500 Top songs per Rolling Stone Mag

  • Thread starter Thread starter shadrach
  • Start date Start date
I love Bob, but I always feel like Beatles should be #1, well they are the most listed... at least Weezer made it on there too. You know, maybe it was the best song... maybe not musically, but meaningfully.
 
what's with jeff Buckley being listed next to "hallelujah"? If you go into it, they credit Leaonard Cohen with writing it, yet it's Buckley whose name is next to the song.

I mean, clearly they've chosen the song because of his rendition of it, but that raises another question - can you be credited for a song for which you play the definitive version, but which you didn't write in the first place?

I tend to think that Leonard should at least be co-listed . . . maybe I'm just being picky?
 
Justice............Bob is the best.
The Beatles show up about 49 times in the top 50. That's something too...
 
I would have liked to have seen a bit more U2. At least Where The Streets Have No Name.
 
Purge said:
WHAT?!?! No Winger???!!!!
Click to expand...
While I am not a Winger fan, there were several bands in the top 50 I didn't particularly agree with (but I won't drop names, it's not cool). I can see that the songs were on there for the impact they contributed to the music scene and to our lifestyle. It's also proof that with the right marketing and timing, anyone of us could be on this list.....
 
top 50

No real suprises really. I personally would have put The Specials - Ghosttown in the top 50 at least - any takers?
 
I didn't see "Lucas (With the Lid Off)" by Lucas or "Informer" by Snow! :mad:


hehehe

At least they got the Pixies in there and mainly used songs from the 70's back to show just how lame music is now... :D
 
therealside said:
I didn't see "Lucas (With the Lid Off)" by Lucas or "Informer" by Snow! :mad:


hehehe

At least they got the Pixies in there and mainly used songs from the 70's back to show just how lame music is now... :D
Click to expand...
And not much 80's stuff in there, hmmmm :confused: No real brainer there! But Nirvana made it into the top 50, and some others that came along in the 90's. I guess it's a direction for music, even if it is blind leading the blind. no wonder I got into home recording. I stopped listening to the radio about 1999, and I haven't turned it on since (accept to record some really cool AM static for a song once.... but I digress). There are some good bands out there now. I am still on the bench about most of them. But I like 3 Doors Down a lot, and I am still deciding what to make of Nickelback. :cool:
 
I think it's about time the Velvet Underground got some of the respect they have coming to them, massively influencal yet never famous at their time is an injustice
 
I think they're over enamored with the '50s and '60s myself especially in the top 250

I also agree with whoever commented on performance vs. writing credit

Now someone with too much time on their hands and a good ear needs to find out how many songs there really are ... considering many of them will be exactly the same song with just different lyrics and/or tempo ;)
 
Any list that suggests the best, worst, most influencial, etc it extremely subjective. However, on a whole, I thought this list was reasonable correct. Is a song "best" because it has good lyrics or a cute melody or a great guitar solo or because it had an influence on people.

Some of us who are older were very much influenced by Dylan, the Beatles the Stones, etc. While some younger people may be influenced by Nirvana, Metalica, etc. I'm sure many kids these days are influnced by artists that I've never even heard of.

As far as too many songs from the 50's and 60's and lack of songs from the 80's - history can pretty well document that certain songs from the 50's were the start of rock and rock (which has influenced every generation to follow). Many songs of the 60's (most significantly the Beatles) helped shape an entire generation (which in turn shaped the future of politics, marketing and every aspect of regulatory and commercial commerce. Dylan made social comment within the text of song a significant part of music (more than anyone before or after). Thus the songs of the 50's and 60's deserve recognition.

Regarding the 80's (and forward to 2004)- while there may have been songs that had some impact on the youth of the 80's, 90's and beyond, there was little that shaped our culture or changed politic - with the exception of the continued growth of hiphop (and I question if that is a positive or negative impact). Personally, while there are post 60's artists who I enjoy, the last 20-30 years were void of any music that I could deem historically signifcant music!!
 
mikeh said:
there was little that shaped our culture or changed politic - with the exception of the continued growth of hiphop (and I question if that is a positive or negative impact). Personally, while there are post 60's artists who I enjoy, the last 20-30 years were void of any music that I could deem historically signifcant music!!
Click to expand...

I think that is a demographic phenomenon, not a musical one. You can't blame Gen X for being too small to make a cultural or political difference. The damn Baby Boomers spent the '80s buying BMWs, it's not our fault.

All we could do was comment:

Smashmouth said:
Twenty five years ago they spoke out and they broke out
Of recession and opression and together they toked
And they folked out with guitars around a bonfire
Just singin’ and clapin’ man what the hell happened
Some were spell bound some were hell bound
Some they fell down and some got back up and
Fought against the melt down
And their kids are hippie chicks and hypocrites
Because fashion is smashin’ the true meaning of it
Click to expand...
 
mshilarious,

Vald point, the baby boomer generation is large and does influence political & cultural direction more than other generations (based on per number of people) - perhaps the music of the 60's was not any more historically significant than the 80's (or any other decade) - but since it influenced the boomers perhaps the music wielded more influence than was warrented.

Every decade (or generation) produces music that is valid and reflective of the times - perhaps it was short sighted of me to suggest otherwise and I certainly meant no insult to Gen X (our anyone else).

That being said, I do think Dylan, the Beatles, Hendrix and many other 60's artists would in the viw of most people be more musically significant than Flock OF Seagulls, Thompson Twins & Tears For Fears :D
 
mikeh said:
mshilarious,
Every decade (or generation) produces music that is valid and reflective of the times - perhaps it was short sighted of me to suggest otherwise and I certainly meant no insult to Gen X (our anyone else).
Click to expand...

Hey man, I would not be the man I am today without "Hungry like the wolf".

But let's be fair; if you're going to compare 60's artists to 80's artists, at least pick some respectable artists from the 80's. Howabout the Police, U2, Metallica, Van Halen, Prince, The Cure, or REM?

Although, if you're going to judge things on the basis of social/political relevance, you're kind of stacking the deck in favor of the 60's. Which of course comes back to the inadequacy of the term "best". "Best" is just a function of the criteria you apply. After all, "Electric slide" may not have broadened anyone's horizons, but you can't dance to Dylan.
 
Last edited:
Rokket said:
But I like 3 Doors Down a lot, and I am still deciding what to make of Nickelback. :cool:
Click to expand...



Ouch. 3 Doors Down and Nickleback? If you want to talk about band that are completly void of influence on others! I'm sorry, I just can't stand these crappy sound alike bands. Creed, Nickleback, Staind, 3 Doors Down, Puddle of Mudd, they are all just aweful. In my opinion anyway. They have no merit at all and they will dissapear in year or so....actually what happened to 3 Doors Down? I haven't heard anything from them since that Superman song.


As for the top 500 I think there are some good songs on there, but I don't know about the order. I guess I would probably have to put something by the Beatles at #1. Dylan is amazing, but I don't know, I think some of the Beatles songs were better. Hey Ya is on there too, and while I kind of like that song, I don't know that it's one of the greatest songs ever. I know it isn't even in the top 100 or anything, but still.
 
I don't think the music really changed anything - politics or whatever like in 60's, I think it just represented it. Like John Lennon said when the Beatles broke up, "It's just a rock band, it's not the end of the world." They influenced other musicians, but reflected their time and what was going on around them... didn't really set any precedents with politics or religion or whatever. Though I'm sure people who didn't know what religion they were tried out the Indian influence because of them - but overall, didn't change much except music. We still have wars, we still treat people the same, if not worse.
 
...

And that's something I don't like to admit, but you can't change the world with music... but you can make it more enjoyable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top