Rock & Roll Immortals

Rolling Stone released it's list of the top 50 Rock & Roll Immortals - as with any list (especially a Rolling Stone list) it has some questionable picks and, I think, way to many "conservative/safe" picks. Some of the missing:
Kinks (these guys really don't get the love, huh?)
Talking Heads
Husker Du (Hey, if you're gonna include Nirvana...)
Pixies
The Jam
Stone Roses
Smiths

They did include Public Enemy, which I think is proper...but then you open up the door for a bunch of hip hop/rap artists...

Who in your opinions should have been included and who doesn't deserve to be included?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gresh

Rolling Stone released it's list of the top 50 Rock & Roll Immortals - as with any list (especially a Rolling Stone list) it has some questionable picks and, I think, way to many "conservative/safe" picks. Some of the missing:
Kinks (these guys really don't get the love, huh?)
Talking Heads
Husker Du (Hey, if you're gonna include Nirvana...)
Pixies
The Jam
Stone Roses
Smiths

They did include Public Enemy, which I think is proper...but then you open up the door for a bunch of hip hop/rap artists...

Who in your opinions should have been included and who doesn't deserve to be included?

---

Don't know since I don't read the RS. Is the list online?

jc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Clark

Don't know since I don't read the RS. Is the list online?

jc

---

It's online at Rolling Stone.com web site.

I linked to it originally from USA TODAY web site.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Clark

Don't know since I don't read the RS. Is the list online?

jc

---

Here's the list:

1) The Beatles
2) Bob Dylan
3) Elvis Presley
4) The Rolling Stones
5) Chuck Berry
6) Jimi Hendrix
7) James Brown
8) Little Richard
9) Aretha Franklin
10) Ray Charles
11) Bob Marley
12) The Beach Boys
13) Buddy Holly
14) Led Zeppelin
15) Stevie Wonder
16) Sam Cooke
17) Muddy Watters
18) Marvin Gaye
19) The Velvet Underground
20) Bo Diddley
21) Otis Redding
22) U2
23) Bruce Springsteen
24) Jerry Lee Lewis
25) Fats Domino
26) The Ramones
27) Nirvana
28) Prince
29) The Who
30) The Clash
31) Johnny Cash
32) Smokey Robinson and the Miracles
33) The Everly Brothers
34) Neil Young
35) Michael Jackson
36) Madonna
37) Roy Orbison
38) John Lennon
39) David Bowie
40) Simon and Garfunkel
41) The Doors
42) Van Morrison
43) Sly and the Family Stone
44) Public Enemy
45) The Byrds
46) Janis Joplin
47) Patti Smith
48) Run-DMC
49) Elton John
50) The Band

What!!!!! No Kansas? Rush?? Yes??? Chicago???? Tull?????

These bands have been around for 30 plus years.

Preposterous. :p

I don't like lists.

Darren

Since Y*** isn't here to say this, I will,

Kansas and immortal should never, ever, appear in the same sentence. Except in the preceeding sentence saying they should never appear in the same sentence. Couple of decent albums, but Immortal? Come on.

Agree that Yes s/b in there, drop Run DMC

After a quick scan the biggest surprise for me....No Pink Floyd?!?!! (Not that that's a bad thing necessarily, just surprising.)

Disappointments....Elvis Costello ought to be there, notice he did the write up on The Beatles though...Leaving The Kinks off is unforgiveable.....And Joy Division deserves a place, but I'm used to that period and type of music being ignored....Eno?????Phil Spector?????

Mark

Typically safe and boring list. About the only band I noticed that wasn't finished with their best stuff in the 80s or before was Nirvana. Probably one of the most surprising ones to me was no Sex Pistols. Rolling Stone used to always toss them in on all these lists. Pretty typical Rolling Stone list. They've been pimping these same artists for decades now.

I think most of the folks here could probably guess what they'd use for at least 35-40 of a top fifty anything list they're gonna print.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dld

Since Y*** isn't here to say this, I will,

Kansas and immortal should never, ever, appear in the same sentence. Except in the preceeding sentence saying they should never appear in the same sentence. Couple of decent albums, but Immortal? Come on.

Agree that Yes s/b in there, drop Run DMC

---

The inclusion of Kansas was meant as a joke. I forgot the smilie. I knew that would eventually rub someone the wrong way. I dig 'em though.

The rest I feel pretty strong about.

But that's just me.

And that's like a**holes and opinions... everyone's is different. If you're looking at the term RnR "holistically"... ie the popular music that displaced swing and Jazz in the 1950's (my working definition please do not shoot at me) then this list makes sense... If you want to restrict your defininition to exclude other sub-genres, soul, RnB, Reggae and country, then this list is flawed and should be revised. It all depends upon your definition.

Da Worfster

Alright DH, now that you've come clean, your reputation isn't tarnished, like Geezers soon will be (as he comes to Kansas's defense). I also think Floyd not being on it is way, wayyyy out of line. Overall, I don't buy the boring list syndrome. Thought it was a pretty good list. Maybe 5-10 insertions/deletions I would make, but thats me (as well)

Thanks for posting the list for me JimN, I'm fairly time challenged today.

I thought this was a list for Rock and Roll immortals? Since when do the Blues = Rock and Roll? Lots of R&B on there too. Less of a stretch but still a stretch as far as to what I was expecting.

Little Richard at #8? U2 @ 22 and no REM? Now I remember why I don't read the Rolling Stone.

jc

How about Richie Valens except for his tragically short career? There is a nice 2 paragraph summary of the origins of rockn roll on the first page of liner notes of the Richie Valens Story box set. Which credits Richie Valen's hero LIttle Richard but doesn't mention Sam Phillips or Sun Sessions unfortunately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Worf101

And that's like a**holes and opinions... everyone's is different. If you're looking at the term RnR "holistically"... ie the popular music that displaced swing and Jazz in the 1950's (my working definition please do not shoot at me) then this list makes sense... If you want to restrict your defininition to exclude other sub-genres, soul, RnB, Reggae and country, then this list is flawed and should be revised. It all depends upon your definition.

Da Worfster

---

I would never define the music of Simon and Garfunkle as "rock and roll", although if you're gonna include Madonna (give me a break!), Bob Marley, Run DMC, and Muddy Waters, then why not? The list is flawed by it's very definition and many of the artists would never be thought of as rockers.

Swish

There was a similar list I read recently that listed the top-100 British albums of all time... it may have been Q magazine... I ferget... but they didn't have a single Who or Kinks album.... a joke.

At least I can't argue much with Rolling Stone's top-10 there. But leaving out the Kinks is krimminal, even if they are my fave band of all time.

RS's started going bad... over 30 years ago. Not much has changed since.

How about bands that live on in our memories? That's a kind of immortality:

Kraftwerk
Led Zeppelin
My Bloody Valentine
Pink Floyd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gresh

Rolling Stone released it's list of the top 50 Rock & Roll Immortals - as with any list (especially a Rolling Stone list) it has some questionable picks and, I think, way to many "conservative/safe" picks. Some of the missing:

Kinks (these guys really don't get the love, huh?)
Talking Heads
Pixies

---

<b>The Pixies</b>; sure you gotta include these guys; a cult influence in the late '80s whose music sounds as fresh and relavent today as it did then.

<b>The Talking Heads</b>; WTF! this same rag did a list of top 100 rock albums of all time during their 20th Anniversary year and the <b>Heads</b> were all over the the top 20. Rolling Stone magazine is for taste mongors and sheople.

<b>The Kinks</b>; so...your doing a list of Rock-n-Roll immortals and you leave off <i>The Kinks</i>...hhmmm...this smacks of a desperate attempt at controversy, cuz no one is stupid enough to do so, accept maybe Rolling Stone magazine. I'd write them a letter, but that's just what they'd want me to do. Screw 'em.

I mean c'mon, he was no more rock-n-roll than Black Sabbath was country. Am I a jerk because I refuse to canonize the guy? Sure, he has his place in music, but a rock-n-roll immortal? Conway Twitty has more right to be counted amongst rock-n-roll artists than Cash does (I'm serious). Twitty actually had a rock-n-roll hit with the song 'Make Believe'. Hell, George Jones has just as long a history of substance abuse, just as long a history at being a maverick, same with Waylon Jennings. And where the hell is Jennings on this list, being that he was touring with Buddy Holly when he died and is more directly connected with rock-n-roll folklore? What's next...Willie Nelson Unplugged? I don't begrudge Johnny Cash any of the notoriety he recieved in his last years, but I think it just because it was fashionable, like it was for Tony Bennet a few years ago.