What's new

Rolling Stone List of Greatest 200 Singers of All Time

I guess I am not a one trial learner based on the reactions here to the last time I started a thread on a Rolling Stone list of the top whatever it was in music. Yes, I know these lists, from whatever source, are lame, and, in particular, no one has cared what RS thinks for nearly 5 decades. And, yes, I agree, RS applies a certain amount of political correctness in making its list. But, no, I do not think who the greatest ever singers are/were is purely subjective. And I do think it is an amusing topic to discuss, even if some of us feel we have more important things to do. I guess I do put a priority on my own amusement! :)

In any event, I note that RS has released its list of the 200 greatest singers. Which, I suppose, is supposed to be a fresh start and not an update to its 2008 list of the greatest 100 singers. Suffice it to say that I think they left some folks off they should not have and included some folks they should not have, and their explanations for inclusion and ranking seem rife with inconsistencies and contradictions. And that I think they cast too broad a net.

I have not found a straight of list of just the names on-line.
 
Last edited:
165 for Dio? He got robbed. Ozzy got 112!!

Just that invalidates the whole list, as far as I am concerned.
Well, Dio edged out Morrisey! :) As RS explains, "Ozzy Osbourne doesn’t have what most people would call a good voice . . ." but goes on to explain why he has a "great one." I'm not buying it, but I get that he is a compelling performer. However, this is as list of singers not a list of the greatest front men of all time. I think RS is looking for clicks here.
 
Bob Dylan. 15. Oh my.....is it April 1st?!
Yep and nope. Just ahead of Prince and just behind Freddie Mercury. The explanation is worth reading. I think it absurd, but it is not my list. I do not think Dylan would claim to be a great singer. I think his voice often serves his material well. But that does not make him a great singer.

Actually, the 2008 RS list of 100 greatest singers had Dylan at 7, with a much better, to my mind, explanation of why he should be ranked high among other singers. But I am not buying any of it personally.
 
Last edited:

Legion

Staff member
Well, Dio edged out Morrisey! :) As RS explains, "Ozzy Osbourne doesn’t have what most people would call a good voice . . ." but goes on to explain why he has a "great one." I'm not buying it, but I get that he is a compelling performer. However, this is as list of singers not a list of the greatest front men of all time. I think RS is looking for clicks here.
I think you are right. Kurt Cobain beat James Brown...
 
165 for Dio? He got robbed. Ozzy got 112!!

Just that invalidates the whole list, as far as I am concerned.
Dio had great pipes for sure. I prefer his two Sabbath albums to anything Ozzy did with them.

Geoff Tate from Queensryche is probably the best living metal singer IMO. His range is ridiculous.
 
I think you are right. Kurt Cobain beat James Brown...
Yep. 36 versus 44. I love them both, but I am not sure either belongs in the top 100. Cobain seems to come out ranked very high in lots of things. I suppose this may shows it is a good career move to die young. Again, I am a fan. But we are talking about the greatest singers ever.
 

Legion

Staff member
Dio had great pipes for sure. I prefer his two Sabbath albums to anything Ozzy did with them.
I really like the early Sabbath stuff, and there is no denying the original lineup are the heavy metal OG's. But nobody with ears could think Ozzy is a "better" singer.
 

Legion

Staff member
Yep. 36 versus 44. I love them both, but I am not sure either belongs in the top 100. Cobain seems to come out ranked very high in lots of things. I suppose this may shows it is a good career move to die young. Again, I am a fan. But we are talking about the greatest singers ever.
The reason Kurt comes out so high in these lists is the people who make the list are Gen X like me.
 
The reason Kurt comes out so high in these lists is the people who make the list are Gen X like me.
Could be. :) Interesting theory. Chris Cornell is on there (80), too, someone I would consider an extraordinary singer, even under RS's strange criteria. But I am not seeing much grunge per se, and I would say grunge is thought to be the Gen X genre. I suppose Courteny Love is on here, for reasons I do not buy. I suppose there are a bunch of folks on there who have been putting out lots of music in Gen Xs most heavy listening days. Maybe the list makers thought they had to give Gen X something more than they were otherwise giving. I suppose 36 is not all that high. Cobain had a specific style as a singer and was influential. I just do not seem him as a great singer. Not 36 level on this list.

If anything, I think the list tilts Boomer, which is typical, and I would argue appropriate for RS. I would argue that RS should know that era best.
 
Okay, sure it's easy to pick on them for including Ozzy and Bob, but I'm sure they made up for it with people who can, you know, carry a tune like Celine Dion, Bing Crosby, Bruce Dickinson, Lucinda Williams, Tom Waits, Lemmy Kilmister, a leaf blower...
 
Top Bottom