Rolling stone magazines 100 greatest singers.

[JDK]

100 Mary J. Blige
99 Steven Tyler
98 Stevie Nicks
97 Joe Cocker
96 B.B. King
95 Patti LaBelle
94 Karen Carpenter
93 Annie Lennox
92 Morrissey
91 Levon Helm
90 The Everly Brothers
89 Solomon Burke
88 Willie Nelson
87 Don Henley
86 Art Garfunkel
85 Sam Moore
84 Darlene Love
83 Patti Smith
82 Tom Waits
81 John Lee Hooker
80 Frankie Valli
79 Mariah Carey
78 Sly Stone
77 Merle Haggard
76 Steve Perry
75 Iggy Pop
74 James Taylor
73 Dolly Parton
72 John Fogerty
71 Toots Hibbert
70 Gregg Allman
69 Ronnie Spector
68 Wilson Pickett
67 Jerry Lee Lewis
66 Thom Yorke
65 David Ruffin
64 Axl Rose
63 Dion
62 Lou Reed
61 Roger Daltrey
60 Björk
59 Rod Stewart
58 Christina Aguilera
57 Eric Bourdon
56 Mavis Staples
55 Paul Rodgers
54 Luther Vandross
53 Muddy Waters
52 Brian Wilson
51 Gladys Knight
50 Bonnie Raitt
49 Donny Hathaway
48 Buddy Holly
47 Jim Morrison
46 Patsy Cline
45 Kurt Cobain
44 Bobby "Blue" Bland
43 George Jones
42 Joni Mitchell
41 Chuck Berry
40 Curtis Mayfield
39 Jeff Buckley
38 Elton John
37 Neil Young
36 Bruce Springsteen
35 Dusty Sprinfield
34 Whitney Houston
33 Steve Winwood
32 Bono
31 Howlin' Wolf
30 Prince
29 Nina Simone
28 Janis Joplin
27 Hank Williams
26 Jackie Wilson
25 Michael Jackson
24 Van Morrison
23 David Bowie
22 Etta James
21 Johnny Cash
20 Smokey Robinson
19 Bob Marley
18 Freddie Mercury
17 Tina Turner
16 Mick Jagger
15 Robert Plant
14 Al Green
13 Roy Orbison
12 Little Richard
11 Paul McCartney
10 James Brown
09 Stevie Wonder
08 Otis Redding
07 Bob Dylan
06 Marvin Gaye
05 John Lennon
04 Sam Cooke
03 Elvis Presley
02 Ray Charles
01 Aretha Franklin

My only real gripe is McCartney missing out on the top 10. I feel he should be ahead of Lennon as he had a far better vocal range.

[T-dog]

I just skimmed through the list...and I dont see Layne Staley on that list, the singer from Alice in Chains, hes a much better singer than the likes of Kurt Cobain.

[Gravity]

I'm with T, my biggest gripe has to be the inclusion of Cobain at all. Based solely on vocal talent, Cobain has no place at all even being on this list, let alone ahead of people like Axl Rose, Mariah Carey, and Stevie Nicks.

[APostingGod]

Guys, there is a difference between vocal range and being able to use your voice to express emotion. Kurt expressed emotion and used little nuances to express his emotion. Same for Lennon, listen to songs like Mother and Working Class Hero and How Do you sleep at Night, and you'll understand why he was ranked so high, he understood his voice.

If you doubt Kurt listen to "Where did You Sleep Last Night" or "All Apologies". I do however regret Layne Stanley not being on the list, he was amazing, both with Alice and Chains, and Mad Season.

[T-dog]

I suppose you make a point there, even though Kurt is not that great a singer, especially Live. He does bring with him a certain style to his singing that is well to me, in a way unique and interesting and works well with his music. But for him to be to be put ahead of someone like Axl Rose, bugs me a bit. oh well.

One person I would have included is Chris Cornell, only just out of pure bias on my part. I've been a huge of his singing from Soundgarden all the way to his single work.

[legendaryken]

That list is laughable. 'Greatest singer' - define your terms, Rolling Stone! Most expressive? Most successful? Most groundbreaking? Happened to be in the Beatles? Best vocal range? or, as I suspect, people we like here at Rolling Stone.

It doesn't include people outwith the rock/pop/soul/R&B areas, so I'll not complain about the absence of Barbra Streisand, Frank Sinatra, Mel Torme, even Andy Williams.

I will complain (bitterly) about the presence of Bono (fuck right off) Christina Aguilera, Mariah Caaaeeeeeeuuuuuurrrrrraaaaaaaeeeeeeyyyyyyyymmmmmm, Don Henley and Karen Carpenter.

I will suggest that McCartney is a genius, a great songwriter, a talented musician and was in the greatest band of all time, but to suggest he is the eleventh greatest singer is just plain wrong.

I wouldn't have them in that order, but Franklin, Charles, Presley, Redding, Brown, Orbison are worth their place. Bob Dylan is like marmite, but somebody like Peter Hammill is Dylan to the max, though approximately a millionth less successful, and should be there. I'll chuck in a couple of obscure ones like Annie Haslam, Amanda Parsons, Francesco Di Giacomo and Kevin Coyne, but realise that they'd never appear in any list except mine.

Proof positive that they really don't know shit is that Brian Wilson is at 52, yet Carl Wilson - a much better singer than his Beach Boy brother, isn't in the list at all. Brian was the genius, the songwriter, the arranger, the guiding light, but not the best singer.

[JDK]

LDK, I am dissapointed in your views on Bono's voice. I think he has a fantastic voice.

[One Stratusfied Customer]

It's pretty contemporariest (yes I made up a word). I think there are probably some more recent singers that deserve to make the list.

I don't understand why anyone would object to Mariah or Christina being listed as having amazingly good voices other than the fact that they're too mainstream (to be honest, I'm surprised they're even on the list). I'm not their biggest fan myself, but they can both sing, especially Christina.

[TheMainMan25]

Ha aha haaaaa!

That was the funniest list that I've read yet from Rolling Stone. Pure Bullshit to have Johnny Cash ahead of Mary J Blige. And you may not like Christina but the girl can blow.

And I'm gonna catch hell for this but, John Lennon? Really? The man was a musical giant, no doubt, but one of the best singers ever? Perhaps Rolling Stone was using the term "singer" to denote anyone who's made a profession singing on a microphone and not who has the best singing ability. If that's the case, then ok. Without seeing the entire article it's hard to tell.

[JDK]

I don't agree with your views on Johnny Cash, but I fully agree with Lennon.

[legendaryken]

Bono is to rock music like X-P*c is to wrestling - self-important, nauseating wankers.

Don't kid yourself. Christina Aguiliera is only there because she's popular at the moment. There's a hundred better girl singers in their 20s.

Lennon's finest moment as a singer was 'Twist and Shout'. Like McCartney, he was in the best band in the world, but he was not an outstanding singer. List me his ten best vocal performances. It would be a struggle, I think.

Nat King Cole should have been in there, but they definitely seem to have avoided 'easy listening'

Strangely, Classic Rock magazine have just published a list of 'The Greatest Singers in Rock Music'.

1. Freddie Mercury
2. Paul Rodgers
3. Robert Plant
4. Steve Marriott
5. Rod Stewart
6. Ian Gillan
7. Ronnie James Dio
8. Sammy Hagar
9. Steve Perry
10. Janis Joplin
11. Noddy Holder
12. Steven Tyler
13. Rodger Daltrey
14. Meatloaf
15. David Coverdale
16. Paul Stanley
17. John Lennon
18. Ann Wilson
19. Layne Staley
20. Steve Winwood

I'll do the other 30 if there's any interest.

[One Stratusfied Customer]

Don't kid yourself. Christina Aguiliera is only there because she's popular at the moment. There's a hundred better girl singers in their 20s.

Haven't seen her in the charts for at least a couple years, there are more popular singers at the moment and noone else on that chart suggests they took into account how popular people are at the moment. I'm not saying she's the best, just she deserves some credit for having a great voice.

[D2Kvirus]

Mariah Carey?!? She doesn't sing, she tortures dolphins.

Meanwhile, Thom Yorke's voice is just a low drone that's one of the reasons Radiohead's music bores me senseless (so, cue a bunch of their fans saying I;m an idiot who has no sense of hearing and hates music - another reason I hate Radiohead, come to think of it...)

Bob Dylan's voice is horrible. It's a nasty, grating, nasal whine. Hendrix's delivery on All Along The Watchtower is far more dynamic and forceful.

Lastly, Paul Rodgers is complete arse in Queen (+ Paul Rodgers) - he can't hit a single one of Freddie's high notes or sustains, making them sound like a pub tribute act. Yes, his stuff in Free was better, but he is an abysmal choice to replace the irreplacible.

Chris Cornell would be a good choice, because he has depth, soul and range in his voice - and that doesn't mean just going "WhooOaaaaaaaaahOAAAAAAAAH" a la Christina Aguileira does at regular intervals on Beautiful.

But then again, I'd add Johnny Rotten and Joe Strummer to the list...

[Juice Springsteen]

Ken, I am very interested. All I wanna know is where the fuck is Rob Halford?

[D2Kvirus]

Ken, I am very interested. All I wanna know is where the fuck is Rob Halford?

Judas Priest.

[T-dog]

Chris Cornell's voice is amazing and I would have included him in this list, but well, according to some of my friends and I bet a few people here, they would find his voice to be monotonous and boring.

Shame though, he does have a unique voice that stands out and is noticable from the rest.

[D2Kvirus]

Come to think of it, I'd put Fiona Apple way ahead of Xtina or Mariah Carey - but she's practically dropped of the face of the earth.

[Gravity]

Chris Cornell's voice is amazing and I would have included him in this list, but well, according to some of my friends and I bet a few people here, they would find his voice to be monotonous and boring
Tell them to listen to "Jesus Christ Pose" and see if they still think that.

[JDK]

I'm thinking caleb followill is a glaring ommision, very good voice.

[legendaryken]

Just had a closer look at the Classic Rock Top 50 - even though it's advertised as such, they've only printed the top 30! Bastards! So, to finish what I started:

30: James Hetfield
29: Lou Gramm
28: Phil Mogg
27: Brian Connolly
26: Steven Wilson
25: Danny Bowes
24: Glenn Hughes
23: Robin Zander
22: Jim Morrison
21: Chris Robinson

So, no Rob Halford (yeah, a bit surprised at that) Axl Rose or Chris Cornell

[AFalseSinn]

If you took recent work for Axl Rose I wouldnt put him on the list. But If you took body of work (which they are clearly doing for everyone or should have done for everyone) then I can actually argue FOR Axl. The man is a great vocalist when it comes to his body of work. As well as Chris Cornell and many people who I am sure are not listed. (I havent actually looked through the whole list because I actually only care to speak about the people not included...its far more interesting to me.)

We could compile another 50 people we all feel should be on this list (40 percent of them easily interchangable with currently listed people agreed on id say) and to me that is far more interesting then the people already in it.

so who else is missing to you guys?

[legendaryken]

Well........it depends which list - the Rolling Stone one or the Classic Rock one.

I don't like Axl Rose as a singer - he yelps out the lyrics - and I wouldn't have him in the top 30 based on my preferences, but I was surprised that Classic Rock didn't have him in there.
I would have expected Bonn Scott, Brian Johnson, Don Van Vliet, Peter Gabriel and Grace Slick to be there. Probably in the top 50, I would think.

[Juice Springsteen]

Rob Halford. That was the biggest snub ever. But yay for James Hetfield being number 30!

[APostingGod]

Lennon's finest moment as a singer was 'Twist and Shout'. Like McCartney, he was in the best band in the world, but he was not an outstanding singer. List me his ten best vocal performances. It would be a struggle, I think.


1. Mother
2. Instant Karma
3. Working Class Hero
4. Oh My Love
5. Beautiful Boy
6. Give Peace a Chance
7. Borrowed Time
8. Jealous Guy
9. Imagine
10. How Do You Sleep At Night?

Bitch.

John Lennon I would consider the best of all time vocally, why? Because he used his voice to express emotion and sang in pitches and ways that were unique that just fit his music perfect. Was his voice the prettiest? God no. Either was Janis Joplin, Bowie, or even Paul McCartney. Lennon used his vocals as a art form. (Bjork is a more contemporary, avante garde way of doing the same) You felt pain, hatred, remorse, and love in the way he sang those songs. Listen to Jealous Guy and tell me you can't feel the remorse, listen to Mother and tell me you cant feel the pain in the way he sings that song. That's fucking talent!

Pretty voices don't mean shit in music, Mariah, Christina, Houston are really just pop chics with good vocal chords. There are opera singers that are 12 who can sing better than them. If anyone has the Rolling Stone Magazine it's about how you use your voice not just the prettiness of it. Hence why Axl should be on there, and why Aretha and Charles are 1 and 2, both had a amazing passion and way of using their voices, especially Charles.

[legendaryken]

Listen to 'Beautiful Boy' and tell me it didn't make you puke!
I'm not allowing Imagine, Jealous Guy or Give Peace a Chance either.
Actually, I agree with you about the 'pretty voices' thing. It's just that many many people express emotions in an earthy, realistic way through their singing far more than Lennon.
Listen to 'Still Life' by Van der Graaf Generator (sung by Peter Hammill) for just one example. It's not pretty at all, but you live the song.

Don't get me wrong - The Beatles are still the best band ever and Lennon is one of the 10 most important people in popular music ever, but he's just not one of the best singers.

[Chazz]

John Lennon- Great voice? No, not really. Emotional? Yes indeed! Top 10? No, I don't think so, simply because I feel their are others more deserving. Lennon, to me, was a better songwriter than he was singer. But, then again, he believed in what he sang, and it showed in the music.

Kurt Cobain- Like Lennon, a trememndously talented songwriter. Not so much a great singer. But man, when you listen to his voice and hear him sing the songs he wrote, could you imagine anyone else singing those lyrics. He made his music have a purpose, and he brought it to life with his voice. No one can deny that. I don't have a problem with him on this list, except that his placement might be a tad to low for me. Understand, he is not one of my favorites at all. But I can respect the man for what he contributed to rock and alternative music.

Bono- Well, Ken has his opinion, but to me, the guy is a great singer. I just love his voice. Plus, when he has done a song of meaning (Streets Have No Name) you can hear the passion in his voice. Honestly, in my opinion, U2 has been the best band over the past twenty years (Yeah, that is bold, but I feel it to be true).

[JDK]

John Lennon- Great voice? No, not really. Emotional? Yes indeed! Top 10? No, I don't think so, simply because I feel their are others more deserving. Lennon, to me, was a better songwriter than he was singer. But, then again, he believed in what he sang, and it showed in the music.

Kurt Cobain- Like Lennon, a trememndously talented songwriter. Not so much a great singer. But man, when you listen to his voice and hear him sing the songs he wrote, could you imagine anyone else singing those lyrics. He made his music have a purpose, and he brought it to life with his voice. No one can deny that. I don't have a problem with him on this list, except that his placement might be a tad to low for me. Understand, he is not one of my favorites at all. But I can respect the man for what he contributed to rock and alternative music.

Bono- Well, Ken has his opinion, but to me, the guy is a great singer. I just love his voice. Plus, when he has done a song of meaning (Streets Have No Name) you can hear the passion in his voice. Honestly, in my opinion, U2 has been the best band over the past twenty years (Yeah, that is bold, but I feel it to be true).

YES!!! Finally someone who agrees. Bono tops this list everytime for me.

[APostingGod]

I think U2 have made song great music... and it was all on the Joshua Tree. Rest of it for me, is meh to ugh.

[JDK]

U2 often split opinions, however I will take "One" as te greatest song of all time.

[Chazz]

I say that U2 is the best band in the last twenty years because their body of work, their longevity, and the fact that collectively these four men are just simply magical together. Joshua Tree IS their best album. But most of their work (other than POP, which was really a disaster for them) has been good and has sold well. Also, take into effect the cultural changes that they have endured. When they broke out with Joshua Tree, Glam Metal and Pop were big at the time. You couldn't lump U2 into either catagory, so they just were a "rock band". When the Grunge scene hit, U2 still sold out arenas worldwide, and sold millions of cd's. They took a break near the end of the 90's, and when Brittney, Christina and the new hip hop scene were dominating, U2 came back with a fury. Basically, no matter what music scene is "IN", U2 survives it. 90% of bands can't do that...stand the test of time. But they have.

[legendaryken]

Serious face on.........

U2 just leave me cold as a band. If you stuck a red hot poker up my arse (as it feels like someone is doing right now) I'd admit that some of their stuff is catchy and the production tends to make the most of rather thin gruel. One is OK, so is Fly but the likes of 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' 'Where the Streets Have No Name' and most of The Joshua Tree (typical - I went to a U2 discography site and the fucking thing nearly crashed my computer) make the word 'bombastic' seem totally inadequate.
And, please, Bonio is just a twat. He spouts off about saving the world, if we all just did our bit, then pisses off to Monte Carlo to take advantage of their less than punitive tax situation. Lectures from Mr Hewson I will not take.
They're just an indie band who got very very lucky and are the most overrated musicians ever.