- Joined
- Dec 5, 2015
- Messages
- 30,339
- Reaction score
- 7,122
- Location
- Washington
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Everything on that list is wrong.
Bob Dylan being on that list at all indicates that it's not credible.The 200 Greatest Singers of All Time
Best Singers. Beyonce, Prince, Adele, Bob Dylan, Whitney Houston, Mariah Careywww.rollingstone.com
My thoughts:
First off, John Lenon was rated too high, #12? Seriously? He wasn't even the best singer on the Beatles, where Paul McCartney was rated #26.
How he was rated higher than Freddie Mercury, Bob Dylan, Prince, and Elvis was a complete head-scratcher.
And Ozzy Osbourne should not be on this list. Seriously?
Where is Johnny Cash?The 200 Greatest Singers of All Time
Best Singers. Beyonce, Prince, Adele, Bob Dylan, Whitney Houston, Mariah Careywww.rollingstone.com
My thoughts:
First off, John Lenon was rated too high, #12? Seriously? He wasn't even the best singer on the Beatles, where Paul McCartney was rated #26.
How he was rated higher than Freddie Mercury, Bob Dylan, Prince, and Elvis was a complete head-scratcher.
And Ozzy Osbourne should not be on this list. Seriously?
Where is Johnny Cash?
Bob Dylan being on that list at all indicates that it's not credible.
When Bob Dylan sings it sounds like he's trying to hold in a bong hit. Bob Dylan is a good song writer he's a terrible singer like Willie Nelson.
This list must have been made by a boomer.
The only one I know of on there is Stevie nicks.These singers weren’t to shabby either:
Smartest post in the threadI quit paying attention to the Rolling Stone years ago, you guys should join me.
Well, aren't we just overjoyed to have been treated to YOUR thoughts.My thoughts:
First off, John Lenon was rated too high, #12? Seriously? He wasn't even the best singer on the Beatles, where Paul McCartney was rated #26.
How he was rated higher than Freddie Mercury, Bob Dylan, Prince, and Elvis was a complete head-scratcher.
And Ozzy Osbourne should not be on this list. Seriously?
Trying to "rank" performers in some order is foolish and, IMHO, nonsensical.The 200 Greatest Singers of All Time
Best Singers. Beyonce, Prince, Adele, Bob Dylan, Whitney Houston, Mariah Careywww.rollingstone.com
My thoughts:
First off, John Lenon was rated too high, #12? Seriously? He wasn't even the best singer on the Beatles, where Paul McCartney was rated #26.
How he was rated higher than Freddie Mercury, Bob Dylan, Prince, and Elvis was a complete head-scratcher.
And Ozzy Osbourne should not be on this list. Seriously?
Well everybody does it you have your favorites. Publishing it doesn't do any good. That group or that song you love that others hate and vise versa.Trying to "rank" performers in some order is foolish and, IMHO, nonsensical.
True, I do have my favorites, but I don't rank them, nor do I care other's opinions. If you like ranked lists - good for you.Well everybody does it you have your favorites. Publishing it doesn't do any good. That group or that song you love that others hate and vise versa.
Agreed rank lists are not very usefulTrue, I do have my favorites, but I don't rank them, nor do I care other's opinions. If you like ranked lists - good for you.
The 200 Greatest Singers of All Time
Best Singers. Beyonce, Prince, Adele, Bob Dylan, Whitney Houston, Mariah Careywww.rollingstone.com
My thoughts:
First off, John Lenon was rated too high, #12? Seriously? He wasn't even the best singer on the Beatles, where Paul McCartney was rated #26.
How he was rated higher than Freddie Mercury, Bob Dylan, Prince, and Elvis was a complete head-scratcher.
And Ozzy Osbourne should not be on this list. Seriously?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?