VH1 Top 100 Music Artists of All Time....

[AUTiger1]

Yeah, thats phuked up too. Not a HUGE fan of theirs but def are a top 100 all time act.

Agree, The Eagles are definately worth a spot on the top 100.

I believe the list was voted on by musicians and "music experts", which may explain some of the placements.  Understand that many of them may cast their vote based on the influence that a particular artist may have/had on them.

I didn't see the criteria, my bad......then I can see how some are on that list, but as far as a purist is concerned, that list is poop.   No Clapton, Cream,  BB King, T-Bone Walker, Muddy Waters, and as you said no Willie and there are several others that I can think of that need to be on that list.

EDIT:  I see Cream on there, never expected them to be at 60 something, but they are on it. 

[Saniflush]

Alright, where the fuck IS Clapton.  Can't just list Cream and say you've covered it.  The hell with that.  Cheap Trick is up there with a grand total of 2 songs and Clapton is not?  No Marky Mark?  No NKOTB?

I don't disagree about Clapton standing on his own but you better step the fuck off on that "Cheap Trick" and "two songs" shit. 

[Snaggletiger]

I don't disagree about Clapton standing on his own but you better step the fuck off on that "Cheap Trick" and "two songs" shit.

Well, they did play both of them live in Japan, too.

[wesfau2]

I don't disagree about Clapton standing on his own but you better step the fuck off on that "Cheap Trick" and "two songs" shit.

[Saniflush]

Well, they did play both of them live in Japan, too.

You need to wean yourself off whatever rock station you have been zoned in on and listen to a larger sampling of work.

[GH2001]

Agree, The Eagles are definately worth a spot on the top 100.

I didn't see the criteria, my bad......then I can see how some are on that list, but as far as a purist is concerned, that list is poop.   No Clapton, Cream,  BB King, T-Bone Walker, Muddy Waters, and as you said no Willie and there are several others that I can think of that need to be on that list.

EDIT:  I see Cream on there, never expected them to be at 60 something, but they are on it.

Agreed. If Cream is gonna be Clapton's spot on the list, it sure as hell needs to be top 15 not at fucking 60 something as you noted. He can stand alone in the top 10 IMHO. BB King, Muddy Waters - forgot them - holy fuck thats a travesty.

Just wait until the Wench gets a hold of this list. 

And he hasn't posted it publicly yet, but djsimp is uber pissed that Duran Duran and Cinderella didn't make it. He is definitely nobody's fool, call it the reflex.

[AUTiger1]

Agreed. If Cream is gonna be Clapton's spot on the list, it sure as hell needs to be top 15 not at phuking 60 something as you noted. He can stand alone in the top 10 IMHO. BB King, Muddy Waters - forgot them - holy phuk thats a travesty.

Just wait until the Wench gets a hold of this list. 

And he hasn't posted it publicly yet, but djsimp is uber pissed that Duran Duran, Boy George, and Cinderella didn't make it. He is pissed that George Michael isn't higher He is definitely nobody's fool, call it the reflex.

FTFY

[chinook]

i hate the fact jerry lee lewis isn't on that list.

[AUTiger1]

i hate the fact jerry lee lewis isn't on that list.

Didn't even notice........the ones that most of us are mentioning are on The Rolling Stone list. 

Rolling Stone list = god tier
VH1 = shit tier

[Snaggletiger]

#87 on the list just got sentenced to a couple of months in jail and lost his license for 5 years.  Hell, he only got stoned out of his mind and drove his car through the front wall of a store.  It's not like he was soliciting blow jobs in the men's bathroom...

wait..what?

[Tiger Wench]

I had to work today while downloading nearly 2GB of music from Jarhead... so I will reserve my comment until tomorrow...

But for now...

ABBA ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
GH - 

[Tiger Wench]

Oh, what the hell.  insomnia city...

IMHO, Van Morrison should be #1 of all time.  He has influenced more acts that you can name.  The Beatles were prolific hacks.  Yeah, I said it.  Their stuff was original for the time, but so was MC Hammer - AT THAT TIME...  Their shit is just stupid.  Obla Di Obla Da Life Goes On?  Seriously?  Stupid.  Paul is ok, and I can tolerate George, but Ringo is an idiot and John Lennon makes me want to club baby seals, smash a few otters and dump fifty thousand gallons of PCB-laced oil on Yoko Ono while she's riding a humpbacked whale.

Dylan - should have stuck to playing harmonica and writing songs for people with real talent to sing.  His voice makes me seriously nauseous.

And Clapton not being on the list COMPLETLY invalidates the entire fucking thing.  The man is a genius - a freaking talented as hell genius... his voice and his sound are completely unique.  He could be singing with Bert & Ernie and you could hear the opening lines and say "hey, that's Clapton singing with some fucking Muppets".

Elton John is an icon.  That is all.  Fuck them if they don't recognize that.

Some stupid thirty year old-ish punkasses with nothing but MTv brains came up with that list.  They probably never heard of Velvet Underground... or The Ramones... or the others who were excluded.

[GH2001]

Oh, what the hell.  insomnia city...

IMHO, Van Morrison should be #1 of all time.  He has influenced more acts that you can name.  The Beatles were prolific hacks.  Yeah, I said it.  Their stuff was original for the time, but so was MC Hammer - AT THAT TIME...  Their shit is just stupid.  Obla Di Obla Da Life Goes On?  Seriously?  Stupid.  Paul is ok, and I can tolerate George, but Ringo is an idiot and John Lennon makes me want to club baby seals, smash a few otters and dump fifty thousand gallons of PCB-laced oil on Yoko Ono while she's riding a humpbacked whale.

Dylan - should have stuck to playing harmonica and writing songs for people with real talent to sing.  His voice makes me seriously nauseous.

And Clapton not being on the list COMPLETLY invalidates the entire fucking thing.  The man is a genius - a freaking talented as hell genius... his voice and his sound are completely unique.  He could be singing with Bert & Ernie and you could hear the opening lines and say "hey, that's Clapton singing with some fucking Muppets".

Elton John is an icon.  That is all.  Fuck them if they don't recognize that.

Some stupid thirty year old-ish punkasses with nothing but MTv brains came up with that list.  They probably never heard of Velvet Underground... or The Ramones... or the others who were excluded.

Seriously though TW, our opinions of ABBA aside, I agree with your musical opinions here 100%. Dead on with Clapton and sir Elton. Van Morrison - couldn't have said it any better. Those 3 are the epitome of music in the 'purist' sense. If I had only read or seen the top 20, I might would have thought a little different, but the 100-21 spots are just garbage looking back on it now.

Some others I have thought of not on the list that maybe should be:

Yardbirds (Jeff Beck was omitted from the list as well)
Sam Cooke
Stevie Ray Vaughn
Simon and Garfunkel
Grateful Dead
Allman Brothers (as mentioned before)
Chicago
Smokey Robinson (guy practically invented the Motown machine)
The Temptations
Lionel Ritchie/Commodores
Phil Collins (him and Gabriel should be on here without Genesis)

[AUTiger1]

Disagree on the Beatles.  You may think some of their stuff is stupid and I do as well, but you can't deny how influential they were.   Joe Cocker, Steven Tyler, Offspring, Oasis, Jimi Hendrix, Elton John, David Bowie, and many others have covered their tracks.  Too many interviews out there from artist that will list them as an influence. 

[GH2001]

Disagree on the Beatles.  You may think some of their stuff is stupid and I do as well, but you can't deny how influential they were.   Joe Cocker, Steven Tyler, Offspring, Oasis, Jimi Hendrix, Elton John, David Bowie, and many others have covered their tracks.  Too many interviews out there from artist that will list them as an influence.

Damnit  - how did I miss TW's comments on the Beatles? I think I skipped right to Clapton.

Yes - bad, narrow view of the Beatles TW. They were not stupid. Look a little deeper into their music and the material they wrote and you will see it isn't stupid by any means.

They did some shit that had never been done before.  They were innovative. Even down to the multiple time signatures in a lot of their songs and the unusual keys the songs were written in. Not many songs had been heard before them where the time sig and key would change during the song that many times - AND sound good at that (Day in the Life comes to mind). These guys were technicians, no doubt.  The only way they look simplistic and stupid is if you listen to SOME of their songs on the surface for face value. To be the first to do a lot of the crap they did is what sets them apart to me. Its easy to copy, but its not easy to innovate.

[Snaggletiger]

Damnit  - how did I miss TW's comments on the Beatles? I think I skipped right to Clapton.

Yes - bad, narrow view of the Beatles TW. They were not stupid. Look a little deeper into their music and the material they wrote and you will see it isn't stupid by any means.

They did some shit that had never been done before.  They were innovative. Even down to the multiple time signatures in a lot of their songs and the unusual keys the songs were written in. Not many songs had been heard before them where the time sig and key would change during the song that many times - AND sound good at that (Day in the Life comes to mind). These guys were technicians, no doubt.  The only way they look simplistic and stupid is if you listen to SOME of their songs on the surface for face value. To be the first to do a lot of the crap they did is what sets them apart to me. Its easy to copy, but its not easy to innovate.

Most excellent take #2001.

[Tiger Wench]

Disagree on the Beatles.  You may think some of their stuff is stupid and I do as well, but you can't deny how influential they were.   Joe Cocker, Steven Tyler, Offspring, Oasis, Jimi Hendrix, Elton John, David Bowie, and many others have covered their tracks.  Too many interviews out there from artist that will list them as an influence.

OK - allow me to clarify.

The early Beatles were horrid.  They had an impact on that generation but their early stuff is insipid and ridiculous - totally self-indulgent (to channel Cowell) commercial let's make a fast buck pop, no better than some of today's "cash in fast on the trend" artists.  They were prolific at the expense of quality. 

The serious Beatles stuff - some of which I will agree is pretty awesome, like Day In The Life and Yesterday - did not come until their pop culture moment had passed and they were able to worry less about making their name and were able to experiment.  IMHO, the Stones were better from the get-go, from beginning until... well, until.  Other groups were the same way - quality from the word go.  You can even argue that Prince is an innovator too, and where is he on the list?

So for that reason, yes, they were influential, yes, not ALL of their stuff sucked, but I still intensely dislike early Beatles and disagree with them being #1 because of it.  MASSIVE numbers of songs on the charts does not equal overall awesomeness.

[AUTiger1]

OK - allow me to clarify.

The early Beatles were horrid. 

The serious Beatles stuff - some of which I will agree is pretty awesome, like Day In The Life and Yesterday - did not come until their pop culture moment had passed and they were able to worry less about making their name and were able to experiment.  IMHO, the Stones were better from the get-go, from beginning until... well, until.  Other groups were the same way - quality from the word go.  You can even argue that Prince is an innovator too, and where is he on the list?

So for that reason, yes, they were influential, yes, not ALL of their stuff sucked, but I still intensely dislike early Beatles and disagree with them being #1 because of it.  MASSIVE numbers of songs on the charts does not equal overall awesomeness.

So you are talking, "I want to hold your hand, love love me do"? 

I would list Prince in my list, would have him in my top 30 to 40, which is why I hate this list.   Rolling Stone top 100 has Prince listed.  Also have Van Morrision listed and the Allman Brothers as well.  I think we all agree, this list is pure horseshit.

[GH2001]

OK - allow me to clarify.

The early Beatles were horrid.  They had an impact on that generation but their early stuff is insipid and ridiculous - totally self-indulgent (to channel Cowell) commercial let's make a fast buck pop, no better than some of today's "cash in fast on the trend" artists.  They were prolific at the expense of quality. 

The serious Beatles stuff - some of which I will agree is pretty awesome, like Day In The Life and Yesterday - did not come until their pop culture moment had passed and they were able to worry less about making their name and were able to experiment.  IMHO, the Stones were better from the get-go, from beginning until... well, until.

Ok ok - I heart you again.

I am a sucker for the Stones as well. Ultimate showmen and party band.

[Tiger Wench]

So you are talking, "I want to hold your hand, love love me do"? 

Yeth.

Seriously insipid.  Easy to write, easy to sing, catchy repetitive tune, requires very little musical skill to play, made panties drop all over the US.  Score.

When half of your discography is music like Love Love Me Do, your credibility should be cut in half as well.