All lists like this 'suck' unless you actually write it up for yourself, that's the nature of music, and the human condition where we all have unique and personal and subjective preferences. It's just a phenomenal list by any standards IMO, very credible and varied, but it's not intended that we all have to agree with their choices, show me one unarguable, definitive list that everybody agrees with on anything, ever? No such thing exists. Nobody has written
"This is the final word in Best Albums, and These Are Now all Inscribed In Tablets of Stone" at the top of the list have they? There's plenty of other lists out there that would look very different, so I never get my tighty-whities in a twist just because the last Tom Petty album didn't make it or whatever, who cares, it's not an exact science, it's just an arbitary list, I assume drawn up by professional rock journalists, who have their own personal preferences, and whose job it is to review and rate music, so give them a break. Even if it was compiled after a democratic public vote, many people still wouldn't be happy with it, in fact many people would be even more horrified because Justin Bieber's debut or Susan Boyle would win it, never trust the general public to make the right choices! So I'm totally cool with this and enjoyed reading down the list, Rolling Stone has been the best rock criticism journal out there for almost 50 years, and it makes for very interesting reading, plus it seems to me to cover every era from the 50's to date, and every genre except classical...rock, jazz, rap, soul, blues, folk, punk, pop, dance, trance, metal, hiphop....oh, plus Astral Weeks, Born to Run, Miles Davis, and three Dylan albums are Top 20.