1. I think classic has to stay as true to the definition as possible in any faction.
To me,it has to have stood the test of time and be as fresh today as it was back then.

2. No, as with most things different terms mean different things to most people.

3. As to Hip Hop as we know it is zeroing in on 40 years old.Gosh,where did all the time go?
I think it is suffice to say that a classic should atleast be 15 - 20 years old.The term instant classic to me
is judging what people will feel about it in that many years from now.Therefore the term makes no sense to me.Just call it a hit.At least that is how James Brown saw it.Who could argue with James?

4.I don't think so because what is classic to people in Cali is not classic to people in N.Y.
So every region probably has there own particular classic in their own majorities.It is nice if something
made it around the world and is recognized by many different people from different lands.

5.No,because being classic itself is opinion based.

6.In doing an extensive list you almost do yourself a disservice.Think about it.
Classic should be what handful of songs,albums or artist that immediately come to the top of your head
without any necessary research because the memorability of them is what makes them well....classic.
So off hand this is what immediately comes to mind:

Eric B for President - Eric B and Rakim
The World is yours - Nas
The Show - Doug E.Fresh and Slick Rick

As far as albums :
Ready to die - Notorious B.I.G.
Raising Hell - Run DMC

Peace.

^Good reading @ all yall.

I'd say it isn't meaningless, but some definitely need to use it more sparingly.

As far as instant classic, I disagree with Jay. Sure sometimes an album sounds like it's so good when it's only a week old, yet it's so fresh, that it's questionable if it's gonna sound that good every time, IE stand the test of time. But a lot of times when I feel that it's an instant classic it's just cuz I was in a great mood that day. Or maybe I had the bomb shit in my pipe, or I just got paid, and it doesn't sound as groundbreaking a few listens later. Or maybe it is that good 100 listens later and still not anyone else has woken up to it, so in that case. it's a sleeper that never wakes up not a classic. Or maybe, like you said, it's Who Let the Dogs Out LOL.

I also think that Illmatic is the high water mark, no brainer when referring to "Certified Classic" along with Dre's - The Chronic. I think only freakish uber snobs who were abused as children would argue against Illmatic being classic.

As far as who can certify it? I think if the majority of the Hip Hop world's heads think so, and that can't be argued otherwise, that is one way it's certified. Adding real accolades to the mix (MTV Music Awards, Grammys, The Charts ( Pop or Hip Hop charts for crossover appeal) Etc.) certainly helps, but it isn't the defining factor, the Hip Hop worldwide community's general consensus is the defining factor.

Edit: Fixed horrible grammar and spelling.

---

“Lesser artists borrow... great artists steal.” - Igor Stravinsky
OP OP Blog CDC
Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | Beat Junkies Blog

Quote
rchecka
As far as instant classic, I disagree with Jay. Sure sometimes an album sounds like it's so good when it's only a week old, yet it's so fresh, that it's questionable if it's gonna sound that good every time, IE stand the test of time. But a lot of times when I feel that it's an instant classic it's just cuz I was in a great mood that day. Or maybe I had the bomb shit in my pipe, or I just got paid, and it doesn't sound as groundbreaking a few listens later. Or maybe it is that good 100 listens later and still not anyone else has woken up to it, so in that case. it's a sleeper that never wakes up not a classic. Or maybe, like you said, it's Who Let the Dogs Out LOL.

I can agree with this also , because I know there have been times where I was lifted and heard a track , or maybe had something going on that a particular track shined some light on , and I thought to myself , " this song is DOPE " ! Maybe even recommended it to somebody or posted it on a forum ( wink wink ) , and later on decided that it was garbage . But , in the same breath, I still feel like there have been times where I've heard a track/ album , and knew that it was gonna stand the test of time . Maybe it wasn't an instant classic , but my guts were right .

I totally agree with @jaybrown...this is one of those things where it can be completely subjective..and usually I tend to follow my "gut"...there have been instances where I hear a record and know somehow that "this" is what is going set this artist apart for me in my mind...as far as what everyone else considers a classic..well sometimes I agree and sometimes I do not...

---

"Smoke sumpin' bitch!"

jbrown and vamos dropped my general sentiments but Eye did want to hit a specific point raised in the original post....

...."Underground Hip-Hop can't be classic no matter how dope it is, right?"....not sure Eye agree with that conceptually and the quandary of that proposal is illustrative of why the whole "classic" designation is problematic.

The term Underground Hip-Hop implies that the so-designated music has an underground following. To the point brought up earlier about agreed upon standards, if music has a following then it stands to reason that the followers of that music share a common set of values which allows them to appreciate that type of music. So within that circle, there is the propensity to have classics...now, Eye would concede that the term "underground classic" or "underground Hip-Hop classic" may be appropriate but, it doesn't negate the classification of "classic". (see Universal Magnetic by Mos Def)

With that said, the concept above would then apply to any sub-categorization of Hip-Hop...regional Hip-Hop (see Batterram by Toddy Tee), electro (see We Come To Rock by Imperial Brothers), pop rap (see Can't Touch This by MC Hammer) etc.....

All of these can and would be debated and challenged (some, likely, more virgorously than others) for their classic status by those who don't particularly care for these various types of Hip-Hop but, when considered within the context of these sub-genres, there is validity to the assertion.

As I'm sure the DJ's among us would attest to, if you set out to play a set of "classic Hip-Hop" you'd need to know your crowd to figure out the set list...."classic" means different things to different people in different parts of the world....nationally and internationally.

As an excersice in this concept...tune in to the classic Hip Hop channel on Music Choice or Sirius/XM...see how many songs it takes before you come up on one that you would NEVER consider a classic. But apparently, in somebody's assessment, that song qualified.

At the end of the day, "classic" is subjective at best...those seeking to identify a collection of "classic" songs/albums that transcends sub-genre will likely have to settle for widely recognizable "hits" unless clear and generally agreed upon definitions are established.....good luck with that!