Stevie Nicks - Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Singers

ButterCookie · #1 06-01-2010, 07:56 AM

Stevie came in at #98.

Born May 26th, 1948
Key Tracks "Landslide," "Dreams" (Fleetwood Mac) "Stand Back" (solo)
Influenced Natalie Maines, Sarah McLachlan, Courtney Love

Sheryl Crow calls Stevie Nicks' voice a "combination of sheer vulnerability and power," and Courtney Love swoons over "that ridiculous beautiful tone." Nicks' strong, deceptively versatile voice — by turns husky, warm, velvety and childlike — has provided the color and texture for songs ranging from smooth and mysterious Fleetwood Mac hits such as "Rhiannon" and "Dreams" to solo rockers like "Stand Back." "She's so tiny, and this big, deep voice comes rattling out, and I think that's very sexy," said Debbie Harry of Blondie. Nicks has influenced and mentored a wide generation of younger female singers, from the country of the Dixie Chicks to the sweet pop of Vanessa Carlton. "Her voice soothes me," says Love, "gives me something to aspire to and leaves me feeling courageous."

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/;kw=[rsHotList,95043,95827]

MissLadyLoki · #2 06-01-2010, 08:02 AM

It's nice she made the list, and I do think Aretha Franklin deserved to be #1 (hey, she is Lady Soul after all), but I personally think Stevie should have been much, much higher up on the list, like in the top 30 or so. If it wasn't for her and a few other singers (such as Janis Joplin and Ann Wilson), we wouldn't have the female vocalists we have today.

Oh yeah, and Debbie Harry is right: it is kinda funny how she's so small and has this huge voice. Hell, I still fall over in shock at the Rosebud version of Rhiannon.

ButterCookie · #3 06-01-2010, 08:04 AM

My browser seems to be acting up so I can't properly see the rest of the list, only the little thumbnails. Is Patti Smith #83?

MissLadyLoki · #4 06-01-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ButterCookie

My browser seems to be acting up so I can't properly see the rest of the list, only the little thumbnails. Is Patti Smith #83?

It's not working for me too, but I have seen the list before. it seems like they put certain people (such as Jim Morrison) high up cause of their "name".

jenniferuk · #5 06-01-2010, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ButterCookie

Is Patti Smith #83?

Yep, she is 83.

ButterCookie · #6 06-01-2010, 08:11 AM

That's Rolling Stone for ya

Chris and Lindsey didn't even make the list which speaks volumes.

MissLadyLoki · #7 06-01-2010, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ButterCookie

That's Rolling Stone for ya

Chris and Lindsey didn't even make the list which speaks volumes.

I gotta come out and say it: i'm not the best judge for keyboard players, but I can say Lindsey is one of the few people out there that can sing and play their respective instrument well (you either have a John Lennon, where they sing well and play their instrument so-so, or an Eric Clapton, who plays their instrument well and are a horrible singer).

Then again, Lindsey, along with Slash, Randy Rhoads, and Bonnie Raitt, never made the top guitarists list.

hell, I just noticed 2 trends: on the singers lists, the top people are all from a few years in the 60's, and on the guitarists, lists, and the top people are classified as having played the blues. Hmmmm, I wonder why...

DashingDan · #8 06-01-2010, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissLadyLoki

...and a few other singers (such as Janis Joplin and Ann Wilson), we wouldn't have the female vocalists we have today.

and this is a good thing?

MissLadyLoki · #9 06-01-2010, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashingDan

and this is a good thing?

There are some good female vocalists out there, and I meant ones that actually have talent, unlike a certain bunch of Disney teen boppers I shall not name.

DashingDan · #10 06-01-2010, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissLadyLoki

I gotta come out and say it: i'm not the best judge for keyboard players, but I can say Lindsey is one of the few people out there that can sing and play their respective instrument well (you either have a John Lennon, where they sing well and play their instrument so-so, or an Eric Clapton, who plays their instrument well and are a horrible singer).

Then again, Lindsey, along with Slash, Randy Rhoads, and Bonnie Raitt, never made the top guitarists list.

hell, I just noticed 2 trends: on the singers lists, the top people are all from a few years in the 60's, and on the guitarists, lists, and the top people are classified as having played the blues. Hmmmm, I wonder why...

cos Rolling Stone is lame. Old and lame. Oh funny, I said the same thing once before, in 1985.

MissLadyLoki · #11 06-01-2010, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashingDan

cos Rolling Stone is lame. Old and lame. Oh funny, I said the same thing once before, in 1985.

I was a 90's kid, but when did RS start going downhill?

DashingDan · #12 06-01-2010, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissLadyLoki

I was a 90's kid, but when did RS start going downhill?

Well, it depends who you talk too...some would say never, some would say always. It's published (still) by the same guy, Jann Wenner. He is the magazine's taste-maker, and if you agree with him you get to work with him and write reviews for his magazine. If you don't, you don't get to. It's not even a classic rock thing, either (eg. RS never gave Led Zeppelin records good reviews). If Jann likes an act, he champions it. If you like what he likes, then it's a great magazine.

MissLadyLoki · #13 06-01-2010, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashingDan

Well, it depends who you talk too...some would say never, some would say always. It's published (still) by the same guy, Jann Wenner. He is the magazine's taste-maker, and if you agree with him you get to work with him and write reviews for his magazine. If you don't, you don't get to. It's not even a classic rock thing, either (eg. RS never gave Led Zeppelin records good reviews). If Jann likes an act, he champions it. If you like what he likes, then it's a great magazine.

I heard all about his Zep hatred, which, as the Zephead that I am, got me pretty pissed. All I can say is they're just a bunch of snobs.

HejiraNYC · #14 06-01-2010, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DashingDan

Well, it depends who you talk too...some would say never, some would say always. It's published (still) by the same guy, Jann Wenner. He is the magazine's taste-maker, and if you agree with him you get to work with him and write reviews for his magazine. If you don't, you don't get to. It's not even a classic rock thing, either (eg. RS never gave Led Zeppelin records good reviews). If Jann likes an act, he champions it. If you like what he likes, then it's a great magazine.

Tastemaker- that definitely sums up Jann Wenner in a nutshell. I used to be a fervant RS reader back in the 80s-90s, and I always knew that, no matter what, I always had to take RS's album reviews with a huge block of salt. And in many cases, I could use RS as a barometer for what NOT to buy. There is a definite Rolling Stone Magazine Sound that makes Jann and all of his sycophantic writers/editors collectively climax. In my opinion, the epitome of this sound is...

"Angel of Harlem" - U2

Guitar-driven retro white boy soul with undercurrents of gospel and punctuated by a horn section. This is the same kind of **** that made them go all gaga over Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Richard Thompson, Elvis, Van Morrison and the Rolling Stones. It's an automatic guarantee for getting a 5-star rave review in Rolling Stone- no matter how mediocre the material! Unfortunately for Led Zeppelin, Journey, Foreigner, Fleetwood Mac, Boston, etc., their refusal to submit to the RS sound has resulted in lukewarm to mediocre reviews.

DashingDan · #15 06-01-2010, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

In my opinion, the epitome of this sound is...

"Angel of Harlem" - U2

Wow, you NAILED that one.