Bands Without a Weak or Bad Album.

Let's Active

 

No on both counts.

Big Star's fourth studio album, or half Big Star (Chilton & Stephens) and half Posies (Stringfellow & Auer) album "In Space", while not terrible is nowhere near the same quality as the 1970s recorded trio of Big Star albums.

As for The Beatles:

1 - Lots of people are saying that the Yellow Submarine soundtrack doesnt count as its not "a real album". Funny mine is 12 inches in diameter, plays at 33.3 RPM, and has a running time of somewhere between 35-40 minutes. Those facts, along with the fact that I paid full album price for it....
But fine, just judge it on its four "new" songs alone then. 1 good Lennon song, 2 OK George Harrison songs and 1 of the worst songs McCartney ever wrote, so....

2 - if one still wants to argue "its not a real album" then fine - exhibit #2 - Let It Be - George contributed (or perhaps was only allowed to contribute) less than stellar material, which while not terrible songs, would likely have been considered substandard filler if included on his own superior ATMP solo album (For You Blue and I Me Mine). Lennon came to the sessions almost empty handed reviving a year old rejected recording and a 6 year old rejected song (although written much earlier even than that), a Frankensteined concoction of Lennon & McCartney stray song fragments (I've Got A Feeling), plus a loose, throwaway, heavily edited jam (credited to all but with Lennon as lead vocalist) and only one actual new song (Dig A Pony). Lennon's best (or better, since there were only 2) new song was omitted from the album to serve instead as the B-side to the album's "originally intended title track" which certainly didnt help the overall quality of the album itself.

3 - Beatles For Sale, was a tired step backward to the 8 original/6 covers template of the first two albums, but at least those albums offered a spark of excitement even at their weakest moments. This album had an unusual for The Beatles "going through the motions" feel about it that marred even its best songs. Ironically (or not - perhaps to avoid comparisons) its most exciting and energetic performance by a wide margin (Leave My Kitten Alone) was left on the cutting room floor.

4 - Help - cant blame the covers this time as there's only two of them (although Dizzie Miss Lizzie might be among their very worst ever EMI recorded/released cover songs). George had yet to write his first decent song (If I Needed Someone), here providing two mediocrities (as opposed to With The Beatles on which he included only one). Lennon wrote some of his worst ever lyrics (It's Only Love) and the first of McCartney's two worthy song contributions didn't appear on the album until track 12 (the third last song on the album).

 

I'd agree except for Mummer. I never could get into that album. But everything else by XTC is wonderful.

 

The Exploited.

 

I think my choice would be Steely Dan - up to and including Gaucho. The later albums have their merits, but the magic is not quite there anymore.

 

No, it is not. Definitely one of the worst records ever issued by a major band with its creative principals intact.

 

IITOD is the second best Led Zeppelin album, right behind House of the Holy. IMO.

 

Let me fix that for ya: "Squeeze is a VU album, period."

 

Yes. No matter what anyone says, these are Doors albums.

 

AC/DC definitely is a shining example. Definitely.

 

The Faces, only one classic album but the other three were all highly enjoyable.

 

ABBA. Every album is majestic.

 

I love Mummer! The one album of theirs I really (and strongly) dislike is Wasp Star. I'm not a huge fan of Oranges and Lemons either, but I love everything else.

 

I'm sorry you feel that way. We have to agree to disagree on that one.

 

XTC fits the bill thoroughly, a group called Magazine IMO also has not much weak material that was released.
I would have to say that the Blur catalog has enough top shelf quality to nullify what was weak on a couple of their releases.

 

If it hasn't already been said, The Pretenders.

 

Man, I think "The Night Before" is one of Macca's three or four best pre-Pepper songs.

 

Galaxie 500

 

SPOON! And still going strong.

 

Dwight Yoakum
Led Zeppelin
Classic Aerosmith
Classic Van Halen
Alice In Chains
The Beatles
Classic Who
Kate Bush
The Smiths
Classic Black Sabbath
Dio Sabbath
The Ian Gillian Band
Classic UFO
The Band
Velvet Underground
New Order
Depeche Mode
Joy Division
David Sylvan
maybe Bruce Springsteen?

Among others.

 

The Smiths
Tears for Fears
Spoon

 

Queen

 

Oh my...I I and I I I weak?

Physical Graffiti weak?

My life must be upside-down. Classics. Each one is an absolute milestone in hard rock history.

PG is the first modern metal album imo.

 

Actually it seems kind of silly to name the bands that have no weak or bad output, because it is totally subjective according to the listener.
Unlike how value is assigned to vintage pressings or 3rd Man rarities in the marketplace, assigning 5 stars to a groups entire catalog suggests a bias based on really being a fan. I mention value in relation to music because for many reasons some pretty out of whack and serious pricing is often attached to crap that has nothing to do with if people really connect with the music but more on the hype of the rarity -many exceptions to that rule for sure.
For me I see the good and bad in all the multiple releases of any group or artist that I own and I am a fan of all of it.
Klunker releases eventually get the one song or two that I enjoy recorded onto a CD/hard drive and then dump it -or not.
The original question might also be worded this way: what band are you so geekily in love with that you accept the crap releases and just dig it all...

 

The Smiths are the only one I could say with 100% conviction.