Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile


Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers

Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 02:33AM

Dylan at 7 so it can't be on a techincal basis. Daltry and Mayfield are pretty low.
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 08:01AM
I question the ordering of the artists on the list. I suppose that's why people get so excited about lists. I say lose the numbers, make it an unordered list and let the reader figure out their own ranking.

And isn't is strange to have rock, soul, country, gospel, funk, but virtually no jazz and absolutely no opera singers in the list? Not that I'm a big fan of all these genres, and presumably neither are RS's readers, but the list is the "100 Greatest Singers" after all.

Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 09:55AM
Do my eyes deceive me or are Elvis Costello and Alex Chilton not on this list?

Costello is a great singer (for a guy who can't actually sing) despite some cringe inducing performances in his later career - his singing in the early days - the way he used that voice was something else at one time.

..............and Chilton has some of my fave vocals ever in the Big Star era.

Has there ever been a more copied singer than Johnny Rotten? I mean as a vocal performance the Pistols album is a triumph of dramtic emphasis and enunciating in all the right places (maaaaaaaaaaaaaan).

Post Edited (11-14-08 06:03)
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 01:23PM
he isnt trouser press kind of music but look up singer songwriter in the dictionary you see a pic of jackson browne .
i agree that the order of lists arent important just if you are on there or not.
i always thought that after a list they should make another list of top 500 guys not on the list.
sometimes i think they put people on the list to be diversified. example steve perry. he is distinctly a singer and if you like that sort of music hes the guy i guess. i think they put him on the list as to say lets not ignore a whole genre of music and it would make us less snobby.
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 02:08PM
There are plenty of singers on here who I guess are universally accepted as great (Aretha being an excellent example), but it seems to me that the quality of a singer's sound is almost too subjective to put on any "best-of" list. Either someone's voice strikes you or it doesn't, regardless of technical ability, vulnerability, etc. I can't see how a list like this one is particularly useful.

And I agree with the other comments that ranking these lists is pointless.
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 02:27PM
An interesting list. I'm relieved to see that Anthony Kiedis and that guy from Sugar Ray aren't on there. Van Morrison--who is one of the most distinctive singers in the history of popular music--is too low on that list. He should be Top 10, though his singing hasn't been great in recent years. Few white singers possess his soul chops and few would dare the vocalese he so frequently lapses into. Daltrey is WAY too low.

Post Edited (11-14-08 10:28)
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 02:30PM
A list like this is worthwhile, in that it has the potential to influence an open-minded reader into investigating the work of an artist who was previously unfamiliar to him/her. I've checked out a lot of artists whom I might have missed otherwise, based on their appearances in year-end or "100 greatest ever" lists from a variety of sources.

As for ranking such artists, well, about the only point to it is giving people like us something to argue over.

Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 02:32PM
New thread coming up. Please do not adjust your set.
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 07:23PM
It's a shame that someone like Kristin Hersh can't crack one of these lists - she's really one of the most distinct, diverse & talented female vocalists of the last 25 years.

The TP Muses entry demands an update (many new KH solo releases, the EXCELLENT 2003 Muses release, 50 Ft. Wave, and most recently Paradoxical Undressing & The Shady Circle.)

Post Edited (11-14-08 15:29)
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 14, 2008 09:27PM
That list is certainly a head-scratcher. I get it to some degree, Lennon would never be a top tenner - I'd switch his place with Macca, Put Cooke Numero Uno.Drop Charles & Elvis lower. bring Van Morrison,Roy Orbison, Howlin Wolf, Brian Wilson, Ronnie Spector, The Everly Bros, and Eric Burdon, up higher. Send Steven Tyler to the list of worst singers.
Putting Dylan & Lennon in the top ten says right off the bat that this isn't about pure ability - so if I could squeeze Marley into the top ten I would.
Re: Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers
November 18, 2008 09:43PM

This is pretty interesting - the individual ballots (some of them, anyway). Good thing that numbskull James Blunt nominates himself, as no one else in the world was going to - really, who thought that hack deserved a ballot? (Doesn't bother me that Keith Richards & Billy Gibbons nominate themselves, though. Just seems cool in their cases. Courtney Love, not so much.)

Also kind of interesting how many band members DON'T nominate their own lead vocalist - Mike Campbell, Clem Burke, Chris Frantz (well, I guess that last one isn't too surprising given the warmth Frantz & Byrne seem to feel towards each other.)

And I don't know why, but it's very touching to me that Ozzy Osbourne has Ray Davies on his list. Just makes me think "Good ol' Ozzy..."
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login