The Immortals by Rolling Stone

[55dodger]

I didn't know where to put this and this seemed as good a place as any.

As part of their tribute to the 50th anniversary of rock, Rolling Stone released their 50 Immortals of Rock in their latest issue. In Rolling Stone's words, these are the 50 men, women, and bands who are continually in the music - as pioneers, teachers, and stars, touching our soul and pulling us to our feet, on a daily basis - even when they are no longer with us.

1. Beatles
2. Bob Dylan
3. Elvis Presely
4. The Rolling Stones
5. Chuck Berry
6. Jimi Hendrix
7. James Brown
8. Little Richard
9. Aretha Franklin
10. Ray Charles
11. Bob Marley
12. The Beach Boys
13. Buddy Holly
14. Led Zeppelin
15. Stevie Wonder
16. Sam Cooke
17. Muddy Waters
18. Marvin Gaye
19. Velvet Underground
20. Bo Diddley
21. Otis Redding
22. U2
23. Bruce Springsteen
24. Jerry Lee Lewis
25. Fats Domino
26. The Ramones
27. Nirvana
28. Prince
29. The Who
30. The Clash
31. Johnny Cash
32. Smokey Robinson & the Miracles
33. The Everly Brothers
34. Neil Young
35. Michael Jackson
36. Madonna
37. Roy Orbison
38. John Lennon
39. David Bowie
40. Simon & Garfunkel
41. The Doors
42. Van Morrison
43. Sly & the Family Stone
44. Public Enemy
45. The Byrds
46. Janis Joplin
47. Patti Smith
48. Run-DMC
49. Elton John
50. The Band

What I like about the list:

There is something to like about every artist on the list. Just about every musical genre is represented, from country to rap and blues to metal.

It has the usual suspects one would expect on a list such as this; Beatles, Stones,Who, Led Zep, Dylan, Janis, etc.
It also has some of legends of the 1950s who help shape rock music through the years; Chuck Berry, Fats, Little Richard, Everlys, Roy, etc. They are the pioneers of rock music.
The inclusion of Bo Diddley & Muddy Waters, two great blues artists.
Including Johnny Cash and the Byrds to add a little country flavor to the list.
Seeing Smoky Robinson and Stevie Wonder on the list. They’ve managed to out last all the other great 60s Motown groups/artists.

What I don’t like about the list

Where in the world is Eric Clapton? No legends or immortals list is complete without him.
What did Madonna ever do that was pioneering, teaching, or innovative?
John Lennon was immortalized as part of the Beatles. How can he be immortalized a second time?
I like Neil Young as much as the next guy, but his name seems a little out of place on this list.
I thought it a bit odd to see Nirvana, Ramones, Clash, Public Enemy, & Patti Smith on the list. Then again, I’m not all that familiar with their music, so maybe I’m just missing something.

Well for good or bad, better or worse, these are the immortals. Now, what say you?

[Dawn]

Great topic, Woody!

I'm with you in that there does seem to be a nice variety of artists represented. It's good to see the early influences listed as well - they definitely helped shape rock music.

I absolutely agree about Eric Clapton - he most definitely should have been on there, along with Crosby, Stills & Nash. I do think that since they included John Lennon as a solo artist, they should have listed Paul McCartney as well. Admittedly I'm not a rap fan, but I honestly can't see why both Public Enemy and Run-DMC ranked ahead of Elton John, who has had a consistently successful career for more than 30 years.

[KittyKat - RIP Luciano]

I for one like the list a lot and am glad to see personal faves Van Morrison, The Band, Otis Redding, Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder...

The one thing that is odd for me is the order of placement on the list.
U2 ahead of Roy Orbison?
John Lennon solo ahead of Elton John?
Chuck Berry #5 ahead of 45 others?

Although I can see the point about the Clapton omission, there isn't really anyone on this list of 50 that I would take out to make room for him - I just like to imagine that Eric's #51. ;D

[djdave]

With a few that are out of place or just completely not on there, a great comprehensive list.
And Public Enemy are probably THE group that got rap to how it sounds and shapes top 40 today. Not a fave of us more classic rock and pop music fans, but that's just how it is in the "music" industry" today.
And, yes, Madonna for keeping the modern dance post-disco music scene alive, paving the way for artists like Janet and Paula Abdul.

[H2IZCOOL]

Great topic, Woody!

I agree with everyone who said that Clapton belongs on the list. Also not Neil Young unless its part of Crosby Stills Nash and...

--and where are the Bee Gees ??

Maybe The Eagles and or Poco for country rock.

-- and what the ##%!&&@! is Public Enema doing on the list? I thought it was ROCK immortals. You may like rap, but it ain't rock.

[55dodger]

Dawn said:

Great topic, Woody!

I'm with you in that there does seem to be a nice variety of artists represented. It's good to see the early influences listed as well - they definitely helped shape rock music.

I absolutely agree about Eric Clapton - he most definitely should have been on there, along with Crosby, Stills & Nash. I do think that since they included John Lennon as a solo artist, they should have listed Paul McCartney as well. Admittedly I'm not a rap fan, but I honestly can't see why both Public Enemy and Run-DMC ranked ahead of Elton John, who has had a consistently successful career for more than 30 years.

Thanks Dawn

I really liked the variety and was so glad they didn't just concentrate on one era of music, but included both old favorites and the newer trendsetters, even if I don't necessarily agree.

Crosby, Stills, Nash, & Young were one of the groups I thought should have made the cut. According to the article they considered 125 artists before cutting the list to 50.
I wasn't surprised Elton was on the list, but like you surprised he was so low.

[55dodger]

KittyKat said:

I for one like the list a lot and am glad to see personal faves Van Morrison, The Band, Otis Redding, Ray Charles, Stevie Wonder...

The one thing that is odd for me is the order of placement on the list.
U2 ahead of Roy Orbison?
John Lennon solo ahead of Elton John?
Chuck Berry #5 ahead of 45 others?

Although I can see the point about the Clapton omission, there isn't really anyone on this list of 50 that I would take out to make room for him - I just like to imagine that Eric's #51. ;D

I was happy to see Van Morrison and The Band on the list, although I think The Band maybe rated to low, but I guess someone had to be #50.

As I told Dawn, I was surprised Elton John was ranked so low (#49), he's had such a great career. And Roy Orbison should have been ahead of U2.

I know I'm bias towards Clapton, as he's my favorite, but it's hard for me to understand his exclusion. But your right, he could have been #51.

[55dodger]

DJ said:

With a few that are out of place or just completely not on there, a great comprehensive list.
And Public Enemy are probably THE group that got rap to how it sounds and shapes top 40 today. Not a fave of us more classic rock and pop music fans, but that's just how it is in the "music" industry" today.
And, yes, Madonna for keeping the modern dance post-disco music scene alive, paving the way for artists like Janet and Paula Abdul.

Agree it's a comprehensive list and the great thing about lists is we can discuss the good & bad of them and gain insight into why some are or are not on the list.

Not being that familiar with Public Enemy or a big fan of Madonna, from your perspective, I can see why the made the cut.

[55dodger]

H2IZCOOL said:

Great topic, Woody!

I agree with everyone who said that Clapton belongs on the list. Also not Neil Young unless its part of Crosby Stills Nash and...

--and where are the Bee Gees ??

Maybe The Eagles and or Poco for country rock.

-- and what the ##%!&&@! is Public Enema doing on the list? I thought it was ROCK immortals. You may like rap, but it ain't rock.

Thanks Ed

As I told Dawn, CSNY before Neil as a solo artist.

The Bee Gees were a group I thought was another omission. Their influence through the latter part of the 70s was tremendous.

I sorta agree with the Eagles, but the Byrds are on the list and they helped pave the way for Buffalo Springfield, Poco, & the Eagles, so maybe not.

[SAT-I need more room!!]

Well, I have a different opinion than a lot of people of who is important and who isn't in rock. So I might get some arguments here.

I was surprised to see Little Richard so high because I have never seen him in a top 10 of these kind of lists. But my dad pointed out how McCartney took the "WOOS" from him, and his early rock-n-roll rebellion and all that. I kind of wonder about James Brown's placement, especially over that of Ray Charles.

No way U2 should be 22, especially ahead of artists like the Everlys, Roy and Smokey. They should get some credit for being the biggest band of the past 20 years, but not that high.

I have NEVER understood the Velvet Underground thing.

The arguement FOR the Ramones and Nirvana is they both came out and did music that was so different from what was out. In the age of big music (Eagles, Frampton, etc), Ramones came out and ripped into 3 minute songs. Nirvana came at a time where hair metal was a big thing. I am not saying I am a fan of either or that either should be ranked higher (they shouldn't) just explaining their rankings.

The whole Neil Young thing without CSN I also saw coming. Neil went into the Hall right away. CSN took a couple years. I am a way bigger fan of Stills, but Neil can do NO wrong with critics, and is held in higher regard than CSN or Buffalo Springfield.

I knew there would be a rap act, but I can't see why Public Enemy is on there ahead of Run DMC.

And my apologies to his fans, I just don't get the Van Morrison thing. I don't think he sucks, not at all. Just don't understand the high regard for him. Maybe someone can explain.

Nobody mentioned-how about CCR?

Good list for the most part, but no WAY the King should take a back seat to Dylan.

[55dodger]

SAT-Sissy's said:

Well, I have a different opinion than a lot of people of who is important and who isn't in rock. So I might get some arguments here.

I was surprised to see Little Richard so high because I have never seen him in a top 10 of these kind of lists. But my dad pointed out how McCartney took the "WOOS" from him, and his early rock-n-roll rebellion and all that. I kind of wonder about James Brown's placement, especially over that of Ray Charles.

No way U2 should be 22, especially ahead of artists like the Everlys, Roy and Smokey. They should get some credit for being the biggest band of the past 20 years, but not that high.

I have NEVER understood the Velvet Underground thing.

The arguement FOR the Ramones and Nirvana is they both came out and did music that was so different from what was out. In the age of big music (Eagles, Frampton, etc), Ramones came out and ripped into 3 minute songs. Nirvana came at a time where hair metal was a big thing. I am not saying I am a fan of either or that either should be ranked higher (they shouldn't) just explaining their rankings.

The whole Neil Young thing without CSN I also saw coming. Neil went into the Hall right away. CSN took a couple years. I am a way bigger fan of Stills, but Neil can do NO wrong with critics, and is held in higher regard than CSN or Buffalo Springfield.

I knew there would be a rap act, but I can't see why Public Enemy is on there ahead of Run DMC.

And my apologies to his fans, I just don't get the Van Morrison thing. I don't think he sucks, not at all. Just don't understand the high regard for him. Maybe someone can explain.

Nobody mentioned-how about CCR?

Good list for the most part, but no WAY the King should take a back seat to Dylan.

I probably would have put Ray Charles ahead of both Little Richard & James Brown. All three contributed so much & influenced so many, just not sure Little Richard & James Brown should have been ranked so high.

I agree U2 is rated way to high. Maybe they were put in at 22 to keep the list from becoming to much of 50s/60s love fest.

The Velvet Underground kind of hit me as a surprise as well. Still don't get it.

I can see the Ramones & Nirvana from your perspective, but, then why not Santana & Steely Dan. Both had a different sound from what was on the radio in the early 70s, and both have won Grammys within the last 5 years.

Ok, Neil good with the critics. But to include him, & exclude Crosby, Stills, & Nash is just wrong.

Like Velvet Underground, don't get the Public Enemy thing.

I actually thought Van Morrison was a like Neil Young, in so far as he looked a little out place on the list. The arguement I can give is he's still making music after 40 years.

Good call on CCR. Another would be Fleetwood Mac.