Rocky4 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I have no problem with The Beatles at #1. They're not my favorite, but they're up there ,and I see the body of work and impact . Michael Jackson at #2!??!? I realize it's a stupid popularity contest, but #2? Take away his solo stuff and could have been mentioned in the same breath as the Osmonds. I'll give him Off The Wall and Thriller, but out side of that, what did he do? Two good albums puts you at #2 of all time? All they talked about is what a great entertainer he was. Where would he have been without MTV? The mighty Zep came in at 3. I can deal with that. Just bashin......carry on..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNylon Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 M. Jackson at #2, is #2. Has an odor to it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 was britney spears on the list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksdaddy Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I don't pay much attention to the 'Top Whatever' on these shows. If this was 1992 Garth Brooks would be way close to the top. In 1980 (I think) Christopher Cross got the award for Best New Artist. That's how much the 'experts' know. Is he still alive? In '83 or '84 Wacko Jacko was on TV at some award show and he had refused to take his sunglasses off during the whole show, but when he was receiving an award he briefly took them off (2-3 seconds) because his mother wanted him to. I thought Jeez, what a friggin' flake! I had no idea what a flake he would turn into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I don't pay much attention to the 'Top Whatever' on these shows. If this was 1992 Garth Brooks would be way close to the top. In 1980 (I think) Christopher Cross got the award for Best New Artist. That's how much the 'experts' know. Is he still alive? In '83 or '84 Wacko Jacko was on TV at some award show and he had refused to take his sunglasses off during the whole show, but when he was receiving an award he briefly took them off (2-3 seconds) because his mother wanted him to. I thought Jeez, what a friggin' flake! I had no idea what a flake he would turn into. that's why i asked if spears was on the list, these "top" lists ain't worth a pinch of salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieman15061 Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 I don't pay much attention to the 'Top Whatever' on these shows. If this was 1992 Garth Brooks would be way close to the top. In 1980 (I think) Christopher Cross got the award for Best New Artist. That's how much the 'experts' know. Is he still alive? In '83 or '84 Wacko Jacko was on TV at some award show and he had refused to take his sunglasses off during the whole show, but when he was receiving an award he briefly took them off (2-3 seconds) because his mother wanted him to. I thought Jeez, what a friggin' flake! I had no idea what a flake he would turn into. Yeah a really talented kid that was never permitted to lead a normal childhood. As an adult insulated by fame and money, he seemed to revert back into a child making really bad decisions with little understanding of consequences. The wolves are still picking at the carcass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Yeah a really talented kid that was never permitted to lead a normal childhood. As an adult insulated by fame and money, he seemed to revert back into a child making really bad decisions with little understanding of consequences. The wolves are still picking at the carcass. that autopsy doco has been pulled by discovery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 If the list were done on a basis of "views," I can feature Jackson at #2. There was kinda a magic to the name and in the 1980s all these kids were doing the "moon walk." I'll admit freely I never was a fan of his music or shows. Ain't what I look for in music. Pop music cycles in interesting ways. Frankly I think all the media that are involved in music are grasping at straws to see where to go next to make money. I don't think a good paradigm has been hit and this type of "popularity contest" does bring interest and mentions the name of the cable channel. I'd agree with Beatles at "#1" post WWII. But I would add that they came in at a time when people, especially young people, were looking for different sounds, and the far fewer media at the time could really blow up a "new" sound. I doubt it would be possible today. Just as one example, there ain't no parallel today with the Ed Sullivan Show on TV that had a huge percentage of potential U.S. audience. I think we're in a different world when it comes to media exposure compared to when I was a kid. Record companies are far less relevant and the expansion of potential media to hear music after, say 1995, has certainly made the pie bigger, but cut into tiny pieces. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 If the list were done on a basis of "views," I can feature Jackson at #2. There was kinda a magic to the name and in the 1980s all these kids were doing the "moon walk." I'll admit freely I never was a fan of his music or shows. Ain't what I look for in music. Pop music cycles in interesting ways. Frankly I think all the media that are involved in music are grasping at straws to see where to go next to make money. I don't think a good paradigm has been hit and this type of "popularity contest" does bring interest and mentions the name of the cable channel. I'd agree with Beatles at "#1" post WWII. But I would add that they came in at a time when people, especially young people, were looking for different sounds, and the far fewer media at the time could really blow up a "new" sound. I doubt it would be possible today. Just as one example, there ain't no parallel today with the Ed Sullivan Show on TV that had a huge percentage of potential U.S. audience. I think we're in a different world when it comes to media exposure compared to when I was a kid. Record companies are far less relevant and the expansion of potential media to hear music after, say 1995, has certainly made the pie bigger, but cut into tiny pieces. m very well said M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 no buckethead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 Ha...no i was commenting on the whining going on about these "lists"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 that's why i asked if spears was on the list, these "top" lists ain't worth a pinch of salt. Haha he said "pinch".... MJ #2...... Hahemmm, please excuse me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNylon Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I think these lists are a real load anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Yeah, the lists are a "real load," but their intent really is to get listeners active in terms of involvement with the medium. Few think of it from that perspective. Who cares who comes out on top? Nobody. It's kinda like the Gibson forums keep us thinking "Gibson." It ain't bad by any means, but... it is what it is. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Lists - interesting, but not much merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 no GARY MOORE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daryl M Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I agree. I always prefer to know the criteria in setting a ranking like this. How do you separate musical genius from record sales, and record sales from celebrity. There are some real musical visionaries who are low on the list, or not at all. Some artist with huge record sales that are often more of a reflection of their record label and marketing team than their music, and some artist that keep or increase their fame for sometimes unrelated activities. The lines blur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wendyw Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Yeah, the lists are a "real load," but their intent really is to get listeners active in terms of involvement with the medium. Few think of it from that perspective. I think that's the best way to look at it. I help run a webcomic community site and when The Webcartoonists' Choice Awards, a sort of industry award that only webcomic creators could vote in, stopped running I took on the job of running a replacement with the help of some of the community members. We changed a lot and it's no longer just webcomic creators that can get involved, but people who work in comics in general. It's still industry, just wider industry if that makes sense. Anyway, the reason for doing it is not because we want to come up with definitive answers to who's the best in what area, but as a sort of community focal point. The old awards got people talking, got people cross promoting each other's comics, telling any readers who qualified to vote who they thought deserved to win. Very few people would agree with the winners of every category and it's true that in both our new awards and the old awards comics find/found their way into the the top few of categories they really weren't that qualified for because they're popular. A comic with quite basic art can find itself as a contender for Best Art because it's popular through the quality of its writing. You have to accept that kind of thing though. Finding winners is only half the job. The other half is getting people active and giving them a place to focus as a community and that's true for most awards and lists I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Wendy... you're a natural for figuring the PR aspect of it. When people talk about it and are involved, that's the real purpose. When people are involved they think about you, whether it's comics or guitars. Heck, that's 99 percent of the reason for a Gibson forum, for example, in that it keeps potential customers talking and thinking about the brand. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundergod Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 What about Queen and the Stones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky4 Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 What about Queen and the Stones? I think The Stones came in at fourth or fifth. Queen was in the top 10 or 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNylon Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 In a way, you could think of the Gibson site as the bar in the show Cheers. "Where everybody knows your name." Dahhh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.