Jump to content

Rolling Stone does it again...


JStarr

Recommended Posts

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstor...161972/page/103

Behind that link is Rolling Stone's brand-new list of the "100 Greatest Singers of All Time."

Be warned, there are retarded "let's cater to the pop audience" picks on there. Christina Aguilera #58...ahead of the likes of Rod Stewart, Wilson Pickett, and Annie Lennox. Mariah Carey #79, still ahead of Annie Lennox. I like them both quite well, but damn. If Celine Dion had made this list, I think I might have shot my computer.

Joe Cocker...well, anywhere, really. I just have a slightly irrational distaste for Joe Cocker's voice.

Bob Dylan #7. #7 on a songwriters' list, sure. As a singer? He's distinctive, no doubt, but for the most part, Dylan's singing is rarely a pleasant sound in and of itself.

I quite like the top four, but Lennon ahead of Marvin Gaye? No, thanks.

Mary J. Blige #100. And who writes the commentary for Aretha Franklin at #1 (good choice, BTW)? That would be Mary J. Blige. Can't tell me there wasn't a trade-off here. Again, Mary J.'s good, but man, we can fill up another list with people that got left off. Matter of fact, let's try that. Anyone who clicks on that list, make sure to name someone that should be on it and isn't. I'll start with Ann Wilson from Heart.

GO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beatnik already brought it up to me, and it's very humorous for the most part, especially Dylan being picked. I love Dylan as much as the next guy, but as has been said before, it's all because of the songwriting and not because of any of his vocals by any means.

And Sous, I don't think any of the celebrity musicians they polled know where Lauryn Hill even is right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 'hundred greatest' is the laziest trope in journalism. What's the arsing point? A hundred names all of which have to, in one sense or another, be drawn from an 'acceptable' pool of talent/works, because the presentation is supposed to be 'authoritative' rather than 'editorial'. Never more than a couple of hundred words expended on why an artist is so great. The tone is so impersonal and half-arsed that the piece might as well be called 'here are 100 singers' -- when guests are roped in to offer their thoughts, their thoughts are boring as all fuck and (necessarily) can't form any sort of dialogue. Why is Aretha Franklin a little bit, but presumably not much, better than Ray Charles?

And it's not like the pieces work as biography since they're so tokenistic. Inane, arbitrary, depth-less shit.

I'd rather read a 5,000 word piece passionately arguing that Marti Pellow is the best vocalist ever to have graced the music industry than bilge like this. At least that might dredge up some unusual commentary, rather than just, "Marvin Gaye was black. I like him. I wish he hadn't died. He had a nice voice." Whether Stevie cunting Wonder placed 82nd or 63rd is of less than no importance: the idea is not to change the channel but to turn off the whole fucking TV.

Also, does anyone actually read 'Rolling Stone'? Surely such a person would collapse in on themselves under the weight of their own tedium.

Edited by Emperor Fuckshit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mr. Potato Head

Freddie Mercury deserves a much, much higher placing.

Also, my list of people who deserve to be on the list (i.e. both good voices and popular) that didn't make it:

George Harrison

Burton Cummings (The Guess Who)

Geddy Lee (Rush)

Roger Hodgson (Supertramp)

David Lee Roth (Van Halen)

Billy Joel

Morten Harket (a-ha)

Sting

George Michael

Eddie Vedder (Pearl Jam)

Jackson Browne

Gordon Lightfoot

Meat Loaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Sous, I don't think any of the celebrity musicians they polled know where Lauryn Hill even is right now.

They need to find her, because the Fugees were incredible and her solo stuff ended up being not half bad, either. But man, the first time I heard "Killing Me Softly" was the first time I ever had a crush on a black woman.

And oh shit, Potato Head, I didn't notice MEAT LOAF wasn't on the list either. Jeeeebus, get the pitchforks.

Edited by Scorching Sousa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Sinatra is an absurd omission. And Bobby Darin. Without Sinatra, a good portion of these people probably wouldn't even have had a career. Not only should Sinatra be on this list, he should be number one.

They claim (thus destroying the "of all time" part) that the list is of artists of the rock era.

Which since Sinatra got his start before rock 'n roll or blues or motown hit, he probably was exiled because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Sinatra is an absurd omission. And Bobby Darin. Without Sinatra, a good portion of these people probably wouldn't even have had a career. Not only should Sinatra be on this list, he should be number one.

They claim (thus destroying the "of all time" part) that the list is of artists of the rock era.

Which since Sinatra got his start before rock 'n roll or blues or motown hit, he probably was exiled because of it.

Well, to be picky, he didn't get his start before blues hit. But yeah, I remember hearing that, which explains the Ella and Billie and basically every great jazz singer ever omissions. But calling it "all time" despite that limitation still re-enforces the fact that Rolling Stone is retarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The absence of Louis Armstrong, rock era or not, is a nonsense.

And while I've never enjoyed anything Lauren Hill recorded, to have Blige and not her is ridiculous. Why not Macy Gray?

Probably because you can get a similar effect from giving a laryingitis patient a couple of cigarettes.

What's wrong with Christina being in such a high spot on the list? The girl has pipes without a doubt. She may be a pop princess, but that doesn't take anything away from how great of a voice and ability to use it she has.

She has a nice voice, but she suffers the same problem as Mariah Carey with all the warbling. Christ, save some notes for the rest of us.

Any suggestions I'd make to the list would just be laughed off as generic emo or something, but Jesse Lacy from Brand New has an awesome voice, as does Brian Fallow of Gaslight Anthem. And Bruce Dickinson's voice is distinctive as hell, I don't know whether I'd call him the best singer, but he's fucking ace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad to see Tina Turner made the list. But seriously that thing is crap. Tina is a much better singer than Bob Dylan. I like Dylan a lot, but he should be nowhere near the top 10.

EDIT: I also want to know why Buddy Holly and Jim Morrison are both so low! They were two of the best in their times! Plus, no Paul Stanley? What a joke.

Edited by BuddyAwesome
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oocbaby22 | November 18, 2008 2:17 AM EST

Wtf wtf wtf is up with the list one of the biggest mistakes and an insult is to see christina aguilera at a higher number than mariah carey r u kidding christina better than mariah umm no never ever whoever did the list should go back n fix this asap I thought rollingstone had taste but I guess not this is an insult it makes me want to cancel my subscription

very happy that my boy otis made the top ten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. To learn more, see our Privacy Policy