Art is subjective. We all know that. But if you were to ask anyone who their favorite bands of all time are then you might get a combination of rock bands like Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, Queen or The Rolling Stones.
Or you might get choices like Elton John, Billy Joel, Aerosmith or Nirvana. Sometimes favorites are based on style, sometimes geography and other times it’s simply generational. But when it comes to the best singers of all time, it’s a little closer to an exact science.
And Rolling Stone Magazine just released its “Top 100 Singers” of all time and somehow, amazingly, there are about 250 things wrong with it.
It’s hard to argue that Freddie Mercury isn’t the greatest male singer of all time. The frontman for “Queen” had an incredible 5-octave range.
And it would be even harder to argue that Aretha Franklin isn’t the greatest female singer of all time. Franklin’s voice is indisputable and her talent was undebatable.
Rolling Stone Magazine just released the “Top 100 Singers” of all time and seemingly the only thing they got right was putting Aretha Franklin at number one, but outside of that it’s a complete mess.
Here it is:
Rolling Stone Magazine list of Top 100 Singers of All Time. Thoughts?https://t.co/nq2WAOnUsq pic.twitter.com/JnGCBgd5CO
— Classic Rock In Pics (@crockpics) October 20, 2019
Ray Charles at number two? Okay, Freddie Mercury was better but that’s not something to pull your hair out over.
Elvis Presley at number three? No. Granted, Presley has always been a niche semi-blues singer with a unique voice, albeit, a widely beloved talent. But to say his singing voice is better than Marvin Gaye or Otis Redding is absurd.
Bob Dylan ranks seventh on the all-time list. Dylan is without a doubt one of the greatest lyricists of all time. He may even be the best to ever do it, but his voice is above average at best.
Mick Jagger at number sixteen is something to pull your hair out over. He should be down near the bottom of the list if Jagger should even make it in the top 100 at all.
And to put Jagger, John Lennon and Dylan ahead of Freddie Mercury is simply inaccurate. There’s no other way to say it. Any professional singer will tell you that. They may even be the first to agree.
The most absurd ranking on the list is Whitney Houston at number 34. It’s almost impossible to argue that there is a better female singer than Houston outside of Aretha Franklin. She deserves to be in the top 5 at the very least.
Also, Joe Cocker is number 97. Did they really just censor his name because of the first four letters of his last name representing the male genitalia? Why would they do that?
Some incredible singers didn’t even make the list at all.
Ella Fitzgerald, George Michael, Chris Cornell and FRANK SINATRA did NOT make the top 100 singers?
By leaving some singers off and moving around the ranking significantly, it would probably add up to 250 different mistakes Rolling Stone Magazine made.
