The Rolling Stone's 100 greatest singers of all time [Archive]

Cpt. Overkill

11-19-2008, 01:45 PM

I ask why you think so.

Kurt Cobain is higher than a lot of singers that are way better than him, hell, he doesnt even belong on the list.

Ill look at it again and list. Also, Aguilera doesnt even belong on that list.

Jim Morrison
Roger Daltrey
Axl Rose
Thom Yorke
Gregg Allman
Steve Perry
Stevie Nicks
Steven Tyler

Just a quick list of people that I scrolled through in about 1 minute.

brobot

11-19-2008, 01:47 PM

I can see why people would Kurt Cobain is to high but he had a very large impact on many of todays singers.

Wolfbeckett

11-19-2008, 01:49 PM

I love Nirvana and am only marginally into Tool, but come on. Kurt Cobain is on the list and Maynard James Keenan isn't? This list seems more like verbal fellatio for old/respected artists than serious journalism.

Cpt. Overkill

11-19-2008, 01:50 PM

I can see why people would Kurt Cobain is to high but he had a very large impact on many of todays singers.

Does that make him a great singer? No. It makes him influential.

brobot

11-19-2008, 01:51 PM

Does that make him a great singer? No. It makes him influential.

What makes a good singer though?

Many people love Tom Waits and he sounds like he is gurgling acid. I think it is very subjective as many things are but you also have to think of lyrics.

Cpt. Overkill

11-19-2008, 01:53 PM

What makes a good singer though?

Many people love Tom Waits and he sounds like he is gurgling acid. I think it is very subjective as many things are but you also have to think of lyrics.

Lyrics=/=Singers Talent.

They may be a talented lyricist, but that doesnt make them a singer. Sure, a lot of people might LOVE something, like The Jonas Brothers, but that doesnt mean they have a lot of talent.

brobot

11-19-2008, 01:55 PM

Lyrics=/=Singers Talent.

They may be a talented lyricist, but that doesnt make them a singer. Sure, a lot of people might LOVE something, like The Jonas Brothers, but that doesnt mean they have a lot of talent.

Ok what makes a good singer?

Many jazz and blues artists and what not are great singers but don't have a great voice.

topperharley

11-19-2008, 02:02 PM

Kurt Cobain ... he had a very large impact on many of todays singers.

Does that make him a great singer? No. It makes him influential.

Exactly. Granted, any list of "great" singers is going to be subjective, but influence should not be a factor. You might as well include number of records sold as a factor if you're going to do that.

And while Aguilera does have a decent enough voice, she is in no way a better singer than a lot of the people on that list that she's higher than.

brobot

11-19-2008, 02:07 PM

Then what else would you gauge a list against. There is no singular aspect of any vocalist that you can judge on.

If you want objective results you would have to have something like loudest or highest pitch. There are many more people that I would put on the list that many would disagree with but the "greatest" anything is going to be subjective and based on opinion.

Rock_Band_Over

11-19-2008, 03:23 PM

Each voter was asked to list his or her 20 favorite vocalists from the rock era, in order of their importance. Those ballots were recorded and weighted according to methodology developed by the accounting firm of Ernst & Young, which then tabulated and verified the results for Rolling Stone.

There's no way of knowing how the panel interpreted this... it does seem that maybe not everyone really focused that much on actual singing talent. The term 'importance' is highly subjective and 'rock era' is also vague. And of course, the actual ranking is being done by a financial auditing firm, so take that as you will.

These lists always use "Greatest" and it just means whatever they want it to mean. But then again, who wants to read a list of the "Favorite Singers of the Rock Era (sorted by order of importance)"?

toymachineSH

11-19-2008, 04:08 PM

Mike Patton is nowhere to be found on the page
fail

theantkid12

11-19-2008, 04:09 PM

Am I the only one who does not see Brad Delp?

TheClashTheClashTheClash

11-19-2008, 04:20 PM

Joe Strummer isn't on there? Whats up? You try singing at punk speeds and play guitar at the same time....How is Christina Agulera (or however you spell it) on this list?

Metal_Man

11-19-2008, 05:16 PM

is bruce dickinson on this list

EDIT: no he is not so this list of so called "greatest singers" is therefore A LIE

TheClashTheClashTheClash

11-19-2008, 05:17 PM

is bruce dickinson on this list

No, I don't know how they could leave him out. He's a beast of a singer

Metal_Man

11-19-2008, 05:21 PM

No, I don't know how they could leave him out. He's a beast of a singer

I know, personally I think they choose the wrong bruce

andrewyamo

11-19-2008, 05:49 PM

Tiny Tim isn't on here. That is insane. That guy had huge vocal range and was an amazing singer.

visualdeity

11-19-2008, 06:04 PM

Does that make him a great singer? No. It makes him influential.

Yeah. Kurt Cobain had one of the worst voices I've ever heard. The fact that he's even on the list makes this list a failure, much less the fact that he's above other artists with actual talent.

theantkid12

11-19-2008, 06:08 PM

Yeah. Kurt Cobain had one of the worst voices I've ever heard. The fact that he's even on the list makes this list a failure, much less the fact that he's above other artists with actual talent.
Although I wouldn't say he had a horrible voice and was a bad singer, you guys have to take into account this isn't a most TALENTED singers of all time list. This is greatest, the best overall package of a singer, and that includes he or she's mark on history.

visualdeity

11-19-2008, 06:14 PM

Although I wouldn't say he had a horrible voice and was a bad singer, you guys have to take into account this isn't a most TALENTED singers of all time list. This is greatest, the best overall package of a singer, and that includes he or she's mark on history.

In that case, the list is still complete fail. Kurt Cobain is listed ahead of Steven Tyler, John Fogerty (sp?), Roger Daltrey, and Art Garfunkel. ALL of those artists (well, maybe except Tyler, he's influential, but an average singer) have more talent in their little finger than Cobain had in his entire body, AND they made a much huger impression on history than him.

This list is made of so much fail.

Hamsterhitman

11-19-2008, 06:14 PM

lol... Axl Rose? Really?

Aragha

11-19-2008, 06:14 PM

Am I the only one who does not see Brad Delp?

No. He definitely should have been on there. He's the second most talented singer I listen to often. Only behind Mercury.

Elegy

11-19-2008, 06:15 PM

No, I don't know how they could leave him out. He's a beast of a singer

RS hates Iron Maiden, don't they?

sphere

11-19-2008, 08:40 PM

Really, they threw on Axl Rose and Joe Perry and no mention of Brad Delp?

Did they actually leave off Brad Delp?

theantkid12

11-19-2008, 08:43 PM

Really, they threw on Axl Rose and Joe Perry and no mention of Brad Delp?

Did they actually leave off Brad Delp?
Exactly.

And, they left the "Boston" album off of the top 25 greatest albums.

Metal_Man

11-19-2008, 10:45 PM

RS hates Iron Maiden, don't they?

ok it's official rolling stones is NOT a music magazine in fact it's a poser magazine for people who think they like rock but they really listen to hannah montana.

sphere

11-19-2008, 11:10 PM

ok it's official rolling stones is NOT a music magazine in fact it's a poser magazine for people who think they like rock but they really listen to hannah montana.

My good sir, while I fully agree with your post, your signature appears to have one too man close color tags.

rgdrafting

11-19-2008, 11:41 PM

It seems that there is an unusually large percentage of people that have an almost vehement hatred for Kurt Cobain. Is it because he (allegedly :rolleyes:) commit suicide?

Let me first say that I don't believe he should be at #45 on this list....he probably shouldn't even be at #145 on a list of "great singers". But why people try to completely discount his influence on music & pop culture is beyond me.

Anybody care to explain this to me?

For the record:
Bob Marley shouldn't be on this list (at least as high as he is). Massively influential - yes. Greatest singer - maybe.

Johnny Cash. See Bob Marley.

Christina Aguilera should definitely be on this list. The girl can sing.

visualdeity

11-19-2008, 11:47 PM

It seems that there is an unusually large percentage of people that have an almost vehement hatred for Kurt Cobain. Is it because he (allegedly :rolleyes:) commit suicide?

I think "hate" is the wrong word. I have nothing against him personally (and wouldn't even if he were still alive), but I do think he shouldn't be appearing on a list of great singers, because he was an awful singer (seriously, worst voice I have ever heard from a professional singer... he could hit notes properly, but that's all one could say for him).

More generally, I'm strongly of the opinion that he was a talentless musician in general, so I'd object to him being on any list of "great musicians", whether he wields influence or not.

Inpheksion

11-19-2008, 11:49 PM

Agree with
rgdrafting.

Cobain has made some good music, and his lyrics are outstanding.

However, singing talent, was one thing this man did not possess in great amounts.

As well as guitar skills. He can play decent. However, if you think Cobain is an "Amazing" guitarist, you really are a fanatical follower of Nirvana

EDIT: And how can you say he is a talentless musician? If there was a list of greatest lyricists of Music I would definitely put him near the top.

Ultimatum

11-19-2008, 11:55 PM

No Ronnie James Dio despite being well into his 60s and sounding almost exactly the way he did 30+ years ago and sporting some incredibly difficult vocal lines.

And if Dylan's No. 7, I can see how Kurt ended up in the high 40s.

instantdeath999

11-19-2008, 11:56 PM

Does that make him a great singer? No. It makes him influential.

He had quite a good range on the Live in New York album, IMO. Not to mention he was so incredibly different from everyone else (see In Utero)

This is coming from a pretty big Nirvana fanatic, though.

EDIT: And how can you say he is a talentless musician? If there was a list of greatest lyricists of Music I would definitely put him near the top.

His writing style reminds me so much of Francis Black. I love it.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 12:00 AM

EDIT: And how can you say he is a talentless musician? If there was a list of greatest lyricists of Music I would definitely put him near the top.

First, Nirvana songs tend to be so emo it makes me want to shoot someone. Second, Nirvana songs tend to be so repetitive (within the song, not from song to song) that I want to shoot someone (prime example being Heart-Shaped Box, which I swear must have 4 notes or something in the whole song, tops).

Cobain was an alright guitarist, I'll give him that. He was a terrible songwriter and singer though (imnsho).

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 12:06 AM

First, Nirvana songs tend to be so emo it makes me want to shoot someone. Second, Nirvana songs tend to be so repetitive (within the song, not from song to song) that I want to shoot someone (prime example being Heart-Shaped Box, which I swear must have 4 notes or something in the whole song, tops).

Cobain was an alright guitarist, I'll give him that. He was a terrible songwriter and singer though (imnsho).

The fact that you call him emo pretty much is a clear sign you have no idea what emo is.

Emo is only a sub-genre of hardcore punk that developed in the 80's, and today, it is only a fashion style. In terms of music style, Nirvana are about as far from emo as you can get. They are grunge, all the way.

As for repetition, while your example is somewhat exaggerated, keep in mind that, in true alternative fashion, the songs are short, usually less than four minutes. Repetition is almost guaranteed.

And for lyrics, many love his lyrics because they are vague, and while they may have not had a deep meaning in mind when written, but it is definitely easy to pull interpretations. I've dissected thousands of songs, and Nirvana have been some of the most fun for me.

EDIT: Also, let me make it clear that I don't think Kurt is a "good" singer. I consider him in the same vein as Bob Dylan, Johnny Rotten, or Jello Biafra.

Cpt. Overkill

11-20-2008, 12:24 AM

The fact that you call him emo pretty much is a clear sign you have no idea what emo is.

Emo is only a sub-genre of hardcore punk that developed in the 80's, and today, it is only a fashion style. In terms of music style, Nirvana are about as far from emo as you can get. They are grunge, all the way.

As for repetition, while your example is somewhat exaggerated, keep in mind that, in true alternative fashion, the songs are short, usually less than four minutes. Repetition is almost guaranteed.

And for lyrics, many love his lyrics because they are vague, and while they may have not had a deep meaning in mind when written, but it is definitely easy to pull interpretations. I've dissected thousands of songs, and Nirvana have been some of the most fun for me.

EDIT: Also, let me make it clear that I don't think Kurt is a "good" singer. I consider him in the same vein as Bob Dylan, Johnny Rotten, or Jello Biafra.

I was about to say the same exact thing about him saying Nirvana songs were emo. This post makes me happy.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 12:26 AM

Emo is only a sub-genre of hardcore punk that developed in the 80's, and today, it is only a fashion style. In terms of music style, Nirvana are about as far from emo as you can get. They are grunge, all the way.

I do not use emo as a genre. Emo is a term commonly used to describe something that is overly whiny to the point of ridiculousness, and I use it in this sense (eg: "emo kid", "I'm so emo over this situation", etc). And I say again, now that we've clarified my meaning: Nirvana songs are so emo they make me want to tear my hair out.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 12:27 AM

Mex

11-20-2008, 12:32 AM

I do not use emo as a genre. Emo is a term commonly used to describe something that is overly whiny to the point of ridiculousness, and I use it in this sense (eg: "emo kid", "I'm so emo over this situation", etc). And I say again, now that we've clarified my meaning: Nirvana songs are so emo they make me want to tear my hair out.

Ha.

Congrats on using the term "emo" wrong. But I get what you're saying. What you should consider is if a word means one thing to you and something else to the rest of the world, people are probably not going to understand what you're saying.

Cobain was not a great singer, but he's not as bad as some of you guys are portraying him to be. He doesn't have a traditional voice and that's a huge part of what made Nirvana succesful.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 12:35 AM

Where the hell did that come from, though? Original emo songs often had uplifting and cheerful lyrics. Just because teenage kids use it doesn't make it right...

Damned if I know, honestly. I use the term as I was introduced to it, though, and that's the first meaning of the term I learned (and the most common, I might add). Also, "teenage kids" is a bit unrealistic, I'm 23, and I use the word that way. It's just the way the word is used these days in my experience, by everyone except hardcore music lovers.

To touch on a point you said about repetition (I've been posting on the phone, heh, forgot to mention it before): repetition is guaranteed to some extent in short songs, but most bands make short songs, and they aren't anything close to the level of monotony that Nirvana songs have. They're just a very monotonous band, which, imnsho, is really bad songwriting.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 12:39 AM

Congrats on using the term "emo" wrong. But I get what you're saying. What you should consider is if a word means one thing to you and something else to the rest of the world, people are probably not going to understand what you're saying.

Here's the problem with your statement. My use of the term "emo" is, by far, the more common usage at this point. I am using the term in a manner consistent with what the average person would expect it to mean. It may have taken on a new meaning than what it once had, but, honestly, that's just the way our language works. It's a long series of bastardizations of what came before it, which happened to catch on.

I sympathize with your point of view, but what you're trying to hold me to is akin to what goes on in the community on slashdot (another forum I frequent regularly): people there tend to be zealots for open-source software, so any time someone says a program is "free", people get all uppity if the program isn't "free" as in "open-source". The thing is, though, they're actually the ones in the wrong, because whatever person said that XYZ is "free" was using the generally-accepted meaning of the term. As was I in this example.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 12:41 AM

Inpheksion

11-20-2008, 12:46 AM

Emo, even in today's usage, does not mean "Overly Whiny."

'Emo Music,' which does not actually exist in it's entirety, but the bands and songs that are labeled emo, yes, they are quite whiny.

Emo, is short for Emotional.

And it's odd, most of nirvana's songs are not much about emotion whatsoever.

In terms of good songwriting and lyrics.

Cobain was very good at metaphors.

Tell me, before this statement,

What do you think "Drain You" is about?

I'll post the following in black, so it does not affect your perception of the previous questions

Drain You is about taking Heroin.

Now, if you didn't think that, I want you to go back and look at the lyrics, and you will see how much apparent sense that makes

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 12:51 AM

Tell me, before this statement,

What do you think "Drain You" is about?

I'll post the following in black, so it does not affect your perception of the previous questions

Drain You is about taking Heroin.

Now, if you didn't think that, I want you to go back and look at the lyrics, and you will see how much apparent sense that makes

That's definitely the most likely meaning, but the chorus always threw me off.

Chew your meat for you
Pass it back and forth
In a passionate kiss
From my mouth to yours
I like you

This led me to believe that the song was about someone who is addicted to sex, or in other words, a whore.

One baby to another says
I'm lucky to have met you

The number of abortions.

I don't care what you think
Unless it is about me

This fit into the chorus.

The problem was, the rest of the song didn't fit very well.

So, I'm asking out of pure curiosity, how does the chorus fit into the heroin meaning? I'm guessing "chew your meat" can refer to the needle squeezing the skin, and the "passionate kiss" can refer tot he transfer from the needle to the veins.

Also, Serve the Servants is a well written, IMO. Double meanings. Half of it about Cobains childhood, the other half about the medias view on Courtney Love.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 12:54 AM

Well, Kurt was around before that usage of emo was used... so he's safe :D

I mean, look at these lyrics. Fade to Black by Metallica

Life it seems, will fade away
Drifting further every day
Getting lost within myself
Nothing matters no one else
I have lost the will to live
Simply nothing more to give
There is nothing more for me
Need the end to set me free

Things not what they used to be
Missing one inside of me
Deathly lost, this Can t be real
Cannot stand this hell I feel
Emptiness is filling me
To the point of agony
Growing darkness taking dawn
I was me, but now he 's gone

No one but me can save myself, but it's too late
Now, I can't think, think why I should even try
Yesterday seems as though it never existed
Death Greets me warm, now I will just say goodbye

If that song came out today, it would be called emo.

I do call that song emo, actually. I appreciate the song mostly for the beautiful guitar part that they wrote for it. Also, I do enjoy listening to it when I'm in a suitably emo mood (one time I sat listening to Fade to Black on loop for like an hour... that was a bad, bad day for me, heh), but I don't deny what it is, in the end.

EDIT: And I should note that I'm not always violently opposed to emo songs. They can be good, but when that's all I hear out of a band, I'm going to write that band off, because they can't find anything to do but make whiny songs.

Mex

11-20-2008, 12:57 AM

Here's the problem with your statement. My use of the term "emo" is, by far, the more common usage at this point. I am using the term in a manner consistent with what the average person would expect it to mean. It may have taken on a new meaning than what it once had, but, honestly, that's just the way our language works. It's a long series of bastardizations of what came before it, which happened to catch on.

I sympathize with your point of view, but what you're trying to hold me to is akin to what goes on in the community on slashdot (another forum I frequent regularly): people there tend to be zealots for open-source software, so any time someone says a program is "free", people get all uppity if the program isn't "free" as in "open-source". The thing is, though, they're actually the ones in the wrong, because whatever person said that XYZ is "free" was using the generally-accepted meaning of the term. As was I in this example.

You may be right, the usage is changing. But every time I see someone use the term "emo" in the way you mentioned, many more people point out that it shouldn't be used that way.

Many people pronounce "Nuclear" as "Nucular". Common or not it's still incorrect.

Truthfully though it doesn't matter, you explained what you meant.

I see alot of people say..."Oh that song is crap, it's so depressing". Well ok, maybe it is, but that doesn't mean it's a bad song. Without the sad/angry/"emo" songs we'd have nothing left but sugary pop crap.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 12:58 AM

Yes, found it! I couldn't remember the term, and was looking forever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law

Basically, any crimes committed before the law is set in place can't be charged :p

In other words, they were "emo" before emo existed.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 01:01 AM

I see alot of people say..."Oh that song is crap, it's so depressing". Well ok, maybe it is, but that doesn't mean it's a bad song. Without the sad/angry/"emo" songs we'd have nothing left but sugary pop crap.

I don't universally hate songs that are in that vein, but I consider it cheesy to make nothing else (as some bands do today, and they catch a lot of flak for it). Without exception, every Nirvana song I have ever heard has been a dreary, depressing, whiny song. I can't respect a band that makes nothing but those kinds of songs.

Mex

11-20-2008, 01:05 AM

I don't universally hate songs that are in that vein, but I consider it cheesy to make nothing else (as some bands do today, and they catch a lot of flak for it). Without exception, every Nirvana song I have ever heard has been a dreary, depressing, whiny song. I can't respect a band that makes nothing but those kinds of songs.

Is it possible that you're not looking deeply enough into it? There are plenty of bands that make the same "type" of song. AC/DC is an example that comes to mind.

GNR has never had a "happy" song, all their stuff is pretty negative. It's all in the same vein.

As far as not respecting them I could understand if you thought Nirvana was being fake and just making depressing songs for the hell of it. I don't think that's the case. I've always felt Kurt's songs were genuine.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 01:07 AM

I don't universally hate songs that are in that vein, but I consider it cheesy to make nothing else (as some bands do today, and they catch a lot of flak for it). Without exception, every Nirvana song I have ever heard has been a dreary, depressing, whiny song. I can't respect a band that makes nothing but those kinds of songs.

These songs don't have depressing lyrics, but might still be whiny to you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CKiHdH5-ec

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgcUyGTq0so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_apoJ0LLCk (song was actually inspired by early Beatles records)

Songs not written by Nirvana:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul58Smlct-k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=209ArurxVG4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN2jYqs8myI

Also, I have a question... is The Beatles Eleanor Rigby, Yer Blues, and Julia emo, since they fit the criteria?

Inpheksion

11-20-2008, 01:13 AM

So, I'm asking out of pure curiosity, how does the chorus fit into the heroin meaning? I'm guessing "chew your meat" can refer to the needle squeezing the skin, and the "passionate kiss" can refer tot he transfer from the needle to the veins.

I forgot where cobain originally stated it, but my friend was reading a book, and Cobain said it was about his heroin addiction

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 01:15 AM

Also, I have a question... is The Beatles Eleanor Rigby, Yer Blues, and Julia emo, since they fit the criteria?

Wouldn't know. I've never heard these songs (well, I may have, but wouldn't know them by name). I've heard enough Beatles to know I really don't like their sound, so I steer clear.

Mex: I have no real problem with bands making the same type of song, as long as it isn't the depressing, dreary song, because that type of song needs to be used in moderation. I really don't see how you figure that GNR never made happy songs, though: Sweet Child o' Mine always came off to me as a sweet love song, as did Patience, and Paradise City is certainly an upbeat, happy song (if an upbeat, happy song about debauchery). They have songs that are negative, too, but that isn't all or even most of their repertoire.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 01:18 AM

If you're interested, here it is. Short song, and very different from their other stuff. It was one of the first songs to feature depressing lyrics and be a hit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxyJLxV0_-8

Mex

11-20-2008, 01:21 AM

Wouldn't know. I've never heard these songs (well, I may have, but wouldn't know them by name). I've heard enough Beatles to know I really don't like their sound, so I steer clear.

Mex: I have no real problem with bands making the same type of song, as long as it isn't the depressing, dreary song, because that type of song needs to be used in moderation. I really don't see how you figure that GNR never made happy songs, though: Sweet Child o' Mine always came off to me as a sweet love song, as did Patience, and Paradise City is certainly an upbeat, happy song (if an upbeat, happy song about debauchery). They have songs that are negative, too, but that isn't all or even most of their repertoire.

Fair enough, you don't like depressing songs. I just don't think that's grounds for saying the artist is a crap singer or anything. I apologize if you didn't actually say that.

Anyway, of the songs you listed by GNR I'd really only consider Sweet Child O' Mine as qualifying. Patience is pretty "emo" dude, there's nothing upbeat about it. Paradise City while it might have an upbeat "sound" is still in a negative vein. Even if we considered those three as positive songs, you'd be hardpressed to find more.

foolosophy

11-20-2008, 01:28 AM

The Top 20 or so are great, but then the rankings really go haywire. There's too much people who were great lyricists or had "unique" voices who got overrated here.

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 01:29 AM

Fair enough, you don't like depressing songs. I just don't think that's grounds for saying the artist is a crap singer or anything. I apologize if you didn't actually say that.

Anyway, of the songs you listed by GNR I'd really only consider Sweet Child O' Mine as qualifying. Patience is pretty "emo" dude, there's nothing upbeat about it. Paradise City while it might have an upbeat "sound" is still in a negative vein. Even if we considered those three as positive songs, you'd be hardpressed to find more.

Again, I need to stress that I don't universally dislike depressing songs. I just need to hear that kind of song in moderation, so if that's all an artist does, I'm going to be turned off.

Furthermore, my complaint about Cobain's singing is separate from my issues with his songwriting. Even ignoring my opinions on his songwriting, I think he's an awful, awful singer. As I said before, he has the worst voice I've ever heard from a professional singer.

I still have to disagree about Patience. Maybe the song just strikes me in a different light than it does you, but it always comes off as a sweet, "I'll be here for you when you're ready" love song to me. But yes, you're right, GnR doesn't have a whole lot more songs than that which are positive... but then again, they don't have many more songs that I listen to. The span of GnR that I enjoy is basically Sweet Child o' Mine, Paradise City, Patience, Knockin' on Heaven's Door, Welcome to the Jungle, and Civil War. So, for what I listen to from them, GnR is shooting about 50% on positive songs.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 01:30 AM

Furthermore, my complaint about Cobain's singing is separate from my issues with his songwriting. Even ignoring my opinions on his songwriting, I think he's an awful, awful singer. As I said before, he has the worst voice I've ever heard from a professional singer.

Someone hasn't heard of Yoko Ono :D

Ultimatum

11-20-2008, 01:31 AM

Visual, do you consider Hurt Emo then?

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 01:31 AM

Visual, do you consider Hurt Emo then?

Never heard 'em.

instantdeath: no, I haven't. Any song which exemplifies her voice?

Mex

11-20-2008, 01:36 AM

Again, I need to stress that I don't universally dislike depressing songs. I just need to hear that kind of song in moderation, so if that's all an artist does, I'm going to be turned off.

Furthermore, my complaint about Cobain's singing is separate from my issues with his songwriting. Even ignoring my opinions on his songwriting, I think he's an awful, awful singer. As I said before, he has the worst voice I've ever heard from a professional singer.

I still have to disagree about Patience. Maybe the song just strikes me in a different light than it does you, but it always comes off as a sweet, "I'll be here for you when you're ready" love song to me. But yes, you're right, GnR doesn't have a whole lot more songs than that which are positive... but then again, they don't have many more songs that I listen to. The span of GnR that I enjoy is basically Sweet Child o' Mine, Paradise City, Patience, Knockin' on Heaven's Door, Welcome to the Jungle, and Civil War. So, for what I listen to from them, GnR is shooting about 50% on positive songs.

Gotcha, gotcha. Sorry it's late and my brain isn't quite functioning to full capacity. Which isn't much when it is anyway.

Honestly I've heard way worse voices from proffessional singers. But I guess it's just a matter of opinion.

As an example, I give you Tom Waits:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExyRMqX8eOA&feature=related

I don't get it, that sounds pretty horrible to me.

As for Patience, I get a different feeling from it than you do. I've always felt it's a song about a guy who desperately misses his girl. Things are not going well in this relationship.

Just a different interpretation I guess.

LibertineStripes

11-20-2008, 01:37 AM

Kurt Cobain ahead of Jim Morrison? hahahaha

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 01:38 AM

Never heard 'em.

instantdeath: no, I haven't. Any song which exemplifies her voice?

He's talking about Hurt, by Nine Inch Nails, and famously covered by Johnny Cash.

As for Yoko... don't say I didn't warn you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el06R6fwm1U

Mex

11-20-2008, 01:59 AM

instantdeath I see your Yoko Ono, and raise you LaToya Jackson:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiiarO36qVc

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 02:13 AM

Ouch....

Time to whip out my trump card.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpocrqvP2Yg

Mex

11-20-2008, 02:42 AM

Ouch....

Time to whip out my trump card.

Well played. But here's MY trump card. I give you.... ICP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Chdw_kAdI

Renrock

11-20-2008, 02:43 AM

Well played. But here's MY trump card. I give you.... ICP.
]

lol , I actually like that one. doh !

. . . yeah , it's no secret I listen to a lot of crap.

Mex

11-20-2008, 02:44 AM

lol , I actually like that one. doh !

. . . yeah , it's no secret I listen to a lot of crap.

Oh....oh dear. Renny...buddy...say it ain't so. PLEASE ;)

You gotta admit those are some horrendous vocals though.

Renrock

11-20-2008, 02:46 AM

Oh....oh dear. Renny...buddy...say it ain't so. PLEASE ;)

You gotta admit those are some horrendous vocals though.

Yeah. I do it for the lulz. :D

(and I've been sober from ICP for many years now.)

rgdrafting

11-20-2008, 03:05 AM

Wow, I guess it's "Gang-Up On visualdeity Night"!

Well, I won't pile-on....mostly because I have no idea what 'emo' truly is either!

I will say this: I really don't think Nirvana (or Kurt Cobain) would have been considered 'emo' back then (or now). Was he emotional? Absolutely, but what singer/musician isn't emotional in one way or another?

Cobain's (Nirvana's) emotion was always considered to be angst. Sure, sometimes it was a melancholy kind of angst (Polly, Something in the Way)....but more often it was a more aggressive angst (SLTS, Stay Away).

I was a sophomore in high school when Nevermind came out...and I can assure you, at that time, Nirvana was not considered 'whiny'. They were very raw & aggressively defiant. They didn't act differently and then bemoan the fact that people thought they were different. They just were different.

The thing that probably causes most people to associate them with 'emo', is the fact that Cobain was usually quite somber-looking...almost 'spaced-out'. Especially offstage. Google his image and 90% of the pictures of him are nearly expressionless. Unfortunately, I think this was most likely because he was smacked-out.

Don't get me wrong...he was definitely a somber dude. And he clearly had more than his share of demons. But I think that his nearly constant chemically-induced stupor is today mistaken for 'emo'.

toymachineSH

11-20-2008, 03:47 AM

I think the only people that like Nirvana are the people that lived through Nirvana. Kids these days see that he doesn't sing like Dragonforce or play like A7X and they think it's lame.

SM2535

11-20-2008, 04:01 AM

Cobain at 45 is a joke. As someone said earlier, where is Frank Sinatra? And the fact that Chris Cornell doesn't crack this list makes me sad.

SM2535

11-20-2008, 04:04 AM

I think the only people that like Nirvana are the people that lived through Nirvana. Kids these days see that he doesn't sing like Dragonforce or play like A7X and they think it's lame.

I am 29 and have lived through Nirvana. Please (and I'm 100% serious) tell me what was so earth-shattering that they did, and why we need to put Kurt Cobain on a pedestal.

I've never understood the slurp job MTV has given to Nirvana (specifically Cobain, and specifically "Smells Like Teen Spirit) over the years. I don't see them fawning over Dave Grohl like this, who (IMO) is ten times the musician Cobain ever was. And what happened to Novacelic? Did he just drop off the face of the planet?

rgdrafting

11-20-2008, 04:05 AM

Cobain at 45 is a joke. As someone said earlier, where is Frank Sinatra? And the fact that Chris Cornell doesn't crack this list makes me sad.

Yeah, I was gonna scroll through the list again (wish they would have just put a 'list' on there instead of the five minute scroll-fest) to see if Cornell was on there. He should be...and yes, far ahead of Cobain.

How about Scott Weiland...he's usually considered to be one of the better 'grunge-era' singers, isn't he??

SM2535

11-20-2008, 04:10 AM

Yeah, I was gonna scroll through the list again (wish they would have just put a 'list' on there instead of the five minute scroll-fest) to see if Cornell was on there. He should be...and yes, far ahead of Cobain.

How about Scott Weiland...he's usually considered to be one of the better 'grunge-era' singers, isn't he??

I like Weiland, but IMO, he is behind both Cornell and Eddie Vedder. Layne Staley as well, if we're going with grunge-era singers.

rgdrafting

11-20-2008, 04:21 AM

I like Weiland, but IMO, he is behind both Cornell and Eddie Vedder. Layne Staley as well, if we're going with grunge-era singers.

Not trying to be argumentative, but (IMO, of course) I don't think Vedder or Staley could touch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrxZtzXtg6w

I love 'em all...in fact, I've seen all of them but Staley (unfortunately) in concert. I was really surprised at how well Weiland sounded live. Vedder was horrific (although I belive it was because he was 'inebriated'). Cornell is always good...that goes without saying.

toymachineSH

11-20-2008, 04:31 AM

I am 29 and have lived through Nirvana. Please (and I'm 100% serious) tell me what was so earth-shattering that they did, and why we need to put Kurt Cobain on a pedestal.

I've never understood the slurp job MTV has given to Nirvana (specifically Cobain, and specifically "Smells Like Teen Spirit) over the years. I don't see them fawning over Dave Grohl like this, who (IMO) is ten times the musician Cobain ever was. And what happened to Novacelic? Did he just drop off the face of the planet?

Kris Novoselic is a politician in Canada now... Seriously XD

meh I don't feel like having the "Nirvana justification" argument tonight. Maybe another time.

SM2535

11-20-2008, 12:48 PM

Kris Novoselic is a politician in Canada now... Seriously XD

meh I don't feel like having the "Nirvana justification" argument tonight. Maybe another time.

Lol. Whenever you feel like it, let me know :)...seriously. I guess I'm one of the few that just doesn't "get it" with Nirvana.

Mex

11-20-2008, 04:07 PM

sweet-t310

11-20-2008, 04:19 PM

For those that don't understand the big deal with Nirvana I'll try to explain.

When "Smells Like Teen Spirit" came out in 1991 and started getting airplay it sort of hit everyone like tonne of bricks. Music like that wasn't played on mainstream radio and seen on TV for years. After a steady diet of hair bands I guess the masses were hungry for something with a little more meaning.

I guess it "spoke" to a generation.

Of course, not everyone liked them, and that's perfectly fine. As for myself Nirvana was part of the soundtrack of my coming of age, my high school years. Along with Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, STP, Alice In Chains etc etc.

Yeah I was a grunge kid.

To follow up on what Mex said, this (http://www.thenelsonbrothers.com/photos/promos/atrpro.jpg) and this (http://www.mtv.com/shared/media/images/artist/c/c_c_music_factory/az_official/281x211.jpg) were the artists dominating the radio before Nirvana came in and changed everything forever. If it weren't for Nirvana, we'd still be wearing spandex and neon colors...and I firmly believe that.

Rock_Band_Over

11-20-2008, 04:39 PM

we'd still be wearing spandex and neon colors...

I hope you are not implying that there would be something wrong with that!

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 04:40 PM

I hope you are not implying that there would be something wrong with that!

We had less fat people then. Fat people + spandex = bad. Dude, I'm teh fatty, and even I wouldn't want to see myself in spandex.

Yeah, glad we got away from that.

Mex

11-20-2008, 04:55 PM

We had less fat people then. Fat people + spandex = bad. Dude, I'm teh fatty, and even I wouldn't want to see myself in spandex.

Yeah, glad we got away from that.

Well...fashion and music seem to be cyclical. I see alot of clothing and hairstyles that seem to be inspired by the 70's these days.

Eventually the neon spandex will come back ;)

visualdeity

11-20-2008, 04:56 PM

Well...fashion and music seem to be cyclical. I see alot of clothing and hairstyles that seem to be inspired by the 70's these days.

Eventually the neon spandex will come back ;)

When it happens, I'll write songs complaining about it, which will drive the spandex away. :P

Mex

11-20-2008, 05:10 PM

When it happens, I'll write songs complaining about it, which will drive the spandex away. :P

I will buy those songs. Too support the cause!

smith5879

11-20-2008, 05:19 PM

This thread is so off topic.

culturedog

11-20-2008, 05:53 PM

Which reminds me of "The Spandex Enormity" by M.O.D. Speaking of which, Billy Milano - he's got one of the silkiest, smoothest Sinatra-esque voices out there. Why isn't he on the list?

Ultimatum

11-20-2008, 08:18 PM

Cobain at 45 is a joke. As someone said earlier, where is Frank Sinatra? And the fact that Chris Cornell doesn't crack this list makes me sad.

Cornell blew out his voice early on.

instantdeath999

11-20-2008, 08:42 PM

Well played. But here's MY trump card. I give you.... ICP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Chdw_kAdI

I know when I am beaten.

I think the only people that like Nirvana are the people that lived through Nirvana. Kids these days see that he doesn't sing like Dragonforce or play like A7X and they think it's lame.

I highly respect Nirvana, their music, and what they did for the industry, and I was in diapers when Kurt died. I think you are right for the most part, though.

Not trying to be argumentative, but (IMO, of course) I don't think Vedder or Staley could touch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrxZtzXtg6w

I love 'em all...in fact, I've seen all of them but Staley (unfortunately) in concert. I was really surprised at how well Weiland sounded live. Vedder was horrific (although I belive it was because he was 'inebriated'). Cornell is always good...that goes without saying.

Weiland has the more polished voice, though Stayley, IMO, has the more powerful voice.

RockBand.com