really, the choice of your favourite is fully up to you.

If you like this album don't forget to check the rest of Dylan's 'quiet' 1967-74 period, particularly New Morning and Nashville Skyline, even if these records are nowhere near as serious as Harding. And, of course, the album opens up the entire 'soft-rock' and 'singer-songwriting' stage for years to come. But it just towers around all that stuff as an untouchable monster.

If you like this album check out the rest of Procol Harum's catalog - for my money, they never really topped this debut, but most fans would actually take 1969's A Salty Dog or 1971's Broken Barricades over it. Me, I just think that Procol Harum, while not venturing too much away from the formula, were one of art rock's most consistent outfits, so almost everything goes.

If you like this album I'm not in a hurry to recommend the Nice's subsequent output to you, as the band gradually went in the direction of making the music more complex and losing that masterful pop edge. However, no true fan of progressive rock should allow himself the unforgivable error of not hunting down such albums as Nice (1969) and Five Bridges (1970).

If you like this album feel free to dip into more Family - their output was always interesting, if not always consistent, and it's time somebody pulled this magnificent band out of the depths of oblivion. Family Entertainment (1969), in particular, is a followup worthy of every bit of respect. Another obvious choice to follow is Traffic, of course, a band similar in sound and far more well-known, but if you ask me, far less interesting.

If you like this album you're free to revel in your newly-found Zappa obsession - which could last for years, considering the vastness of his catalog. Personally, out of the guy's Mothers of Invention period I would heavily recommend such albums as Freak Out (which I like even more, but it's a bit less diverse), Hot Rats, and Burnt Weeny Sandwich (Zappa's most serious exploration of modern classical).

If you like this album what can I say? If you DON'T like this album you're a fuckin' idiot. (Now don't sue me, I'm just paraphrasing Mark Prindle on that one). No sane person can dislike this stuff. However, since this is the goddamn Beatles, there's no guarantee you'll like all these genres even if you manage to dig all the songs on here. Even I hold a grudge towards 'Revolution #9'... sniff.

If you like this album don't forget to scoop up everything the Kinks recorded in 1966-67. Some actually consider their 1967 album, Something Else, to be of equal quality, if not superior, and while it might be a little more representative of Ray Davies' perspective, it's somewhat more boring in places - if you ask me, that is. But don't let that turn you off these guys. Britpop will never be the same without their input.

If you like this album dig deeper into Spirit, although I must warn you - contrary to rumours, I haven't yet found a Spirit album that would be better than their debut as far as songwriting and diversity goes. 12 Dreams Of Dr Sardonicus is often said to be their masterpiece, but I find it slightly boring in parts. Who knows, though, maybe you'll want to disagree.

If you like this album you'll be glad to know that Cohen actually produced three more records in the same vein before switching gear and going more mainstream. They aren't any better and therefore aren't included on the list, but they're all a must-find for any Cohen fan. There are also probably boatloads of similar S.-S. guys floating around, but I wouldn't know about that.

If you like this album I'm glad for you, because there's nothing else to recommend from this one-day "band". Joe Byrd seems to have released one more similar album with a band called "Joe Byrd & The Field Hippies", but nobody ever saw it. At least, no one I know.

If you like this album you'll probably love all of Zeppelin's output, and they do have plenty of more good stuff where that one came from. However, before you start following the obvious route, I'd ask you to pay homage to Zep's predecessor, Jeff Beck, whose Truth album is hardly any worse - and it actually came earlier than Zeppelin's debut. Not that anybody cares, of course.

If you like this album this means you're ready to take in more Serious Art outcoming from Mr Pete "Big Nose... er, sorry, Birdman" Townshend and his trusty companions. Also, while we're at it, don't really forget to check out the above-mentioned S.F.Sorrow. It's somewhat patchy, but the psychedelic side of the Pretty Things actually deserves as much attention as their earlier rock side.

If you like this album then Tyrannosaurus Rex has more for you - Bolan recorded three acoustic albums, including this one, before recording two more electric ones of similar quality before shortening to T. Rex and going glam, which is a somewhat different story. Also, I'm not a big expert on the 'starry-eyed' scene, but perhaps you can check out Pentangle.

If you like this album you're a sissie... nah, forget it. If you like this album, you gotta prepare for a HUGE collection of Crosby, Stills, Nash, Young, Crosby / Stills / Nash, Crosby/Stills/Nash/Young, Crosby-Nash, Stills-Young, etc. records to come. There's been at least fifty thousand of them, and they all rule. Eh... well, not too sure about that last point.

If you like this album Sly has more for you! Starting from their next album, the band undergoes some drastic changes, but the earlier albums are just as optimistic and ravenous, even if inconsistent; Life (1968), however, is practically as good as Stand! - not as grandiose, but with shorter and more diverse tunes, ranging from proto-Funkadelic acid dizziness to even proto-disco. Again, Sly & The Family Stone are a band whose two most successful albums have overshadowed the rest of their catalog for strictly non-musical reasons; today, there is no point in sticking to nothing but the "classics" and overlooking the rest of the good stuff.

If you like this album, and for the exact reason I've mentioned, you will probably be disappointed - Neil's studio records in the Seventies almost never recapture anything similar, with rare exceptions like on Zuma's 'Cortez The Killer'. But do check out Rust Never Sleeps (1979) and pretty much every electric-based album of Neil's "comeback" period (1989 to 1994 in particular), some of which are actually more consistent than Everybody Knows.

If you like this album don't forget to thoroughly check out all of the Beatles' late period - such monster albums as Abbey Road and The Beatles often tend to overshadow the Fab Four's equally creative singles of the day (collected on Past Masters Vol. 2), as well as the much-maligned Let It Be (even at their 'weakest', they were still going strong) and even the rip-offey Yellow Submarine soundtrack.

If you like this album, then you'll probably like the one after it - Lola And Powerman, although the Kinks never really recaptured the heights of Arthur again. In fact, I'm pretty scared to recommend later day Kinks albums (bar one); good as some of them are, it's a real crying shame when you look at them and see how low the mighty have fallen. Well, then again, so has the British Empire itself.

If you like this album, you're ready for Prog Rock prime time! King Crimson themselves only made one more album in the same style (too much in the same style, some say), but other bands took up the baton and proceeded to run forward, developing the genre to its absolute culmination in the early Seventies. Too much to recommend in one go, and it's hardly likely you'll like all of it, but try anything from early Emerson, Lake & Palmer, Genesis, or Yes in the first place.

If you like this album the Stones' 'classic' period of 1968-72 lies open for you (start with 1968's Beggar's Banquet, which is almost just as good - I actually wanted to post both records at first...). Not to mention that this also opens a path for such fun British roots-rock bands as Humble Pie, the Faces, Free, etc., etc., none of which were as imaginative but many of which were just as energetic.

If you like this album check out everything else Frank and the Mothers put out at the time - including Uncle Meat, Hot Rats and maybe - for a more difficult listen - Weasels Ripped My Flesh. Frank went into a more gimmicky, if not any less intriguing, direction afterwards; but some of these albums gotta rank among art-rock's greatest achievements, even if it takes time to appreciate them.

If you like this album do get its companion - Live At The Isle Of Wight, presenting the Who in a different setting (large outdoor venue). The sound is somewhat different, but in no way inferior, in fact, I still can't decide which of the two albums I like the better. And hey, if you have the possibility, trace down all the Who live bootlegs from the epoch. Please!

If you like this album, remember that it was followed by the slightly inferior, but still ass-kickin' Fireball and the just as ass-kickin' Machine Head. The latter is actually sometimes considered to be Purple's pinnacle, but to me, In Rock still seems more consistent (not to mention groundbreaking). Nevertheless, all the three albums are classics, and any 'classic metal' fan will want to have all the three.

If you like this album, remember that all Creedence albums bar one are well worth owning, and it's a real joy to explore their modest, but thoroughly consistent catalog. John Fogerty's solo career is also well worth investigating. As for their successors... amazing as it might seem, CCR didn't have even a single well-known band follow their steps. Not to my knowledge, at least.

If you like this album, you'd probably want to check out the Stooges' other two albums - they're also great, but far milder. I am not an expert on late Sixties proto punk myself, though. The MC5 are supposed to be somewhat similar. However, don't even start messing around with Iggy Pop's solo career if you look for a continuation of the Stooges vibe.

If you like this album, there's not much else to recommend: none of the Stones other live albums live up to its standard, so unless you go around collecting bootlegs, you'll have to be content with this one. But I think that appreciation of Ya-Ya's also opens the road to appreciating all kinds of early Seventies' British blues-rock, from Free to the Faces and so on.

If you like this album, check out its surroundings: Black Sabbath is less consistent, but even more groundbreaking, while Master Of Reality doesn't have the same high points, but is often called 'the heaviest album ever recorded' - in 1971!! Also keep in mind that the early Seventies' metal scene was definitely not limited to Black Sabbath - but I'm no expert.

If you like this album, you can explore George's career further, but be wary: he never ever amounted to the same level of sophistication, catchiness and sincerity as on here, although certain parts of Living In The Material World come close, and albums like 33 And 1/3 are fun, harmless listens. Also, don't forget his masterful 1987 comeback with Cloud 9.

If you like this album, check out its companion, Workingman's Dead, but the rest of the Grateful Dead's catalog will only occasionally match your expectations, as the band was essentially psychedelic, you know. But they did establish the 'soft-rock tradition', together with CSN - and hey, it's not their fault that we had to tolerate everything the Eagles put out.

If you like this album, check out the rest of Lennon's solo career (particular highlights are Imagine (1972), Walls And Bridges (1974) and the blistering 'Lennon half' on Double Fantasy (1980)). But remember that John 'mellowed out' a bit after this album, so you might be disappointed... As for the record in question - it hardly has any analogies in rock music.

If you like this album, the only other Derek & The Dominos album, Live At The Fillmore, is an absolute must. It has no Duane Allman, but Clapton is doing his best to work for the two of them, and actually manages to obliterate some of the studio versions! It's a hard listen, long solos and all, but it's one of those few 'jam' records that don't bore me for a single second.

If you like this album, proceed carefully: this band never knew when to stop, and occasionally went overboard into the deep seas of pretention and tunelessness, as on the ridiculous 'epic' Pawn Hearts. My other favourites include the slightly more lightweight debut album Aerosol Grey Machine and a couple later, more introspective records like World Record and Still Life.

If you like this album, check out Can's entire classic period of 1970-74, starting with the criminally underrated Soundtracks (shorter, but even more consistent - and more accessible and immediately likeable, too), and ending with the more 'ambient-friendly' Future Days and Soon Over Babaluma, where the band moves closer to 'fantasy-world', but is just as groundbreaking.

If you like this album, Amon Düül II have plenty more of that stuff! Yeti (1970) has even higer points, although I'm hugely sceptical about the 'improvised' half of it; Wolf City and Carnival In Babylon develop these themes even further (although not always to good effect, as Carnival shows); and stuff like Vive La Trance and later albums are closer to 'mainstream', but still weird enough.

If you like this album you won't want to listen to general critical opinion that always singles out Tapestry as the only Carole King album worth owning, and will at least want to check out her earlier, and slightly more adventurous, Writer (1970), as well as some of the later albums like Music (1972) and Fantasy (1973); you yourself choose when to stop, as different people seem to have different borderlines for Carole's stuff.

If you like this album, check out its follow-ups: Fragile might be less innovative and its numerous 'solo spots' might be confusing, but the songwriting quality on there is arguably even better; and Close To The Edge is often considered to be Yes' peak due to the grandiosity of the compositions, although I think it has far too few ideas to actually merit all the hype...

If you like this album, there's more: The Slider (1972) is considered a similar classic, although I'd prefer to disagree and establish Tanx (1973) as Bolan's absolute peak as glam-rocker. Who cares if that album wasn't as sensational - Marc's music outlived the trends. There can be some gems found in his later catalog as well, particularly on Dandy In The Underworld (1977).

If you like this album, feel free to dig deeper into the catalog of the Zepsters. Me, I'm not a great fan of late Led Zep, but that doesn't mean that nobody else is. But please please please, don't go in for derivative primitive trash like Uriah Heep. Too much schoolboy mysticism is simply incompatible with good taste, and I do mean it in an objective way of thinking.

If you like this album, you can check out its 'sequel', Everybody's In Show-Biz, which is pretty good as far as sequels go, but not more than that. The album has simply no analogies anywhere in rock music, and is perhaps the most 'weird' representative of the entire roots-rock genre you'll ever find. Note, though, that it's practically 'undissectable' - the components don't work independently.

If you like this album, check out Killer as well - it has more shock rock, but it's still just as immaculate anyway. Later on, Alice Cooper slowly started drifting away from teenage angst into all-out 'black vaudeville' of guillotines and boas, but the first few albums are well worth checking out even if you detest shock rock as a genre. The punks do own a lot to Alice Cooper, of course.

If you like this album, you'll probably be disappointed in later Nazareth: Exercises is similar, but far softer, and most of the band's consequent output is just normal heavy metal, with good riffs and vocals and everything, but way too dependent on their immediate metal influences. Sadly, this vibe has never since been recaptured - not to my knowledge, at least.

If you like this album (and you're bound to like it, so it would be more correct to say "if you find this album"), then rejoice, as Sparks have more of this stuff ready for you. Beware, though, because in the mid-Seventies Sparks hit the disco vibe and never quite recovered - much of their later music may be good, but it's nowhere near those innovative and entertaining heights of the 1971-76 period.

If you like this album, feel free to dig deeper. Notice that I haven't put up the more obvious choice - the critically acclaimed 1969 album Trout Mask Replica, because it's a) far more difficult to get into and b) frankly, I still often wonder if it's worth the bother. For me, it's still way too anti-musical and unfunny. However, records like 1979's Shiny Beast are quite enjoyable.

If you like this album, the rest of Jethro Tull's career is well worth checking out; Stand Up (1969) and Aqualung (1971) are equally timeless classics that didn't make the list only because of a lesser degree of originality. That said, later period Tull is very spotty, to say the least: even this record's immediate successor, A Passion Play (also a one-song album) is far less creative and/or interesting.

If you like this album, don't even bother about later period Purple live records - not a single one is worth mentioning in this context. As far as early heavy metal live albums go, though, I've always thought that Zep's Song Remains The Same was underrated (although the BBC Sessions are even better), and, well, Thin Lizzy's Live And Dangerous ain't too bad either...

If you like this album, welcome to the flowering cult of Gentle Giant. My personal favourites are the band's two first albums (Gentle Giant, 1970, and Acquiring The Taste, 1971), where the guys weren't so detached yet, painting far more impressive sonic landscapes. But this earliest period also betrays too much Yes and King Crimson influence, which is why I had to downplay these records a bit.

If you like this album, Santana's got a lot more. If you prefer more accessible, but more generic, Latin-pop with a lot of verve, Santana's "debut trilogy" (Santana, Abraxas, Santana III) is a must for you. The "spiritual" period, starting with Caravanserai, lasted for about three years more, but Carlos never came close to the heavenly heights of Caravanserai. Lotus is a good live summary of all this.

If you like this album, you're probably one of those wusses who only know of Pink Floyd's mid-/late-Seventies monster hit albums... then again, maybe not. In any case, Wish You Were Here and The Wall are generally more of the same, with similar messages and moods, but my favourite of this period is the unjustly overlooked Animals, with Waters' most original lyrical concept.

If you like this album, mind you that basically every Roxy Music album in between 1972 and 1975 is a must for any collection. For more Eno wizardry and futurism, check out the self-titled debut; for more of Bryan Ferry's lush melancholic approach, check out Stranded and Country Life; and for a solid junction of "artsy" and "disco", see Siren.

If you like this album, Marley's got more! Burnin' is essentially more of the same style; later albums get a wee bit less 'intimate', but stuff like Natty Dread is almost as well written and will please you with its stately anthemic declarations, while latter-day Marley, particularly on Exodus, will strike you as a giant of the Grand Spiritual Statement. This music just gotta be appreciated.

If you like this album, check out everything you can find that has 'Roy Wood' on it, except for his last 1987 solo album, which sucks. The Move are pefect for glittering pop singles and weird artistic exercises; Wizzard are harder to take, but they still have a unique sound going for them; and Wood's other solo albums, like Mustard, are filled with little underrated pop gems.

If you like this album (why not?), you can continue engaging in further Skynyrd records, although personally, I think they never topped this one. Then there's this whole brew of Southern Rock bands which I'm not really an expert on, like Little Feat (the band that's most respected by non-Southern rock aficionados), or Blackfoot, or, well, a million others. Skynyrd is the epitome, though.

If you like this album, just about everything from Genesis' Peter Gabriel period will qualify; for instance, I almost thought of putting Foxtrot onto this very same list, but then I realized that the two records are too similar in the overall style (kinda like a Beggar's Banquet and a Let It Bleed - while the differences between those two are significant, they still fall in one general category).

If you like this album, just about everything Elton released in between 1970 and 1975, with maybe one or two minor exceptions, will do. After all, you do need a mainstream piano-pop album in your collection, and this is as good a deal as you can get, although personally, I think that Elton was a bit more creative and inspired on albums like Honky Chateau or Madman Across The Water.

If you like this album, more Renaissance is recommended - particularly from the "peak" period of 1972-1975, with Prologue, Turn Of The Cards and even the slightly over-bombastic Scheherazade all qualifying. In the process, don't forget about Renaissance Mark I with Jane Relf on vocals, and their 'offspring' band, Illusion, who also made similar classically-influenced music.

If you like this album, check out Who's Next, of course. Yes, some will complain that I haven't included Who's Next in the list, but my humble opinion is that, as great as that record is, Quadrophenia offers us everything Next has and much more; plus, as far as conceptual albums go, Quadrophenia is far more balanced and adequate than the Lifehouse project ever was.

If you like this album, check out the rest of Faust's catalog - it's not at all huge! Their debut album I don't quite like (too much emphasis on collages), but So Far is an innovative and inventive 'weird pop' masterpiece, whereas Faust IV is a huge step towards merging pop and industrial with ambient textures, and making the final product eatable for even some of the more untrained ears.

If you like this album, you can invest in its "sequels", and no, I don't mean Tubular Bells II or III, recorded much later; I mean Hergest Ridge and Ommadawn, which constitute the real natural "proto-New Age" trilogy of Mike. Not that they manage to surpass the first part, but they'll be able to satisfy the hunger of those who hunt for more vintage Oldfield.

If you like this album, check out the entire 1973-75 period of KC, most notably this album's studio predecessor, Larks' Tongues In Aspic, which is just as good (on certain days, even better). Since there were never any bands that sounded like the untouchable King Crimson, I won't be recommending anything else. That's all.

If you like this album, the entire highlighted ELO period is fine. On The Third Day and Face The Music are slightly less consistent, but essentially in the same vein; A New World Record ditches a lot of the 'artsiness' in favour of an even more mainstream, but equally captivating sound; and Out Of The Blue is a double album of the same - for better or for worse.

If you like this album, its immediate follow-up, Propaganda, is almost as good (and some actually think it better because it's not as glossy and inhumanely immaculate). Big Beat and Indiscreet, both from that epoch, also qualify as excellent listening experiences - at times, I think that Ron Mael had more unbelievable hooks in his head than the entire dance-pop scene that came afterwards.

If you like this album, there's hardly anything else like that to recommend in the Sabbath catalog - and remember that 'prog metal' is a very dangerous genre, with bands often losing control and following their cheap fantasies rather than sticking to solid musical essence. Perhaps Rush could make a good song or two in that department; Uriah Heep certainly couldn't. Be wary.

If you like this album, the entire 1974-76 period of Queen is equally recommendable (particularly this record's immediate 'companion', A Day At The Races). The descent into arena-rock lowness on News Of The World seems rather painful to me, but later on, Queen would revisit the same fun motives in Jazz (1978), easily their most balanced album of all.

If you like this album, be sure to check out the rest of the band's "classic 4" - 10CC (1973), Sheet Music (1974) and How Dare You (1976). They never made much of an impact in the States, apart from a couple hit singles, but that's more of an argument in favour of the band than against it, if we remember it was the epoch of the Carpenters and Kiss.

If you like this album, Bruce is da man! I must confess that my personal favourites in his catalog are the musically superior E Street Shuffle (1973) and the bleaker, more desperate Darkness On The Edge Of Town (1978) - granted, these records are nowhere near as headspinningly powerful as BTR, but they run deeper and are far more rewarding in the long run.

If you like this album, be sure to check out Rainbow's classic live releases (most notably In Germany), where Blackmore's talents are on fullest display. Of the other Dio-epoch Rainbow albums, I'd recommend 1978's Long Live Rock'n'Roll; 1976's Rainbow Rising is also supposed to be a classic, but I find it somewhat lacking in the songwriting department.

If you like this album, pretty much everything that Vangelis recorded has at least some redeeming qualities. Some albums are more boring than others but that's a matter of taste and/or deeper analysis than the one offered here. Keep in mind, too, that Vangelis was not the only one to experiment on the "melodic Electronica" scene of the Seventies; but I'm not an expert on that one.

If you like this album, the entire 'classic' period of Stevie Wonder is recommendable. In my opinion, the massiveness of SITKOL can easily be matched by a clever combination of Talking Book (1972; Stevie's 'softer', more sentimental side) and Innervisions (1973; Stevie's 'harder', more socially conscious side), but that's far from all that this guy has to offer to you.

If you like this album, you will maybe be more forgiving about Patti Smith than you're supposed to be. After all, she's an extremely important link in the "proto punk chain", and all of her 'classic period' albums are well worth getting acquainted with, including also Easter (1978) and Wave (1979). The "comeback" period albums are an acquired taste, but some actually prefer them over the early stuff.

If you like this album, there's three more like these (the "classic quadrilogy"): Leave Home (1977) is basically more of the same with improved production (not that it's necessarily a plus), Rocket To Russia (1977) gets a bit dull to me, but Road To Ruin (1978) is a brilliant combination of the original approach with more refined pop hooks and ballads and gets some great applause as well.