Rock: The Rough Guide, First Edition

I own the 1996 edition, and recommend this book with some reservations. While I learned about a lot of bands I never would have heard of otherwise (draining my bank account as a result), there does seem to be a bias toward newer artists, particularly British (perhaps they could have included Wanda Jackson?). Also, there is a definite tendency toward artists who have yet to prove themselves in the long run (Alanis Morissette???) or artists of questionable merit (Meatloaf?). It is interesting to compare this book to the Trouser Press review guide, as their opinions are sometimes diametrically opposed to each other regarding specific albums.

I love this book and I have spent a great amount of time dipping into it since it arrived in the mail. I'd already seen a fair bit of it online but the print version with irreverently captioned photographs and whatnot is certainly an improvement.The editors have made some interesting choices, granting equal space to relatively unknown bands such as the X-Ray Specs as they did to The Eagles. This book is basically about bands "that mattered" and record sales don't really influence the amount of space granted to any individual act. The editors cheerfully admit that they didn't really get around to including the Moody Blues (I can't complain!) The perspective is pretty much what you'd appreciate and agree with if you are interested in Indie Rock and enjoy the Britisn NME rock magazine. I am, so I love it.Furthermore, the book seems to be pitched to rock fans in their thirties: there is a wealth of entries on late 70s UK punk bands and their influences and American counterparts. If I were a few years younger, I don't know if I'd enjoy this book as much as I do.The fact that a lot of it was collected from contributors to the Internet means that there is less of a geographical bias than might have been expected. There are several entries for 80s bands from New Zealand that would have made ripples in England (such as the Chills, the Clean, etc). The book's only problems as far as I can see is that it's only one of a series of "Rough Guides". For example, there is no entry for Bob Marley, who presumably has been included in the companion volume on Reggae. They could have included some colour photographs, especially when dealing with album covers, but I suppose that'd jack up the price.All in all a great, fun read if you're into that sort of thing and I'm sure I'll be dipping into it for a long time to come.

I've looked through lots of "rock history" books over the years. What makes this one different is that it was truly a joint venture by hundreds of different people and done mostly over the Internet. While most bios were done by fans, they still maintain objectivity. They aren't afraid to comment on a specific band's strengths and weaknesses and where a band did something great or not so great. They also give accurate bios of virtually every group that did or still does exist. Not only that, this book chronicles histories of hundreds and hundreds of bands, and not just the most popular ones, but also a lot of the more obscure bands around. While there are a few groups (mostly ones that are extremely obscure) not listed here, the books' editors took great pains to include as many essential bands as humanly possible. As for the ones missing, well there's always the next edition to include them in.Indispensable for any serious rock music fan's library.

The real strength of this book is the in-depth writing by knowledgeable fans who appreciate the music but who are also reasonably objective about the merits of individual albums. It is a welcome contrast to the Rolling Stone guides that offer the sometimes curt opinions of a handful of critics. Coverage is given to a number of British and European artists, such as Canterbury and Krautrock groups (you'll find Dagmar Krause here but not Bob Seger), that some American readers may find obscure but enlightening. Any guide that gives two full pages to Robert Wyatt (as well as two more to his former group Soft Machine) is OK by me. Be sure to check out the mock-serious Spinal Tap entry.

This book was an experiment: thousands of fans were asked to write something about their favourite band, and these aricles were collected. Thus, some focus on the music, others on the history and some are just gossipping, but altogether they make up a great work, containing thousands of reviews and record recommendations. You need this book absolutely, it is the only one I know that gives so much information about such a lot of artists in one single volume.