Greatest of ALL Time??
That's the real problem with such lists.
To give an example - one of the best albums I owned was the Berlin Philharmonic, Herbert Von Karajan conducting, full boxed set of Beethoven (not roll over). From which I'd nominate No. 9 , Opus 125 as the best piece in that set. But I rather doubt it'll make any list of "greatest" anything outside of rag devoted to classical music, or a station specializing in the same. Doesn't upset me though, I know it is good, very good.
But greatest of all time is not really what these lists stations / magazines mean is it? They mean their opinion as to the best Rock & roll or Rock albums ever made. Not rap, (though that generally leaves me cold), not jazz (else there would be scads more Miles Davis and Bird and ... etc on the list, not Blues, else there would be more than the passing nod to Robert Johnson or Muddy Waters, not Soul really - other than the occasional tip of the hat to Marvin Gaye and James Brown.
Now, having said that I own, or have owned,
from the first Philly top 50 list (which is seems nearly identical in many respects to the Rolling Stone list) - all except numbers 15, 24, 25, 27, 31 and 46.
From the Rolling Stone list, top 50 - all except numbers 8, 17, 20, 35 and 48.
Actually the bulk of these I no longer own.They were lent to my brother who found alternatively ingenious and tawdry means to lose, abuse, or have abused what was at the time a significant cornerstone of my (then modern) record collection.
To this day, when the occasion arises, I still remind him of his selfishness in not taking care of things lent to him by others. Not that I haven't forgiven him

I just want one day to wake up and find a package containing all the replacements for those albums lost, damaged or made useless in his care.
Oh, yes and any list of this type that has Disraeli Gears below 100 has doubtful quality.