in that it's not very good, unlike the rest of their catalogue.

if you classify it as his proper solo debut (disregarding the Bang stuff) I don't think it bears much resemblance to what followed.

The metamorphosis from Mr Fantasy (ignoring the Hole In My Shoe single) to Last Exit followed by the John Barleycorn reformation to the Low Spark / Shoot Out / Eagle would have been hard to forecast.

...what new bands have been dismissed over the past year that will become the great bands of the future.
Amidst all the best of lists can we have a list of artists/albums were everything is there but not quite gelling.

as I've often thought the same thing. It's a wonderful record, but it really does bear little resemblance to those that followed it. Play 'Reeling In The Years' and 'Aja' back to back and it's hard to believe it's the same group, although the Dan was more of a collective after the first couple of albums.

A band should develop over the years. Changing tack, evolving etc. Unless you have a trademark sound that does the job (Status Quo, Oasis).

I would say that the most dramatic transformation is probably Talk Talk - from teen Smash Hits sensations to material that is so heavy, Radiohead's next record is rumoured to contain a song called "Lighten up, Hollis!"

While it was not their first, Just Can't Get Enough was an early Depeche Mode single and still has to be played in concert, due to its enduring popularity. It doesn't sit well with their later material but It Has To Be Done.

David Bowie takes the prize for this, surely. From The Laughing Gnome to Heroes is a long step indeed.

very different on the 3 they have deigned fit for release:
First and Last and Always - Gothic
Floodland - Blade Runner Gothic
Vision Thing - Dumb Ass Amerikan Rawk! Gothic

works for me Next!

His second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh solo albums are all solid gold classics. I just cannot get on with the first. I believe it's David Bowie's favourite.

From Genesis to Revelation is always dismissed as 'something they did to please Jonathon King'.

Compare the 1st Sparks album with No1 In Heaven only 8 years later and compare that with their more recent records it's quite a journey.
There's a huge difference between The Clash debut and Sandinista and only a 4 year difference.
Who knoew the stripped down pop of Talking Heads:77 would develop into the funk workouts of the later albums?

...a similar trajectory to fellow 80's contemporaries Talk Talk in that they started out very differently from how they finished. In their case the debut was glam and pretty shallow and by the end they had achieved considerable critical acclaim. The music was pretty good too!

.....to Nights in White Satin is quite a hoik. I know which I prefer.
And whilst I am not going to put up the links, the quiet desperation of morphing from the Leyton Buzzards to Modern Romance must have been, um, a surprise at the time.

Pink Floyd - who knew that without their lead singer and main songwriter they'd go on to make one of the biggest selling albums ever and that many of those buying it would have no interest whatsoever in debut.

Joy Division - similarly who'd guess that without their leader they'd go on to make one of best selling ever 12" dance singles!

Soft Machine - debut not representative of jazz rock odyssey direction to come.

...their first 3 albums haven't been included on any official CD releases, Ralf and Florian have generally dismissed them in interviews.

A shame really..they're all decent albums but certainly different from Autobahn onwards i.e use of some traditional instruments, certainly more experimental in form.

Blur. You'd never have guessed they'd have gone onto major things after that debut.

ABBA. Their 'first' album' seemed to be the Greatest Hits - they must have had some duds previously and followed with an amazing set of songs.

As a fan of The Human League's first two albums, I must have been one of the only people in the world who hated "Dare" when it came out.

If you like sinister industrial 1970s electronic music I have to recommend both "Reproduction" and "Travelogue". Quite why these albums aren't revered as much as those of Kraftwerk's output from the same period has always been a mystery to me.

Why should an artist put out a series of albums that sound similar and not change, move on and develop? Why are we bothered if it's the debut album that isn't "representative"? When does a change in sound move from a development to unrepresentative? If an artist puts out an album that is different from how they've sounded in the past but represent where they stand artistically today, why is it unrepresentative.

And maybe it's the recent work that's unrepresentative?

And at what point do you freeze a bands cannon to say what is and isn't "representative"?

I saw it more a question of how different a band's debut sounded to what they produced at a later date, not that they shouldn't change or progress.

Ramones anyone?

From Sheena is etc to Don't Come Close is an entire footprint s progress. Seriously, there is the veneer of polish and sophistication lurking beneath the surface, to say nothing of the proto-prog guitar soloing.

to

(Hmmm, maybe it's more pronounced with studio polish.....)

from

(Funny old thing, memory!)

to

Whats 40 years between friends?
(Woops, if you caught the early version with the Ramones instead of the other lot)

about their Phil Spector produced album and the rather fetching colour coordinated T-Shirts on the cover!

Yes, i was one of those people who hated Human League's Dare when it came out, i loved reproduction and travelogue, dare, to me, was like a major cop out.

I remember writing to a bloke who was in a band, saying how i hated how the Human League had suddenly become famous, and how everyone and their dog was into them. This chap wrote back telling me in a very nice way, that i was being a c**k.

I of course was a c**k, and i realised that dare was a classic. Still have a real soft spot for those two lps.

First Dire Straits album was not like any of its successors but is actually quite similar to Mark Knopflers solo output especially Rag Pickers dream.
Regarding the mighty Steely Dan I much prefer their earlier stuff and really believe they went down hill with Aja, Gaucho and the comeback albums.Dont get me wrong I like the later stuff too but for me it is too stylised and misses the dirtiness of the earlier stuff.

Travis? - Kind of short, choppy, more agressive stuff than The Man Whos more considered pop and it's follow ups.

The Stone Roses - :)

I always thing of Dylans first album as being set apart in some way from all that followed. I guess in part that is down to the all the covers. But it's also his age and he's still trying to find his own voice.

Supergrass - They grew up a lot between albums 1 and 2. Richard III is a long way from Caught By The Fuzz.

Bruce Springsteen?? - Never as many words on that first album as ever again but there is a connection with the second album. I'm not sure this one would stand up in court.