West Coast Connection Forum

DUBCC - Tha Connection => West Coast Classics => Topic started by: techniec on July 15, 2001, 05:16:06 PM

Title: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: techniec on July 15, 2001, 05:16:06 PM
i hear alot of homies sayin 2001 is a classic, i dont know about yall but i dont think so,
i mean it is amazing, the best in a while, but too much tracks i was feeling, like big egos, murder inc, i mean they are not bad songs but they dont belong on a classic, perhaps it is a classic considering how it was produced, mixed and what not, but af for the music, too much tracks i didnt like

big egos
murder inc
forgot about dre (its a surprise but i hate it) >:(

peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 15, 2001, 05:21:37 PM
we're not alone in this case critics people are with us... i think the source will try to change the mark and put a classic mark like the already did
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sub_Z_Row on July 15, 2001, 05:31:54 PM
i dont think its a classic either,the only songs i like on it are: #3-Fuck You,#4-Still D.R.E,#6-XXplosive,#7Whats The Difference,#10Forgot about dre,#11-next episode,and #22-the message

7 songs
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: DPGC2001 on July 15, 2001, 05:32:30 PM
I agree 2001 is not a classic...too many just ok songs on there...But the production is so dope...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 15, 2001, 05:55:44 PM
I think you guys will change your minds in 3 years and notice that nothing like it came close to it from 1997-2002...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Big BpG on July 15, 2001, 06:00:32 PM
exactly... in a few years that album will still be in your player while others that came out around this time will just collect dust... a classic album doesn't have to CHANGE ANYTHING ... no music can... the chronic (original) is a classic because the topics and themes that were portrayed in the music were being ignored on the outside. On the otherhand, Nas's illmatic is a classic the same way 2001 is. The music is dope, the lyrics are dope and meaningfull and it was a success. Thats my two cents

-bpg
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: West Coast Veteran on July 15, 2001, 06:07:38 PM
It's CLASSIC! Timless Album! It's Still In My Heavy Rotation...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: CWalker187 on July 15, 2001, 06:10:01 PM
Hell yeah...2001 was an above average album but nowhere near a classic. I am suprised people on this website are agreeing with you, last week I posted about Dre falling off and everyone jumped down my throat.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Dope Money Clean on July 15, 2001, 06:17:51 PM
i gotta say in the 20 years i been alive   2001 is the best album ive ever heard.......... i bump the Instrumentals version  daily.  if there is anything else as perfect as 2001  i wanna know........
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sub_Z_Row on July 15, 2001, 06:22:25 PM

Quote

Hell yeah...2001 was an above average album but nowhere near a classic. I am suprised people on this website are agreeing with you, last week I posted about Dre falling off and everyone jumped down my throat.

yea there are a lotta dre dick riders on the board
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 15, 2001, 06:24:13 PM
yeah n some dead hoes too  ;D
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sub_Z_Row on July 15, 2001, 06:25:05 PM
dead hoes.........?????
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 15, 2001, 06:28:01 PM
dead hoe = death row
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Big BpG on July 15, 2001, 06:29:59 PM
lol hahahahahahahaha

where are the dead hoes... i only see live ones
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sub_Z_Row on July 15, 2001, 06:40:10 PM
whats up wit everybody hatin on death row on this  board?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 15, 2001, 06:43:49 PM
man . fo me i just on't like these hoes like u know snoop don't like hoes  ;D
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Big BpG on July 15, 2001, 06:44:02 PM
who hates Deathrow?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sub_Z_Row on July 15, 2001, 06:47:54 PM
all kinds of ppl on here hate on tha row theres only one person on tha forum that doesnt say anything negative about them (other than me)

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: HBKid_Jr on July 15, 2001, 06:53:22 PM
Honest to God i was goin post this question tonite,  i was thinkin about it walking home from 7-11,  but i feel it is a classic.  Look at the Chronic many peeps felt when it first dropped it wasnt a classic but now many of those same peeps feel it is one of tha greatest if not tha greatest rap album ever.  Five year from now when every1 is using dre's new style a lot of you will change your opinion
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 15, 2001, 07:36:37 PM
Well if it ain't classic it is damn near a classic album. There has been no album as good as it in the past few years so if it's not a classic what is?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: The Big Bad Ass on July 15, 2001, 07:38:44 PM
In my opinion, I thought Dre 2001, and the Streetz by Kurupt were both classics. Nothing within the last 5 years has been better.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: DJ Stew on July 15, 2001, 07:38:49 PM
i dont think so either i just think all the major Dre fans were just real happy to have some new shit that they got all excited and said it was a classic
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: The Big Bad Ass on July 15, 2001, 07:40:49 PM
All 6 million dre fans. That is the most records a living artist has sold in the hip hop community in a long ass time.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 15, 2001, 08:22:01 PM
2001 is NOT classic, not even near-classic. Its good, but not classic. When I think of classics, I think of The Chronic, Illmatic, 36 Chambers, Fear Of A Black Planet, Liquid Swords, E.1999 Eternal, All Eyez On Me, Moment Of Truth, ATLiens, Doggystyle, Ready To Die, and so forth. All of these, and many more, are better albums than 2001.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 15, 2001, 08:23:38 PM
Quote

In my opinion, I thought Dre 2001, and the Streetz by Kurupt were both classics. Nothing within the last 5 years has been better.


Thats quite preposterious. I can think of MANY albums released in the last 5 years that were better. MANY albums.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 15, 2001, 08:32:53 PM
"some people say i fell off , how nigga my last album was the chronic" dre is still as dope as the chronic , classic both , u just don't realise it now, but in the future u will talk about some albums and say" oh it is not as good as the chronic and chronic 2001..you'll see ;)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: The Big Bad Ass on July 15, 2001, 08:43:19 PM
Quite preposterious???? You're right, I'm not allowed my opinion. Just because I think they were 2 of the hottest albums in the last five yours doesn't mean I expect you to believe that. Just stating my opinion.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 15, 2001, 08:51:06 PM
No, your entitled to your opinion, but im just wondering, what do you base it on?? 2001 is a good album, but the best in the last 5 years?? Thats saying its better than the likes of Moment Of Truth, ATLiens, Aquemini, Stankonia, Ironman, The 7 Day Theory, Its Dark And Hell Iz Hot, Art Of War, Murda Muzik, etc etc.....all of which are either classic or near classic albums. J/W
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: DreSnoop00 on July 15, 2001, 08:51:27 PM
2001 was definitley tight.. when i heard this i thought this was a really dope album.. one of tha best in years.. its not a classic... pretty fuckin good tho
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 15, 2001, 08:54:17 PM
Well, its July of 2001 right now. Basically, between July of 99' and right now, the best hip hop album to come out within that time frame, in my opinion is Stankonia....which is, musically and lyrically, an unbelievable album.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: maxi-padz on July 15, 2001, 09:01:52 PM
nowadays the new rap music is starting to all sound da same
u can tell if a song is dope or "a classic"
but 2 me i dont think yall gon bump to X in 3 yearz
caus all tha shitz da same and it will get out done ann forgotten
peace
1
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 15, 2001, 09:26:26 PM
We're all talkin All Eyez On me, Doggystyle,Ready To Die, Liquid Swords etc cuz we grew up on it. Ask some old ass mofuckas and they will name some Run'DMC, Kool Moe Dee, Ice T instead of that. The kids that are just gettin into the rap game right now will only name 2001, Stankonia, Its Dark and Hell is Hot, The Dynasty cuz they dont CARE much about Doggystyle, 36 Chambers etc.

C'mon, ask your peer if Run-DMC is classic he'll laugh yo ass all off. Time goes on, dont trip
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 15, 2001, 09:33:44 PM

Quote



Thats quite preposterious. I can think of MANY albums released in the last 5 years that were better. MANY albums.


I really wanna hear the other albums that have been as better in the last 5 years cause I haven't heard many. So what are they?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Big FC on July 15, 2001, 09:37:49 PM
the thing that seems most prevalent to me is that no one here seems to think that a single artist has more than one classic album cept for tupac & outkast... what the fuck? dre's 2001 is a classsic, stankonia is also a classic, but other than that nothing in the last three years is on the same level as those albums..
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Dope Money Clean on July 15, 2001, 09:44:33 PM
E. 1999 Eternal  is a classic ,  but  2001  aint  ?  ???  i aint gonna be able to sleep tonite.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Seer on July 15, 2001, 10:15:12 PM
classic  ;)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 15, 2001, 10:24:56 PM
Still no one can name 4 other albums that may have topped 2001 in the last couple of years. Y'all can only come up with Stankonia.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 16, 2001, 12:33:01 AM
IVE JUST RED THE WHOLE LOT

THE ONES THAT SAY CLASSIC R EASILY RITE

MAINLY COS THE REST OF U WHO DONT HAVENT STATED A GUD ENUF REASON Y NOT

LETS SEE -

U SAY ALL EYEZ, READY 2 DIE, 36 CHAMBERS, LIQUID SWORDS, ETC ETC

BUT THOSE ALBUMS R 4+ YEARS OLD, ITS TIME WE LOOKED AT ALBUMS AS WHETHER THEY WILL B CLASSICS IN THE FUTURE, AS WE DID BACK THEN

2001 - PEOPLE WILL LOOK AT THIS AND LEARN SOMETHING FROM IT - THEY R ALREADY SO WOTS 2 COME??

JUST THE SAME AS PEOPLE SAW 36 CHAMBERS AS CLASSIC IT MADE PEOPLE SEE THINGS FROM ANOTHA ALBUM THAT MAKES IT A CLASSIC

IN MY OPINION THERE IS A CLASSIC ALBUM RELEASED EVERY YEAR

I MEAN THAT, SO EACH YEAR SOMETHING NEW COMES ALONG AND SOME PEOPLE WILL TAKE ON BOARD WOT THAT PERSON HAS DONE OTHERS WONT BUT WGHEN SOMETHING MAJOR COMES ALONG THE FOLLOWING YEAR THE OTHERS MAY THINK AGAIN HOLD ON THIS IS GUD, WE CAN USE THIS!


I HOPE ALL OF U READ THIS AND THINK IT OVA


peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 16, 2001, 12:43:44 AM
You say every year? Let's see...

1992 - The Chronic
1993- Doggystyle (and 36 is always here too)
1994 - Ready to Die
1995 - Liquid Swords
1996 - All Eyez On Me
1997 - Wu Tang Forever
1998 - Its Dark And Hell Is Hot
1999 - DrDre2001
2000 - Stankonia
2001 - Duces and Trays?

Sounds like you're right dogg...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Last Dragon on July 16, 2001, 12:59:06 AM
Dre2001 not a classic?  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! ;D


IN all sheer honesty, Dre2001 is derfinately a classic album.  
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 16, 2001, 01:54:14 AM

Quote

You say every year? Let's see...

1992 - The Chronic
1993- Doggystyle (and 36 is always here too)
1994 - Ready to Die
1995 - Liquid Swords
1996 - All Eyez On Me
1997 - Wu Tang Forever
1998 - Its Dark And Hell Is Hot
1999 - DrDre2001
2000 - Stankonia
2001 - Duces and Trays?

Sounds like you're right dogg...



OF COURSE IM RITE!!

U SHUD ALL READ MYPOSTS MORE OFTEN!  ;D

DONT AGREE WITH WU FOREVER 97, PERSONALLY I WAS A LITTLE DISSAPOINTED WITH IT ILLTHINK OF ANOTHA THO!


peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Jay ay Beee on July 16, 2001, 06:25:27 AM
C-L-A-S-S-I-C
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Trauma-san on July 16, 2001, 06:58:40 AM

Quote

We're all talkin All Eyez On me, Doggystyle,Ready To Die, Liquid Swords etc cuz we grew up on it. Ask some old ass mofuckas and they will name some Run'DMC, Kool Moe Dee, Ice T instead of that. The kids that are just gettin into the rap game right now will only name 2001, Stankonia, Its Dark and Hell is Hot, The Dynasty cuz they dont CARE much about Doggystyle, 36 Chambers etc.

C'mon, ask your peer if Run-DMC is classic he'll laugh yo ass all off. Time goes on, dont trip


That's The Realest Thing Anybody's Said On Here Yet, And That's What Makes The Chronic 2001 A Classic.  Ask Tanjint, So Much Style, Or Any Other Younguns On This Board, And They'll All Say It's Classic.

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Kingpin on July 16, 2001, 07:04:28 AM
its a classic...it had hit songs like next episode and  still d.r.e and i thought the rest of the album was tight
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Trauma-san on July 16, 2001, 07:09:48 AM
clas·sic (klsk)
adj.

Belonging to the highest rank or class.
Serving as the established model or standard: a classic example of colonial architecture.
Having lasting significance or worth; enduring.

n.
An artist, author, or work generally considered to be of the highest rank or excellence, especially one of enduring significance.
A work recognized as definitive in its field.

One that is of the highest rank or class: The car was a classic of automotive design.
Informal. A superior or unusual example of its kind: The reason he gave for being late was a classic.


------------------------------------------------------

This Is From Dictionary.com, And I'd Say The 2001 Album Lives Up To it! Come On... It's
A. Definately Belonging To The Higest Rank Or Class. Can Anybody Say That This Album Is SubPar? The Beats Are Great, Most All Of The Lyrics Are Well Written, The Flow Is Perfect, There's A Nice Diversity Of Songs...

B. It Serves As An Established Model.  Nowadays, We Compare Everything Dre Produces To What He Did On 2001, As Well As Other Artists.  Since It's A Model, It's Classic.

C.  I Feel It Has Lasting Significance.  People Will All Talk About It In The Future.  Someone Made The Comment That Dre Fans Were Hungry For An Album, That's Why They Liked It.  WELL, What The Fu*k Does It Matter Why We Liked It, No Matter What The Reason, It's Classic Because We DID Like It.  If A Mentally Retarded Kid Made An Album, And We Liked it Because It Sounded Good For A Retarded Kid, Then it Doesn't Matter That It's Not As Good As Other Albums, Because We STILL Liked It.  Get Me?

D.  
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 16, 2001, 08:18:43 AM
Thanx Trauma for supporting my thought. It's nice for a 10-year-time rap fan to be appreciated.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: jay on July 16, 2001, 08:19:28 AM
classic
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: So Much Style on July 16, 2001, 08:25:51 AM
ok...i hate to say it but "us dre dickriders" aka big fans are the only ones who think this is classic..hate to say it.i luv the album but we are the only ones who think its classic
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Trauma-san on July 16, 2001, 08:31:32 AM
Dre Doesn't Have 6 Million Dickriders.

To Paraprase A Famous Elvis Pressley Record Title,

"6 Million Dr. Dre Fans Can't Be Wrong"
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Seer on July 16, 2001, 08:33:16 AM
some people just aint caught up with us yet.. coz we're ahead of the curve
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: HHH on July 16, 2001, 08:35:01 AM
IN MY EYES 2001 IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE A CLASSIC  :P
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: HHH on July 16, 2001, 08:35:42 AM
(I SHOULD HAVE SAID EARS)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 16, 2001, 08:37:40 AM
Yeah. Someday around 2050 the next bitchass president of your darn country with a name like George XYZ Bush will say Yo I was a fan of Dr. Dre back in the day. And he'll win the elections wit it. But it'll be too late.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: West Coast Veteran on July 16, 2001, 09:41:40 AM
"We're all talkin All Eyez On me, Doggystyle,Ready To Die, Liquid Swords etc cuz we grew up on it. Ask some old ass mofuckas and they will name some Run'DMC, Kool Moe Dee, Ice T instead of that. The kids that are just gettin into the rap game right now will only name 2001, Stankonia, Its Dark and Hell is Hot, The Dynasty cuz they dont CARE much about Doggystyle, 36 Chambers etc.

C'mon, ask your peer if Run-DMC is classic he'll laugh yo ass all off. Time goes on, dont trip"

i've been listenin' to Hip Hop since '85...i think Run DMC is Classic...i grew up on Run DMC, LL, Kane, BDP, and Public Enemy..but i still think Doggystyle ..Chronic 2001..and alot of new school shit is CLASSIC...i can understand why most of you wont find Run DMC, Big Daddy Kane, Biz Markie Classic cause you weren't listenin to it at the time so its hard to relate... but anyone who laughs there ass off at Run DMC i'll laugh at 100Xharder for being an ignorant new comer who hasnt studied the history of hip hop and the impact Run DMC had on all the "Rap" music he listens to today...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 16, 2001, 10:05:07 AM
It is classic ya'll...I mean come on there was nothing as good to come out as it between 1997-2001....This is the album of our era...Plus it inspired so many people, one to point out is Timbaland....It's classic, don't front...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Top-Dogg2001 on July 16, 2001, 10:14:54 AM

Quote

You say every year? Let's see...

1992 - The Chronic
1993- Doggystyle (and 36 is always here too)
1994 - Ready to Die
1995 - Liquid Swords
1996 - All Eyez On Me
1997 - Wu Tang Forever
1998 - Its Dark And Hell Is Hot
1999 - DrDre2001
2000 - Stankonia
2001 - Duces and Trays?

Sounds like you're right dogg...


where is illmatic, where is iron man, where's reasonable doubt, where is only built for cuban links, where are the tribe's albums, where is aquemini and the rest of outkast's albums, where is bone thugs's first album. I would probably put mobb deep infamous there but that is my personal prefrence.  WHy is it's dark and hell is hot a classic on your list? Why is wu tang forever a classic on your list? It's good but it's no classic.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 16, 2001, 10:19:21 AM
READ MY THREAD I POINT THATOUT....ITS TRUE THO THERE IS AT LEAST ONE CLSSIC PER YEAR!

peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Mr G-Thang on July 16, 2001, 10:34:27 AM
as an album, 2001 is better then the Chronic

Chronic had more 10/10 songs , but as an album it was weaker

peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 16, 2001, 11:22:40 AM
I agree with NIK 100%. As a matter of fact it inspired many of us to go post at the Dre board which got our asses over here.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: RapAce on July 16, 2001, 12:19:56 PM
Actually it is not a classic yet, it will be, I mean you even got ppl listening that don't know amy hiphop, but they bought Dre2001, Dre's Mixin, And the entire Album i just brilliaaaaaant! And it is wicked. And it will be considered Classic soon....

Peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 03:43:35 PM
so much style said we're the only ones who think it's classic, dude your my homie but that another dumb thing you just said apart from the post you made in the dre's musicians post


2001 is classic point blank


and hellrazor your sad, you think that the mo thugs first album and 3 of the bone albums are classics and not 2001...lol ok that's retarted bone has 1 classic and that's e. 1999 eternal

and for the guy who said 2001 was better than the chronic slap yourself...the chronic is the best album ever ...period

back to what so much style said though, every publication hails it as a modern day classic now...MANY rap fans think this album is classic or near classic, an album doesn't stay in the punlic conscience for almost 2 years if theres nothing special about it .you're young nieve so i can't be too ruff on you, if you don't like it that's cool i can live with that i ain't tryin' to force you to like it just becuase it's classic, shit the rollingstones put out a bunch of classics and i can't feel any of them, but don't run around saying ignorant and uneducated shit

in 5 years this album with be a definate classic same with stankonia, people hate on stankonia ALOT on other boards...wtf?, but anyways in 5 years from now people will be saying what i've been saying since the release date of these albums ...they are classics

c'mon when doggystyle came out, so called "real hip hop fans were saying it was pop rap and a novilty...umm it's been 8 years since it was released and it's almost everyones favorite or one of their favorite albums of all time

when ready to die came out it surcomed to ALOT of criticism, east coast heads were not pleased with the gangster themes and funk inspired tracks, not many people were saying it was classic, but shit 7 years from it's release biggie is praised as the best rapper along with 2pac of all time

when almost of all run dmc's albums came out they  were considered fads in the music industry...lol

theres only a handful of albums that have came out in the rap world that has been automatically recieved as classics, i ain't trying to be concieded or anything but i'm good at detecting classics and theres no doubt 2001 is/will be a classic
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:01:35 PM
Quote

so much style said we're the only ones who think it's classic, dude your my homie but that another dumb thing you just said apart from the post you made in the dre's musicians post


2001 is classic point blank


and hellrazor your sad, you think that the mo thugs first album and 3 of the bone albums are classics and not 2001...lol ok that's retarted bone has 1 classic and that's e. 1999 eternal

and for the guy who said 2001 was better than the chronic slap yourself...the chronic is the best album ever ...period

back to what so much style said though, every publication hails it as a modern day classic now...MANY rap fans think this album is classic or near classic, an album doesn't stay in the punlic conscience for almost 2 years if theres nothing special about it .you're young nieve so i can't be too ruff on you, if you don't like it that's cool i can live with that i ain't tryin' to force you to like it just becuase it's classic, shit the rollingstones put out a bunch of classics and i can't feel any of them, but don't run around saying ignorant and uneducated shit

in 5 years this album with be a definate classic same with stankonia, people hate on stankonia ALOT on other boards...wtf?, but anyways in 5 years from now people will be saying what i've been saying since the release date of these albums ...they are classics

c'mon when doggystyle came out, so called "real hip hop fans were saying it was pop rap and a novilty...umm it's been 8 years since it was released and it's almost everyones favorite or one of their favorite albums of all time

when ready to die came out it surcomed to ALOT of criticism, east coast heads were not pleased with the gangster themes and funk inspired tracks, not many people were saying it was classic, but shit 7 years from it's release biggie is praised as the best rapper along with 2pac of all time

when almost of all run dmc's albums came out they  were considered fads in the music industry...lol

theres only a handful of albums that have came out in the rap world that has been automatically recieved as classics, i ain't trying to be concieded or anything but i'm good at detecting classics and theres no doubt 2001 is/will be a classic


Sad?? Bullshit im sad. "Creepin On Ah Come Up", E.1999 Eternal, and Art Of War are ALL better 2001. Especically E.1999 Eternal. The Bone albums were plauged with mediocre guest appearances and filler tracks. Someone in this thread earlier on page said 2001 is a better album than E.1999 Eternal. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! E.1999 Eternal shits all over 2001, and dont even try to argue cuz Ill shut cha down just like MJ.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 06:10:43 PM
i can accept you saying e. 1999 is better than 2001, i don't feel that way but i can accept that, but that's REALLY sad you put creepin' and art of war over 2001


since we're being sad here, i guess ludacris' Back for the First time is better than streetz iz a mutha, limp bizkit is  a better band than Black Sabath, swizz beats is a better producer than timbaland....dude this is how you sound
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: d_bomb_23 on July 16, 2001, 06:11:40 PM
yes it is yeah stupid brit
start listenen to some white music
like EVERYONE in the UK does
dre is one of tha best

Your stupid but then i cant blame yeah,since you are
UK
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:20:09 PM
Quote

i can accept you saying e. 1999 is better than 2001, i don't feel that way but i can accept that, but that's REALLY sad you put creepin' and art of war over 2001


since we're being sad here, i guess ludacris' Back for the First time is better than streetz iz a mutha, limp bizkit is  a better band than Black Sabath, swizz beats is a better producer than timbaland....dude this is how you sound


I guess you could make a case for Art Of War not being better than 2001 [though I like it better personally], but Creepin On Ah Come Üp is DEFINATLY better than 2001, and I think most people would agree with that. I dont feel 2001 is classic, cuz of the filler songs and alot of the mediocre guest appearances. Creepin and Eternal were both flawless from top to bottom, with no filler cuts and no wack guest appearances. Another reason why they're better, two words:

IMPACT and INFLUENCE.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 16, 2001, 06:23:15 PM
Yeah, I like Art of War and 2001 both the same but if you look (or hear) at both albums 2001 is clearly the better album
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 06:27:05 PM

Quote



I guess you could make a case for Art Of War not being better than 2001 [though I like it better personally], but Creepin On Ah Come Üp is DEFINATLY better than 2001, and I think most people would agree with that. I dont feel 2001 is classic, cuz of the filler songs and alot of the mediocre guest appearances. Creepin and Eternal were both flawless from top to bottom, with no filler cuts and no wack guest appearances. Another reason why they're better, two words:

IMPACT and INFLUENCE.


what your saying bone has more impact than dre? wigger pleez

and your saying bone is more influencial than dre.....oh what becuase bone opened the gates for nelly


you seriously need to check my defintion of a dickrider post ...seriously
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:34:53 PM
Quote



what your saying bone has more impact than dre? wigger pleez

and your saying bone is more influencial than dre.....oh what becuase bone opened the gates for nelly


you seriously need to check my defintion of a dickrider post ...seriously


Get the fuck off Dre's nuts for a second and read my post more carefully:

I never said Bone was more influential than Dre, I said Creepin and Eternal are more influential albums than 2001 is......Jesus Christ. If you were talking about the Chronic, it would be a different story, but we're not. E.1999 Eternal and Creepin are better albums than 2001, end of discussion.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 06:37:51 PM
you can make a reasonable argue ment for e.1999 eternal but your that's gay to say creepin' is better than 2001...oh yeah your the one who needs to jump of a cock here, every other post is about how great bone is/was....dude they are NOT all that PLEEZBALEEVIT!!!!!!...period, god it's like arguing with a brick wall
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:41:15 PM
Oh, and here are some more albums that are better than 2001:

Public Enemy's first 4 albums [especially It Takes A Nation and Black Planet]

All 4 Outkast LP's

The Chronic

Doggystyle

All Eyez On Me, Me Against The World, and Makaveli

36 Chambers, Liquid Swords, Cuban Linx, Ironman, Wu Forever

Illmatic

Ready To Die

Run DMC's first 3 albums

The first two Redman albums [especially Dare Iz A Darkside]

The Infamous

Moment Of Truth

Hard To Earn

All of the Beastie Boy's albums

Low End Theory and Midnight Marauders from Tribe Called Quest

Amerikkkaz Most Wanted, Death Certificate, The Predator

Straight Outta Compton



DAAAAAAAAAMN, I just named a SHITLOAD of albums better than 2001.

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:42:45 PM
Oh, and for good measure, throw in:

Scarface, The Diary

The first two Goodie Mob albums

Its Dark And Hell Iz Hot
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 06:44:12 PM
oh yeah and to add to the influencial thing and impact thing those albums have been out for a while now, 2001 hasn't been out half as long ...


plus who the hell did they influence...nelly?

dude bone's music sounds ALOT like the other stuff that was coming out in that time period from the west don't even front, there is some differences with the singing but most of the topic manner was the same shit that was being talked about already

impact? again who did they impact...nelly, and that dude who has that song called "in my projects?" pleez

if you havn't noticed alot of popular parts from 2001 have been sampled or interploited...and i doubt you know about this but alot of punk rock acts have redone a few of the songs on there. not to say that's what makes your great but that says somthing about your greatness in that product
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 06:46:22 PM
i hope you know you just wasted time writing all those albums becuase the question was


what albums in the past 5 years are better than 2001....not too many

not what albums of all time are better no one siad it was the best album of all time
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:51:32 PM
Dude, if it werent for Bone, where the fuck would midwest hip hop be?? Nowhere. I dont care how popular Nelly is, the fact of the matter is, Bone where the first cats from that region to blow up, and they ARE the pioneers of a particular sound. You cant deny it. That is how they are influential. Plus, how many cats have tried to bite their style?? A shitload of cats. Even a bunch of legit artists have tried to use the Bone flow, at one time or another. Nas, Biggie, Eminem, Outkast, and even Snoop Dogg have all tried to use the Bone flow at least once. Nobody was trying to do that shit until AFTER Bone blew up. Sure, there were cats rapping fast before Bone was, but Bone was the first to incorporate the harmony into it. After multi-platinum success, everyone was on their jock trying to use their flow. But Bone is the only group to have that style perfected, thus the reason why they are the only ones to reach multi-platinum status with it. Even 3-6 Mafia, who was out before Bone was, didnt start harmonizing until after Bone blew up. Cuz they wanted to emulate Bone's success, and though they got their first platinum album, it didnt sound half as dope as when Bone did it, cuz Bone are the pioneers of that style. E.1999 Eternal is the BLUEPRINT for midwest hip hop. That album influenced EVERY midwest hip hop album that came out after it.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 06:55:53 PM
Quote

i hope you know you just wasted time writing all those albums becuase the question was


what albums in the past 5 years are better than 2001....not too many

not what albums of all time are better no one siad it was the best album of all time


Albums in the last 5 years?? Lets see. The following albums, released within the last 5 years, are better than 2001 in my opinion:

ATLiens, Aquemini, Stankonia

Ironman, Wu Forever

Blackout

It Was Written, I Am

Murda Muzik

Moment Of Truth

Art Of War [yea, we discussed this, but I still like this better than 2001]

TM 1999

The 7 Day Theory

Its Dark And Hell Is Hot
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 16, 2001, 07:07:21 PM
Hahahhahhahahhahah...You said "It's Dark and Hellz Not"...Dude....shut the fuck up...half of the albums you listed aren't near "2001"...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:10:01 PM
hellrazor you have issues
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 07:11:01 PM
Quote

Hahahhahhahahhahah...You said "It's Dark and Hellz Not"...Dude....shut the fuck up...half of the albums you listed aren't near "2001"...


The words of a typical Dre dickrider^^^^^^Its Dark And Hell is Hot is alot better than 2001. And ALL the albums I named are at LEAST equal to 2001, if not better. Name the ones you think arent close to 2001, and we'll see how much of a herb you are.

By the way, this post is for Now I Know, in case someone posts above this and I target the wrong person.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 07:14:11 PM
Quote

hellrazor you have issues


I have issues?? Im the one who's explaining all my opinions here and backing up what I say with objectives and logical explanations. I havent see you explain to me why 2001 is so great. Please elaborate. What is so great about 2001??
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:23:28 PM

Quote



Albums in the last 5 years?? Lets see. The following albums, released within the last 5 years, are better than 2001 in my opinion:

ATLiens, Aquemini, Stankonia

Ironman, Wu Forever

Blackout

It Was Written, I Am

Murda Muzik

Moment Of Truth

Art Of War [yea, we discussed this, but I still like this better than 2001]

TM 1999

The 7 Day Theory

Its Dark And Hell Is Hot


ATLiens is about equal to 2001
true their last 2 was better than 2001, but the production wasn't as good

iron man isn't as good, iron man is near classic but 2001 is better

wu forever, not even dude

black out-ha ha ha not even close

it was written was tight but it's far from classic, and I am was so average

murda muzik -that's really dumb to say this album is tight but not as good as 2001

moment of truth-this album is good but not the classic you make it out to be


art of war-you are such an idiot for saying this

the 7 day theory-these are about tied  even though i feel 2001 more

thug mentality-ha...not even close 2001 by a long shot

it's dark and hell is hot-dmx is a one album wonder really, but dmx's best can't even fuck with 2001


really now your talking out your ass

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 07:28:52 PM
Quote



ATLiens is about equal to 2001
true their last 2 was better than 2001, but the production wasn't as good

iron man isn't as good, iron man is near classic but 2001 is better

wu forever, not even dude

black out-ha ha ha not even close

it was written was tight but it's far from classic, and I am was so average

murda muzik -that's really dumb to say this album is tight but not as good as 2001

moment of truth-this album is good but not the classic you make it out to be


art of war-you are such an idiot for saying this

the 7 day theory-these are about tied  even though i feel 2001 more

thug mentality-ha...not even close 2001 by a long shot

it's dark and hell is hot-dmx is a one album wonder really, but dmx's best can't even fuck with 2001


really now your talking out your ass




You still havent said what is so great about 2001. If im soooooo wrong as you say I am, prove it......Oh, thats right, YOU CANT, cause you know almost all the above albums I listed are better. Moment Of Truth isnt classic?? Heh, Moment of Truth is considered to be better than 2001 by GENERAL CONSENSUS.......lol. Until you give me an explanation as to what is so great about 2001, you have no arguement. Ive already backed up my opinions with logical objectives and analysis.

Dont reply to this until you come with an intelligent post explaining why 2001 is so great. I dont wanna see any dumbass posts like "your an idiot", "2001 shits all over this album and that album", yada yada yada, otherwise I aint even gonna address this topic anymore.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:32:45 PM
elaborate?


ok

2001 single handedly brought back the west coast

2001 is one of the most anticiapated follow ups ever

2001  gave the west coast a new sound to work with instead of the same g-funk formulas

2001 is the most diversly purchased album of the 90's and the new decade acording to usa today

2001 earned dre a grammy for producer of the year the first hardcore rapper to do so and the first rap artist also i think

2001 has earned more accolates and awards,and titles for album of the year than any other rap album in rap history

2001 is the best selling rap record in many  overseas countries

2001 launched the carreers of xzibit kurupt and nate dogg even more so


Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:34:26 PM
and oh yeah 2001 is a fucking tight album
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 07:40:57 PM
Quote

elaborate?


ok

2001 single handedly brought back the west coast

2001 is one of the most anticiapated follow ups ever

2001  gave the west coast a new sound to work with instead of the same g-funk formulas

2001 is the most diversly purchased album of the 90's and the new decade acording to usa today

2001 earned dre a grammy for producer of the year the first hardcore rapper to do so and the first rap artist also i think

2001 has earned more accolates and awards,and titles for album of the year than any other rap album in rap history

2001 is the best selling rap record in many  overseas countries

2001 launched the carreers of xzibit kurupt and nate dogg even more so





Ok, but you're not really telling me anything I knew. I already knew that 2001 was hella anticipated [ill admit, I anticipated it HUGLY, and maybe thats why it disappointed me cuz I was expecting it to be on the same level as Chronic], and that it was critically acclaimed. However, I cant consider an album classic if I skip half the tracks on it, and it doesnt stay in my stereo in consistant rotation. 2001 is just under 2 years old, but it rarely gets rotation in my stereo. Ill put in on every now and then, cuz there are some HOT tracks on it, but I cant consider it a classic. E.1999 Eternal [for example], is SIX years old, but it still gets INCREDIBLE amounts of rotation in my stereo. And the thing about Eternal is, it sounds BETTER and FRESHER today than it did 6 years ago. The album actually gets better with every listen, 6 years after its release!!!! Same goes for albums like Liquid Swords, The Chronic, All Eyez On Me, ATLiens, 36 Chambers, and so on. Im not saying 2001 is a wack album, its about a 3.5-3.75 in my opinion, but I cant consider it classic for the reasons I stated. Aight, Peace.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Tecknine on July 16, 2001, 07:43:19 PM
Exactly what Jake said.I feel the whole album..It is a classic.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:47:18 PM
that's all you had to say


i can live with the fact that you don't like it, i ain't tryin to force it down your throat like mashed potatoes


but just cuz you don't consider it a classic and a shit loads of other people do doesn't make it a non classic


in my eyez i don't see what so great about  the first cypress hill cd wich is considered a classic but just becuase i don't like doesn't deminish it's classic status just becuase you feel a certain way doesn't mean that's the way it is, like i said i don't like the rolling stones music and their whole catelouge i heard is suppose to be classic and i havn't heard a Stone's song i've liked yet and my uncle plays all their shit 24/7...but i'll respect them and give them their title as the second best rock band of all time
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Last Dragon on July 16, 2001, 07:53:01 PM

Quote

and oh yeah 2001 is a fucking tight album


I couldn't have said it better myself.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 07:55:23 PM
Quote

that's all you had to say


i can live with the fact that you don't like it, i ain't tryin to force it down your throat like mashed potatoes


but just cuz you don't consider it a classic and a shit loads of other people do doesn't make it a non classic


in my eyez i don't see what so great about  the first cypress hill cd wich is considered a classic but just becuase i don't like doesn't deminish it's classic status just becuase you feel a certain way doesn't mean that's the way it is, like i said i don't like the rolling stones music and their whole catelouge i heard is suppose to be classic and i havn't heard a Stone's song i've liked yet and my uncle plays all their shit 24/7...but i'll respect them and give them their title as the second best rock band of all time


The Beatles are the #1 rock band, right?? Im not much into rock music, but if I had to pick who was second best, id say Led Zeppelin. To be honest, I like their music, alot better than The Beatles music overall, and many consider Zep to be the greatest rock band ever. But ill admit that the Beatles had the most impact. Im not gonna turn this into a rock discussion though, lol.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 16, 2001, 07:59:17 PM
:o wow this subject begin to grow very fast now...lol . every fans did a to claim that it's a classic and i still do
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 07:59:38 PM
yeah this would be gay to turn this into a rock argument


yeah the beatles are hailed as number one, even though i love metallica more


and even though i feel metallica more zeplin is considered the best HARD core rock band
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Cliftone_Santiago_909 on July 16, 2001, 08:41:10 PM

Quote

i can live with the fact that you don't like it, i ain't tryin to force it down your throat like mashed potatoes


but just cuz you don't consider it a classic and a shit loads of other people do doesn't make it a non classic


   EXACTLY! I haven't jumped in this thread yet but for real..... you can't deny Chronic 2001. You can go ahead and say that you dont like it.... but when you got millions of muthafuckers praising it (some who aint even into rap) and it's getting nominated for grammies...... you can't deny it.

    And it's not that the people who praise Chronic 2001 are Dr Dre "Dickriders".... it's just that the rest of you are straight HATERS!
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 16, 2001, 09:13:01 PM
Quote



   EXACTLY! I haven't jumped in this thread yet but for real..... you can't deny Chronic 2001. You can go ahead and say that you dont like it.... but when you got millions of muthafuckers praising it (some who aint even into rap) and it's getting nominated for grammies...... you can't deny it.

    And it's not that the people who praise Chronic 2001 are Dr Dre "Dickriders".... it's just that the rest of you are straight HATERS!


Well, I can make the same arguement for all the people who hate on Art Of War.....
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 16, 2001, 09:22:25 PM
I GUESS U MOTHERFUCKERS WONT SHUT UP UNTIL DRE AND BONE THUGGS DO A COLLABO ALBUM 2GETHER. CALM DOWN!
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 16, 2001, 09:29:43 PM
u can't say the same for art of war cuz 1. it's not critically acclaimed 2. every bone fan i know thinks that album is their worst 3. there's more people who don't like it than do
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: littlesnoopdogg on July 16, 2001, 10:31:34 PM
OK, you dont' sell as much as 2001 did, and not be considered at least a damn near classic in your style of music. The fact it's not a near classic is because of what was already mentioned. The critics and non rap fans loved it.

I'm a huge Bone fan. I've got all 5 group cd's, both of bizzy's, Flesh's 1st, Krayzie's, and all Mo Thugs.
Art of War has alot of good stuff, but some bad stuff. I'd consider Eternal a classic. Hell, I like both collections more than either disc on AOW. I feel AOW ain't near  a classic.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: cremedelaclem on July 17, 2001, 04:53:26 AM
the official cremdelaclem list of classic and near classic hip hop albums

classic - the chronic

           doggystyle

           paid in full

           e.eternal
 
            efil4zaggin

           liquid swords

            36 chambers

             only built....

             legends

              illmatic

            midnight marauders

             peoples instinctive travels....

             fresh mode ep
   
              slim shady lp
 
              soundbombing 2

               aquemini

                2001

                amerikkas most wanted

                the diary

                regulate





near classics -  supreme clientele

                     atliens

                      stankonia

                       hell on earth
   
                       streetz is a...

                        dogg food
           
                        reasonable doubt
 
                        lifestyles ov the poor and dangerous

                       3 feet high and rising

                        the weight

                         lyricist lounge 1

                          cypress hill

                           ironman
 
                         at the speed of life

                           balance and options
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: cremedelaclem on July 17, 2001, 04:56:07 AM
i forgot these

classic - ready to die

near classic - life after death

                  no way out
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: RapAce on July 17, 2001, 04:59:15 AM
So like if we all voted wuld it be classic or nonclassic...?

I say classic  8)

Peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 17, 2001, 05:06:13 AM
CLASSIC!

2001 - PEOPLE WILL LOOK AT THIS AND LEARN SOMETHING FROM IT

AS I SED EARLIER THERE IS A CLASSIC ALBUM RELEASED EVERY YEAR SO EACH YEAR SOMETHING NEW COMES ALONG AND SOME PEOPLE WILL TAKE STUFF IDEAS OFF IT

AND THE FANS JUST

BENEFIT!


peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 17, 2001, 09:55:31 AM
Crem, you forgot "Death Certificate" and "Eazy-Duz-It"...
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 17, 2001, 10:00:51 AM
100TH!

WOW THIS HAS BECOME A LONG TOPIC YET STILL STAYED RELEVENT!


peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: techniec on July 17, 2001, 10:05:05 AM
hey!!!!!!!!

my post has 100 replies ;D

keep the arguments going, i wanna catch up to that 7 page "is there any euro gangsta rap" post ;D

i still say it aint a classic, cuz there are 3-4 tracks that are shit which is too much, but for me its too close
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 17, 2001, 01:49:12 PM
Quote
the diary


I thought I was the only one who thought The Diary was a classic. Good to see I'm not.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 01:52:06 PM
Quote

u can't say the same for art of war cuz 1. it's not critically acclaimed 2. every bone fan i know thinks that album is their worst 3. there's more people who don't like it than do


Critically acclaimed status doesnt mean jack shit. I judge the album by the content, not critical status. And my ears tell me Art Of War is a better album than 2001.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 01:52:40 PM
IS THIS DA BIGGEST TOPIC YALL EVER HAD OR WHAT????????????? ??? ???
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Seer on July 17, 2001, 01:53:31 PM
nah we've had worse.... LOL
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: =[Euthanasia]= on July 17, 2001, 01:53:55 PM
In my eyes it a classic....I labelled it as a classic as

soon as I started bumping it due to the fact that

IMO it sized up to the original Chronic, NO DOUBT!

There's not many artists that have second, third,

forth etc LP's that size upto their debut. 2001 will

always be reflected on, along with The Chronic by

aspiring emcees & Hip-Hop fans to come. This in my

eyes makes it a CLASSIC.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Mr_Loc on July 17, 2001, 02:06:01 PM
i try to not get caught up in 'classic' discussions because all i know is what i like. thats why i label shit i really like 'Loc's Classics' lol

2001 is a Loc's Classic, i got kind of bored with it just cuz everyone was playing that shit too much, but when all the smoke settles it'll still be an incredible album

and the production did set a new trend in hip hop, even though some producers had been using that style on the underground (Hutch, The Glove, etc) this album brought it to a new level.

thats my 2 cents
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Joachim on July 17, 2001, 02:11:04 PM

Quote


i got kind of bored with it just cuz everyone was playing that shit too much, but when all the smoke settles it'll still be an incredible album



Yeah i same thing wit me it got rinsed hard

But its a dope album and....ah fuck it, i feel it is definately a classic album....
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 02:26:37 PM
One more thing I wanna say about Art Of War. ALOT of Bone fans USED to hate it, but now that Resurrection has come out and proved to be disappointing, many people who hated the Art Of War before now like it. If you dont believe me, go to almost any Bone board, and the majority will tell you that AOW is a bangin' album. I was telling mothafuckaz in 97' that AOW was a masterpiece, and people were like "hell naw". Nowadays, people are like "yea, Art Of War is the shit, I cant believe I hated that album before". It took mothafuckaz 3 years to catch up. The album concept is hella deep, and mothafuckaz didnt understand, thats why they hated on it. But now, in 2000, after the simplicity of Resurrection, people have really started to realize how great AOW really is. Some Bone fans even go as far to label it as their fav Bone album, or the best Bone album. I wouldnt go that far, cuz Eternal is UNTOUCHABLE, but AOW isnt too far behind. Listen to Resurrection, then listen to AOW. The difference is staggering. Resurrection lacked chemistry and cohesion, whereareas AOW was Bone's maturing peak. They matured on that album BIG time, and its still Uneeks most diverse production to this day [though Eternal is his musical masterpiece]. AOW marked the album where Krayzie become more diverse with his styles, Bizzy became a sharp lryicist, and Layzie was still pretty consistant. Wish kinda fell off, which was the only mishap of the album, besides a few filler cuts. Go to various Bone boards and see what they think about Art Of War now. I think you'll be surprised, BigJake.......

Oh, and Art Of War was liked well enough, for it sold over 5 million.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 02:33:03 PM
that doesn't mean it's classic
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 02:37:48 PM
Fuck Yall, Every Bone thugs n harmony is a fuckin classic except tha last one. dats rite.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 02:42:25 PM
ummm yeah and you probably own only 7 albums then , right
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 02:43:31 PM
Quote

that doesn't mean it's classic


Yea, its debatable, but its definatly a better album than people give it credit for. If you have the album, give it a listen again. It really is a dope album, and the last great Bone album. Disc 1 was nearly flawless, and Disc 2 wasnt quite as strong but was still very listenable. The only reason people hated on is cuz they were expecting another E.1999, but the truth of the matter is, them cats grew up. They had no reason to rap about the streets anymore, cuz they didnt do that shit no more. So with AOW, they basically made a more deep concept album, based on "fighting w/o fighting" or "being mentally superior to your opposition". When you think about it, its a deep concept, very very deep. Cuz life itself is a struggle, and the concepts on that album apply to many everyday situations. Im probably not gonna convince you its a great album, but im just telling you why I think its dope. Alot of Bone fans who used to hate now love it death, cuz of Resurrection. Res wasnt a bad album, but it wasnt the caliber album a Bone album could or should be.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 02:54:40 PM
Fuckin hata, there aint no otha group as good as bone, and no group has sold more than them,

E.1999 has sold nearly 10 million records.
Art of War-5 million
Creepin on ah come up-5 million
And they're still undaground and walk in their own streets wit their head up.

When did anyone from west besides 2pac do anythin like dat huh?
Dats what I thought.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 02:54:47 PM
i bought this album when it first came out which was like in 97...


and the only tracks i feel are  to this day:


look into my eyes
if i could teach the world
thug luv
the intro
evil paradise
body rott


6 song on a cd with 28 songs...that's sad

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 02:59:36 PM
bone is not the best group , it's about quality not quanity


wu tang is a better group than bone
Public enemy is a better group than bone
NWA is better than bone
the alkaholiks are better
outkast is better than bone
tribe called quest is better than bone
dogg pound is better



Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 03:02:43 PM
Quote

Fuckin hata, there aint no otha group as good as bone, and no group has sold more than them,

E.1999 has sold nearly 10 million records.
Art of War-5 million
Creepin on ah come up-5 million
And they're still undaground and walk in their own streets wit their head up.

When did anyone from west besides 2pac do anythin like dat huh?
Dats what I thought.


Bone is the highest selling rap group ever, but some of those numbers are A LITTLE high.

E.1999 Eternal--8 million
AOW--5 million
Creepin ON Ah Come Up--4 million
BTNHresurrection--1.5 million
The Collection Vol.1--gold
Family Scriptures--2 million
Family Reunion--Platinum
Bizzy's first solo--gold [almost platinum]
Flesh's first solo--gold
Krayzie's solo--2 million

Anyway, the songs from AOW im feelin:

Disc 1: The whole thing, except song #7

Disc 2: Thug Luv, Hatin Nation, 7 Sign, Wastland Warriors, U Aint Bone, All Original, Whom Die The Lie, Friends [one of my fav Bone songs EVER], Evil Paradise.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 03:03:58 PM
hell razore i want you to read these reviews fans sent in to these certain sites about Art of War


stephan thomas earlwind(a critic but an admitted bone fan

The double-disc album was the bane of mid-'90s hip-hop. Single-disc albums tended to be over-long in the first place, but double-discs were even worse, since it required artists incapable of successfully filling out a 70 minute disc to produce twice as much music. And it wasn't a question of the two-disc set being an artistic statement — as if the rappers had so much to say they couldn't contain themselves to one disc — it was purely a commercial decision, so they could take home more royalties. It could be argued the first two double-disc rap albums by 2Pac and the Notorious B.I.G. justified their length, since they were hip-hop giants, and the Wu-Tang Clan's Wu-Tang Forever more than justified its length with vision, depth and variety. However, Bone Thugs N Harmony's double-disc Art of War can only qualify as an exercise in pure indulgence. Unlike the aforementioned artists, Bone doesn't posess either a lyrical or musical vision; their most distinctive trademark, whiny "soulful" sung vocals alternating with ragga-inflected raps, was lifted from Snoop Dogg and Dre productions. While the group is capable of producing a catchy single, they don't have the personality to sustain an album, much less a double-disc set. By the end of the second disc, they have repeated all of their ideas at least five times apiece, and only a few of those ideas resulted in actual songs in the first place. Even hardcore fans will find Art of War to be an endurance test. As the cliche says, it's a double album that would have made an excellent single disc — and in this case, that means a standard 45-minute record, not a 70-minute CD.

Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 03:04:45 PM
Quote

bone is not the best group , it's about quality not quanity


wu tang is a better group than bone
Public enemy is a better group than bone
NWA is better than bone
the alkaholiks are better
outkast is better than bone
tribe called quest is better than bone
dogg pound is better






Um, The Doggpound and the Liks are NOWHERE near Bone, just for the fact that E.1999 Eternal shits on anything either of those groups has ever done, and im not even gonna argue about this........
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Ro J. Simpson on July 17, 2001, 03:10:20 PM
X.O experience, and the last dogg pound album  both shit on e.1999 fo shizzle.........i thort that album was weak, im sorry i did not feel that album in the slightest
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 03:15:11 PM
Quote

X.O experience, and the last dogg pound album  both shit on e.1999 fo shizzle.........i thort that album was weak, im sorry i did not feel that album in the slightest



WTF?? Yea, and Nelly is the illest MC ever, right?? Please.....dont make me laugh.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 03:16:53 PM
um tha dogg pound and the liks are way more consistant than bone


i'm sorry but 21 and over and likwitdation are faaaaaaabulous


i'm sorry but kurupt and daz's total efforts with their 2 group albums and 4 solos has been better than bones catelouge, and that's excluding their work on the chronic and doggystyle
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: DreSnoop00 on July 17, 2001, 03:17:32 PM
ijust gotta say damn.. this a a long topic goin on here
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 03:22:07 PM
Quote

um tha dogg pound and the liks are way more consistant than bone


i'm sorry but 21 and over and likwitdation are faaaaaaabulous


i'm sorry but kurupt and daz's total efforts with their 2 group albums and 4 solos has been better than bones catelouge, and that's excluding their work on the chronic and doggystyle



Um, no, not even close. And thats all im gonna say about it. Ill let yall continue to talk about 2001 now.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Ro J. Simpson on July 17, 2001, 03:22:39 PM
(http://www.growkind.com/gardens/growkind/9/5weeksgarden2.jpg)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Ro J. Simpson on July 17, 2001, 03:23:13 PM
(http://www.growkind.com/gardens/growkind/9/5weeksgarden2.jpg)

my garden is comin on quite nice now i think, what o y'all think?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Ro J. Simpson on July 17, 2001, 03:25:21 PM
im pissed.....the owners of the site always put there logo on the damn photo, everytime i post a new one, they put there logo on....ITS MY BUD, NOT YOURS...bitch ass faggots, im a quit sendin my foto's there, but u do get a cash prize if u get loads of votes...

peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 05:31:14 PM
Yall muthafuckas must be crazy, U can't compare Tha liks to Bone in tha slightest. Bone will kill tha Liks lyrically and physically. Fuckin hatas.

Bone Thugs n Harmony have a Legacy bitch.
No group has ever come close.


Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 05:38:55 PM
Quote
Bone Thugs n Harmony have a Legacy bitch.
No group has ever come close.




hey man have you ever heard of

NWA
Run DMC
Public Enemy
Tribe Called Quest


Quote
Bone will kill tha Liks lyrically and physically. Fuckin hatas.


hmmm so your telling me L-burna Bizzy Wish and flesh are better than J-ro??????? your telling me Tash wouldn't rip Krazie?????? i'm sorry but your talking out of your ass
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 05:41:26 PM
...physically? ha maybe only cuz there's 5 bones and 3 liks, lets put xzibit and King Tee up in there  and see how they fair up
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 05:46:00 PM
They'll still kill em,

Mo' thug  V.S Dogg House == No Competition
4 mo. thug.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 05:48:17 PM
Fuck A Tribe called Quest.

NWA and Public Enemy comes close.

Run-DMC has always sucked and everyone knows it.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 05:49:59 PM
damn i didn't know they let 8 year olds on the internet
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 05:57:15 PM
Why iz u always bitchin about Bone fuckin fag, u started this shit.

Go eat a dick buddy.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 06:02:53 PM
why are you so illiterate?
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: West Coast Veteran on July 17, 2001, 06:10:27 PM
haha tha7th is one hilarious Bone Dick Gobbler...

Run DMC
ATCQ
NWA
PE
ALL SHIT ON BONE!

go back to the bone boards little boy and when you have passed hip hop 101 you can come back and talk..otherwise your young bitch ass opinions aint valid.."i hear alot of talking but the words dont mean shit!"
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 06:12:11 PM
lol west coast vet gave you a chorizo slap
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: techniec on July 17, 2001, 07:44:28 PM
i made this post, and shed tears as the vote total grew, but i still dont get how a IS 2001 A CLASSIC post grew to a 2001/DRE/ VS BONE/E1999?
;D

YOU GO HELLRAZOR AND BIG JAKE
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 17, 2001, 07:53:37 PM
You still don't get it? Jake and everyone else went as deep into detail as you can possibly go.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 17, 2001, 07:54:26 PM
i just can't believe that fool is going around saying the art of war is a hip hop classic, now that's just dumb
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 17, 2001, 07:56:52 PM
::) dawm!!!!
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 17, 2001, 07:57:06 PM
That aint dumb, thats my opinion. Just like its your opinion that 2001 is classic.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 17, 2001, 08:14:20 PM
EXACTLY, it's a muthafuckin opinion u dumfuck.
Fuck Dat West Coast Vet, these muthafuckas keeps bringin dis Run Dmc shit around, just cause them muthafuckas waz one of da first ones out dont make em the greatest group.
Now NWA waz tight, i gotta admit dat.
Yall muthafuckas just jealous of bone sellin so much shit and still keepin it real, unlike alot of these west coast fools.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Rud on July 17, 2001, 10:58:59 PM
ALRITE WELLIF ITS UR OPINION JUST STATE IT LIKE TECHNIEC DID


UNLIKE U.....

MUTHAFUCKA FUCK FUCKER FUCKIN....

I KNOW ITS A NEW WORD 2 U AND U FEEL UR HURTIN PEOPLE WITH IT......BUT PLEASE, SPARE US


peace
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 18, 2001, 12:28:54 AM
Quote
Yall muthafuckas just jealous of bone sellin so much shit and still keepin it real, unlike alot of these west coast fools



i'm sorry but every bone release since after e.1999 eternal has pretty much fallen off the charts pretty quick considering their "greatest group of all time status" wow that's some selling power


you make it seem like how much you sell is a mesurment of success, shit in that case Nelly is the new 2pac or Rakim
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 18, 2001, 06:36:43 AM
Damn man This is my 1st week in this fuckin forum and im already makin enemies.

U know what lets just stick wit BONE is ONE of tha greatest groups of all time. How bout dat?? :P
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Jay ay Beee on July 18, 2001, 07:57:36 AM
Apart from the other groups already mentioned, Outkast takes a big shit on Bone
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: techniec on July 18, 2001, 08:45:21 AM
DAMN RIGHT RUD, U TELL EM! ;D

but serious yall, everyone has a right to an opinion,
by the way, speaking of classics, dont yall think Bring Back That G Shit by kurupt is a classic song?

just though id switch shit up a bit
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: HHH on July 18, 2001, 09:05:46 AM
2001 IS A GOD DAMN MUTHAFUCKIN CLASSIC FULL STOP  ;)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 18, 2001, 10:36:45 AM
Hellrazor and Tha7Th are Butt Buddys...The End
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: West Coast Veteran on July 18, 2001, 11:10:56 AM
^^^ i'm koo with hellrazor but i'm suspicious that he and Tha7th are the same person?

holla!
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 18, 2001, 11:31:32 AM

Quote

^^^ i'm koo with hellrazor but i'm suspicious that he and Tha7th are the same person?

holla!


I seriously doubt that.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: xz on July 18, 2001, 12:35:50 PM
im gonna do my own review of 2001....

1. intro
2. the watcher - 5
3. fuck you - 4.5
4. still dre - 4
5. big ego's - 4.5
6. xxplosive - 4.5
7. whats the diff - 4
8. bar one
9. light speed - 4
10. forgot about dre - 3.5   11. next episode - 4
11. lets get high - 3.5
12. bitch ni**az - 5
13. car bomb
14. murder ink - 3.5
15. ed-ucation
16. some LA ni**az - 5
17. p4p
18. housewife - 5
19. ackrite - 4
20. bang bang - 5
21. the message - 4

4 mics. when i hear tracks like dre day, let me ride, and nuthin but a g thang, its hard to award 2001 with a classic mark. and the beat to xxplosive is off the meat rack!
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: RapAce on July 18, 2001, 01:38:11 PM
and I will too xz

1. intro
2. the watcher - 5
3. fuck you - 4
4. still dre - 5
5. big ego's - 4.5
6. xxplosive - 4
7. whats the diff - 4
8. bar one
9. light speed - 4
10. forgot about dre - 3.5
11. next episode - 5
11. lets get high - 4.5
12. bitch ni**az - 5
13. car bomb
14. murder ink - 4.5
15. ed-ucation
16. some LA ni**az - 4.5
17. p4p
18. housewife - 4.5
19. ackrite - 4
20. bang bang - 4
21. the message - 5

Thaz my ratin.

And HHH 's right!!
Quote

2001 IS A GOD DAMN MUTHAFUCKIN CLASSIC FULL STOP  ;)



Peace



Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Seer on July 18, 2001, 01:39:58 PM

Quote



I seriously doubt that.


whereas I now know for a fact.. pz ;)
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: .:N-Imy:. on July 18, 2001, 01:52:49 PM
This is some long ass thread we got here and while I'm here I may aswell add an opinion seeing as how this is wot this topic is about.

Some of ya'll are getting uptight no doubt because people be saying tha tCroninc 2001 is a "classic" and some people are saying it is "not a classic".

Let's not forget that Chronic 2001 is still only a CD and many people are going ot have many opinions but if you think it's a classic fine it's a classic to you but it does not mean it is a classic world wide and vice versa for it not being a classic. See also on MTV they may call it a classic but The Box may not so there is always going to be a difference of opinion there is just no point in getting up tight about it and arguing with people over it. Goodbye.

p.s - that is about the sesible-ist thing I have said in quite a while. That is a pretty scary thing for me cause I don't ever tend to be sensible.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Joachim on July 18, 2001, 02:33:37 PM
Its called a debate, and in debates people have different opinions....
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 18, 2001, 02:35:29 PM
LoL.......Fuck u bone haters, i dont give a fuck wachall think about em no more, Yall just keep riding Snoop and Dre's dick. It's all about Bone here in frisco. And Bay Area Rap.


Ah by tha way I aint Hellrazor or whoever, I just discovered this forum like a week ago.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 18, 2001, 02:39:01 PM
i don't care if you don't think it's a classic  just don't say dumb shit like the Art of War is classic, hell if that's the case, tha last meal , nastradaumous, in my life time vol3., and 400 degreez, and the war disc are classic classics
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: .:N-Imy:. on July 18, 2001, 02:45:20 PM
I guess I was better of not posting anything but hell here's another post to help this topic on it's way to somewhere. l8r.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Now_Im_Not_Banned on July 18, 2001, 03:27:01 PM
Dude, shut up, your not funny any more..
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Ro J. Simpson on July 18, 2001, 04:28:28 PM
yo i know i will get hated here but...

all the hype bout bone and how all his shit is dope and most of the bone albums are classics...

ive NEVER felt bone in the slightest...infact he is weak...dont hate...its just my opinion...e.1999 was weak...i ahte bone...i just think some people say he's dope cos they go with all the hype...so ima put it straight rite now..my opinion...not yours...

Bone Are Weak

remember...

my opinion

peace - seed
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ZILLA THA GOODFELLA on July 18, 2001, 04:49:35 PM
I think yall just cant stand Bone thug's fast raps and harmony. 2 much 4 yall 2 handle.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 18, 2001, 09:17:27 PM
Quote

yo i know i will get hated here but...

all the hype bout bone and how all his shit is dope and most of the bone albums are classics...

ive NEVER felt bone in the slightest...infact he is weak...dont hate...its just my opinion...e.1999 was weak...i ahte bone...i just think some people say he's dope cos they go with all the hype...so ima put it straight rite now..my opinion...not yours...

Bone Are Weak

remember...

my opinion

peace - seed


"He"?? Bone is group fool, not a solo artist. Where have you been??? And E.1999 Eternal is an UNDISPUTED classic, arguably one of the top 10 hip hop albums EVER made.........
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Sikotic™ on July 18, 2001, 09:53:47 PM

Quote



"He"?? Bone is group fool, not a solo artist. Where have you been??? And E.1999 Eternal is an UNDISPUTED classic, arguably one of the top 10 hip hop albums EVER made.........



If he's lyin' He's dyin'.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 18, 2001, 10:20:18 PM
i'm sorry e.1999 eternal is classic but it's NOT better than


straight outta compton
the chronic
doggystyle
it takes a nation of millions to hold us back
illmatic
ready to die
all eyez on me
paid in full
reasonable doubt
follow the leader
midnight mirauders
death certificate
raising hell
me against the world
amerikkkaz most wanted
liquid swords
or
only built 4 cuban linx

and to the dude who said "he" slap yourself
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Siberian_Wolf on July 18, 2001, 10:33:21 PM
Yeah, slap that fool. He shouldn't even show his ass on forums like this.

Dude! Do you like the new guy that acts ninja?
His first name is Wu, second name is Tang, and last name....................................... CLAN!!!!!! :D :D :D
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: ImmortalOne on July 18, 2001, 10:35:38 PM
Quote

i'm sorry e.1999 eternal is classic but it's NOT better than


straight outta compton
the chronic
doggystyle
it takes a nation of millions to hold us back
illmatic
ready to die
all eyez on me
paid in full
reasonable doubt
follow the leader
midnight mirauders
death certificate
raising hell
me against the world
amerikkkaz most wanted
liquid swords
or
only built 4 cuban linx

and to the dude who said "he" slap yourself



I could definatly debate E.1999 Eternal being better than some of those, but alot of those are also some of my fav albums, so I wont bother. Though I agree all the albums on your list [except Reasonable Doubt] are classic.
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 18, 2001, 10:37:44 PM
Quote
all the albums on your list [except Reasonable Doubt] are classic



see that's why you're such an idiot when you say shit like Art of War is a Classic and Reasonable Doubt isn't
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Nosak on July 18, 2001, 11:23:27 PM
man there's got to be regulate (g funk era) in your top ten naw  ???
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Doggystylin on July 18, 2001, 11:27:58 PM
this thread is trippin
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Jacob on July 19, 2001, 12:13:51 AM
ya regulate is in my personal top 10 faves
Title: Re: 2001 is NOT a classic
Post by: Don Seer on July 19, 2001, 12:33:01 AM
Quote

this thread is trippin


yup...

i'm locking this up now with these final words....

read what crem wrote.. because its 100% on point.


THE END

p.s.

The shits classic  :P