...Number 1! Good to see Elvis being recognised almost 30 years after his death. In the past Q have been less than flattering in some of their articles about him but I guess this makes up for it,
I'm not going to type the top 100 but here's the top 10:
10. Jeff Buckley
9. Mick Jagger
8. Robert Plant
7.Kurt Cobain
6. Marvin Gaye
5.John Lennon
4. Otis Redding
3.Frank Sinatra
2.Aretha Franklin
1. Elvis
I disagree with Cobain being number 7 and why have John Lennon at 5 and poor old Macca is at 32 (as much as I like Lennon!) but I suppose it's all for healthy debate isn't it?
"How Do You Expect Me To Soar Like An Eagle When I'm Surrounded By Turkeys? " .Anon.
I certainly agree with number 1, but the rest of their choices show the shallowness of their tastes in music. There is no concievable way that Lennon, Cobain, Jagger, Buckley, or even Gaye should be in the top ten of a list of great SINGERS. (It's also a stretch for Robert Plant IMO) Someone needs to play these self important music editors some records by the likes of Sam Cooke, Solomon Burke, Ray Charles or even Dean Martin.
Nice to see Elvis at #1, where he belongs. The Top 10 is ok, IMO, though I agree that Kurt Cobain doesn't belong anywhere nere the top 10. But Jeff Buckley was a fantastic singer, and definately deserves to be included!
Hav-A-Tampa wrote:Nice to see Elvis at #1, where he belongs. The Top 10 is ok, IMO, though I agree that Kurt Cobain doesn't belong anywhere nere the top 10. But Jeff Buckley was a fantastic singer, and definately deserves to be included!
Yeah, Cobain a top ten vocalist. Did the dude ever sing in tune? He was a talent, no doubt about it, but a top ten vocalist? What was the criteria? Amazing that Q didn't have their beloved Thom Yorke in there; another guy that is never in tune.
These lists never have any credibility.
Btw, Joe Car, have a listen to Buckley's sole full length studio album Grace.
i have never heard of Jeff Buckley and for him to be in the top ten is a joke and Freddie Mercury not being in the top ten says it all but at least they got the number 1 spot right.
Hard to take a list seriously with such staggering omissions:
As has been said (and not said) ..... no Freddie Mercury, James Brown, Ray Charles or Karen Carpenter? Or Roy Orbison? Or Roberta Flack? I'd easily place these at the top with Elvis -- not (comparitively) two bit singers like Lennon and Cobain.*
*Not disparaging these guys. They had very distinct voices in their own right, but is this list about singers, or all-round artistry / impact? It seems they were going for a little more of the latter, yet the above exclusions are still galling even based on that broader criteria.
Sanatra is so over rated, Nat King Cole, Tony Bennet and Bing Crosby are all so much better. Even Dean Martin was a better singer. One of the best under rated singers is Mike Nesmith. I would put him number 2.
rocknroller wrote:i have never heard of Jeff Buckley and for him to be in the top ten is a joke and Freddie Mercury not being in the top ten says it all but at least they got the number 1 spot right.
Well since you have never heard of Jeff Buckley, that is all the justification one needs to exclude him from a list ranking top vocalists.... Maybe you should actually listen to the man before dismissing his vocal talents.
You are correct about Mercury though. How one can put Cobain in front of Freddie on any list celebrating top vocalists shows that Q's list holds zero credibility.
Cryogenic wrote:Hard to take a list seriously with such staggering omissions:
As has been said (and not said) ..... no Freddie Mercury, James Brown, Ray Charles or Karen Carpenter? Or Roy Orbison? Or Roberta Flack? I'd easily place these at the top with Elvis -- not (comparitively) two bit singers like Lennon and Cobain.*
*Not disparaging these guys. They had very distinct voices in their own right, but is this list about singers, or all-round artistry / impact? It seems they were going for a little more of the latter, yet the above exclusions are still galling even based on that broader criteria.
LonnieBeale wrote:Sanatra is so over rated, Nat King Cole, Tony Bennet and Bing Crosby are all so much better. Even Dean Martin was a better singer. One of the best under rated singers is Mike Nesmith. I would put him number 2.
I thought the whole world knew that the absolute best singer in the world is Barry Manilow closely followed by Wayne Newton
When you get to the point where you really understand your computer, it's probably obsolete
Lennon, Kobain, Jagger great singers? What are the parameters they are judging? Since we're talking singers, then it would be logical to talk about vocals. Freddie Mercury should come right after Elvis and Sinatra.
And I strongly disagree with the criticism of Sinatra. He was a great vacalist, a revolutioneer in his place, not as much as our man but still. Sinatra had a technique and talent that will remain appreciated forever.
Tony Bennett was stunned when Sinatra recorded The Summer Wind in just one take. And the song is flawless. Now that's a professional!
I just saw the magazine and the entire Top 100 list and despite Elvis' placing and the perspicacious Top three, this has got to be the worst list ever compiled of great singers in the history of the world. No Bobby Darin, Jackie Wilson, et al. Thomas Yorke of Radiohead ahead of Sam Cooke. Axl Rose, champion screecher ahead of Dionne Warwick who languishes in the bottom quarter. The list in fact is dominated by non-singers. By the standards of this list Elvis ranks among the greatest guitar players ever due to his playing on the '68 TV show.
We wonder why Elvis often gets short shrift. This list, in spite of Elvis' placement, reveals why. When it comes to great singing, today's critical establishment does not know its butt from a hole in the ground. These choices look like they were just randomly thrown together. If you view the art/skill of singing so haphazardly you're bound to dismiss it.
Good to see Elvis being recognised almost 30 years after his death. In the past Q have been less than flattering in some of their articles about him but I guess this makes up for it,
Did the dude ever sing in tune? He was a talent, no doubt about it, but a top ten vocalist? What was the criteria? Amazing that Q didn't have their beloved Thom Yorke in there; another guy that is never in tune.
Good Job 
