What are the criteria for each category?
The main criteria for the whole review is that only albums released in that calendar year qualify. None of this "October-through-October" nonsense that the Grammys use. As far as the subsections go, here's the intent:
- TOP TEN: These are CDs released within this calendar year made up of all new material.
- REISSUES: These are previously released CDs which have been re-released, or out-of-print records that have been released on CD during that year. These don't qualify for the Top Ten because the original release date was prior to the current year.
- CATALOG REISSUES: Same as the other reissues, but these are for when a whole bunch of CDs by the same artist are released in the same year. Lately, I've been putting those on their own review pages.
- LIVE ALBUMS: Basically, what you'd expect. Albums recorded live, either at a concert, or at a radio station, or something similar. Live albums generally don't qualify for the Top Ten because older material is usually used. If an album contains all new songs but was recorded live, it's eligible for the Top Ten. If it's using a number of older songs, then it isn't.
- COMPILATIONS: Greatest hits packages and box sets. Again, not eligible for the Top Ten because the material is older.
- TRIBUTE ALBUMS: "Various Artist" albums where each of the artists cover a different song by the same band/songwriter/etc. Technically eligible, but I usually don't consider 'em because all of the songs are older. They're certainly new performances, but just doesn't seem like Top Ten material. Of course, maybe I'll come across one that changes my mind.
- BOOTLEGS: You know … less-than-authorized releases … (wink, wink)
- MISSED IT!: Stuff I missed. Older (but not too old) releases that would've been Top Tens had I heard them in time. It's a chance to acknowledge my oversights.
- OTHER NOTEWORTHY RELEASES: Albums that do qualify for the Top Ten, but just weren't quite good enough.
I may not have all of these sections in each year's review. It depends on that year's crop of releases.
Do you ever go back and revise old lists?
Nope. Never. For instance, I feel I blew the '88 poll's top two. In retrospect, I should've had Midnight Oil's Diesel And Dust as #1, but what's done is done. I'd love to say this is a deeply rooted integrity thing, but the truth is that if I went back, I'd probably end up tweaking list after list. I figured it was better to just leave it as a snapshot of my opinion at the time.
However, I will go back and clean up formatting, typos, graphic quality, broken links, etc. I'm not changing the content of the reviews, just making it look a little better.
Why do you put out the new lists in January instead of December?
Four reasons:
- I always find it weird to see "year end" lists come out at the beginning of December. The year isn't over yet!
- I want to give myself a little slop time to give me a chance to hear something I might have missed out on.
- It takes time to put these together. I usually start in December, but Christmas shopping and such usually takes more time than I expect, so I give myself January to finish off the list.
- It's a chance to build the drama and give everyone time to waste countless hours pondering exactly what my list is going to to be.
OK … I don't actually believe #4. It sounded good though, didn't it?
Were these questions really asked frequently?
Yep. With my readership base, being asked ONCE qualifies as "frequently".