Tuesday, 1 November 2011

Rolling Stone Top 500

This is one of those lists that invite debate, so let me wade in ...

First of all, it's a ridiculously tough job.  The 500 Greatest Songs Of All Time?  My "desert island" playlist has about 900 songs on it - and my list is far less inclusive than Rolling Stone's.

And how do you please everyone, with so many sub-genres and musical tastes?  You can't.

That said, I think they did a pretty credible job.  Most of the songs are deserving, whether you like the genre or not, whether you want to quibble about the relative placement or not.  And, looking at the people who created the list, you'd have to agree they know what they're talking about.

Some random reactions:

As Expected:
The Beatles topped the list with the most entries and the Stones came second.

The 60's dominate the list and the 70's came second.

Not Expected But Not Surprised:
Dylan came third in terms of number of entries and Elvis came fourth.

Not Expected But Pleased:
Hendrix had seven songs on the list.  His influence is huge, but he gets so little airplay, and I always worry that the ongoing posthumous exploitation takes away from his legacy.  It's nice to see the experts know better.

I suppose ABBA had to get a song on the list, but it's still sad.

The Beach Boys are over-represented with seven songs.  And Good Vibrations does not beat any of The Beatles Songs on the list.  I have never undestood why so many people think this song is so good.

And call me greedy, but The Beatles should have had more songs on the list.  Where is:  We Can Work It OutI Feel FineNowhere Man?  for example.

Only six Led Zeppelin?  And Sly Stone gets six?  Please!

Does Free Bird really have to be on the list?  I never got that one either.

Only one Bonnie Raitt song?

No Jethro Tull.  At all?

No comments:

Post a Comment