What makes a good best-of?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

You don't have to read the review of the Radiohead best-of which got me thinking about this - the relevant bit is this: "This compilation is dominated by a pair of central ideas of what Radiohead sound like: emotionally nourishing, impressionistic balladeers, or crunchy, tech- and texture-savvy rockers. The outliers, moments when the band has dabbled more in mood, atmosphere, or a love of pure sound...aren't represented at all."

Now admittedly Scott's talking about the 2CD version not the 1CD version, which would have more room to roam, but my reaction was still "DUDE IT'S A BEST OF" - one of the things best ofs are for is to boil down an act to its essence, and with the best will in the world the experimental stuff has always been fringier to Radiohead than some might have you think.

But maybe you think best ofs are for representing a band's entire output, or spotlighting hidden depths, or presenting fan favourites, or or or - what do you look for in a compilation?

Comments

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

Didn't David Bowie let the fans select one bonus song for his best-of, then take his ball and go home when an orchestrated campaign resulted in that song being (early, funny) The Laughing Gnome?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

IIRC this was for selecting the tracklist of his world tour (I believe a "farewell" tour). So he'd have had to play The Laughing Gnome every night, arf arf.