|
| Headline | 100 Greatest Singers Of All Time |
|
Page:
[1] |
| Author | Comment |
Rosemary In Time
Nov-14-2008, 17:00 GMT
United Kingdom
Send private message
| http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/241619
72/page/103
Artie creeps in at number 86. His former singing partner didn´t make the cut. Is that a scandal, or what?
Use SEND to share on Facebook or A.M.P.S
|
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Scaaty
Nov-14-2008, 18:19 GMT
Ireland
Send private message
| I wouldn´t worry too much about that list - Bob Dylan, tom Waites, Johnny Cash - you would n´t even call them good singers never mind best - brillient performers but none of them ever admitted to being good singers! |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Søren
Nov-15-2008, 00:13 GMT
Denmark
Send private message
| I understand your point, Scaaty - but I have to disagree: Johnny Cash was actually a very good singer (and certainly not comparable to Dylan or Waits, who I agree cannot be called great singers): A very powerful voice with great variation and clarity and a natural talent when it comes to technique. Not so strong in the high pitch but he makes up for it by being so powerful in the lower register.
Paul Simon is somewhere in between the likes of Dylan and Waits and then Cash. He has trained himself to a brilliant technique, has a nice but not spectacular voice and fine range (though nothing compared to Art in his prime).
A list of the 100 best singers is of course a strange thing to do. If it was really all about measuring their skills in the art of singing, then I guess I wouldn´t know a lot of people on that list. It is obvious that the list also reflects WHAT the singers have been singing, and by that scale I guess we can all agree .that Paul should be on the top 5! ;-)
.
.
.
Just read through my comment, and I really have no idea, what the point is - something like: Johnny Cash should be on ANY list of great singers and Paul should be on a list that includes Dylan and Waits... |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Klausi
Nov-15-2008, 08:00 GMT
Germany
Send private message
| Bob Dylan is really a joke!
I miss a lot of woman there, if soft pop like AG is allowed, like Eva Cassidy. Or Jennifer Warnes (she "saved" some Leonard Cohen tunes on her "Famous blue raincoat"-album).
Or Lizz Wright! Great. |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Klausi
Nov-15-2008, 10:13 GMT
Germany
Send private message
| Hm, Bruce Springsteen also is included in this very American list.
Thank god Annie Lennox too, but of course they forgot Kate Bush. |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Bodo
Nov-15-2008, 15:09 GMT
Austria
Send private message
| lists... I always decide what to listen too from lists, made by a few strangers. Thats the best way :)
Paul himself said he is a songwriter, not a singer. So it is good to see he is not on that list with Artie ;)
Where is the list of the 100 most senseless lists of all times?
And what the hell means ´ALL time´, does that imply that singin is over now? If all people on that list are death, nothing better will come? How bad for the next generations.
|
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Ian
Nov-15-2008, 16:20 GMT
Unknown
Send private message
| Right on Bodo,some common sense at last.´Where is the list for the 100 most senseless lists of all time?´. LOL! I really think these lists are used by certain publications as a stop gap,a filler in between more interesting,genuine news. Groan! |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Klausi
Nov-16-2008, 08:30 GMT
Germany
Send private message
| Lists, charts, prizes. Comparison and competition.
If you watch young kids, you see they want it. And in sports it would be boring without.
But in culture?
Paul Simon said he is not interested in having hits anymore, but he said this as one of the first millionairs in this fast-living business, the rules of it he knew better than most of his comparisons.
But it`s true, his music since the seventies shows he meant what he said. |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Jupira
Nov-17-2008, 22:09 GMT
Brazil
Send private message
| Strange list:Patsy Cline is there but not Paul. Not that I dislike her... Just dont know a single person who knows her here,except me...
Art must be happy ;-) |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Klausi
Dec-20-2008, 10:22 GMT
Germany
Send private message
| By the way: one of his two Grammies in 1975 (the other was the most important one, album of the year) was for "best Pop VOCAL performance male" (Still crazy).
Try following Have A Good Time, it is not easy! |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Ian
Dec-20-2008, 12:38 GMT
Norway
Send private message
| Yep. Try also,´Silent Eyes´ and ´Some Folks Lives Roll Easy´. |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
Richard
Dec-20-2008, 13:59 GMT
Unknown
Send private message
| I agree with Bodo that all these lists are totally absurd. But this one is especially insulting.
How pompous can they be to assume that all the great singers in the history of music existed in only one century? And they don´t even include some known great singers during that century. Perhaps I read the list too fast, but I didn´t see Sinatra or Ella Fitzgerld or Caruso. This list is arrogant and pathetic. And what about singers before recorded music existed? How can you rate them?
Oh, and of course, the writer can basically only include english-speaking singers. According to Rolling Stone, music from other cultures simply doesn´t exist!
I read one of these lame lists about great chases in movies and the writer had no knowledge of any movie before 1990. Of course, no silent films or foreign films were included. This is the same type of arrogant nonsense, written by someone who spent no effort whatsoever to educate themselves about their topic.
Total garbage. I could go on about how such ignorant arrogance is sadly typical of citizens of my country, but that (luckily) does not apply to Paul Simon fans. |
| |
[Like] [Reply] - [Readers: 733 ] |
|
Page:
[1]
|