100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)

ClashWho · **Joined:** Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:45 pm **Posts:** 19167

What's the first rock song to slowly add instruments to the mix until it climaxes with a huge crescendo a la "Bridge Over Troubled Water"?

Sampson · **Joined:** Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm **Posts:** 950

ClashWho wrote:

What's the first rock song to slowly add instruments to the mix until it climaxes with a huge crescendo a la "Bridge Over Troubled Water"?

That slow build was a favorite device of arranger Jack Nitzsche who utilized it, or something reasonably resembling what you're talking about. on The Rolling Stones "You Can't Always Get What You Want" in 1969, The Monkees "The Porpoise Song" from 1968, Buffalo Springfield's "Expecting To Fly" from 1967 (kinda - though it never really crescendos on that one, he clearly was enamored with the tension it brings) and The Righteous Brothers "Ebb Tide" from 1965. Otis Redding didn't add instruments, but he gradually increased the tempo and prominence of them on "Try A Little Tenderness" from '66. It's been done a lot. S&G is notable because they start with just the piano.

Why, what brings this up?

ClashWho · **Joined:** Mon Oct 11, 2010 5:45 pm **Posts:** 19167

I was just listening to "Bridge Over Troubled Water" and noting how effective the build up is and wondering what some antecedents of that arrangement technique are. I asked here because the sort of people who could answer that question are in this thread. Thanks.

McMurphy · **Posted:** Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:28 pm

Quote:

If I'm severely underrating Madonna's musical impact by saying that more than half of the artists in the top 100 beat her in muiscal impact, that must mean that at most 40 do. So of the list of 68 artists that follows, at least 28 don't beat her in musical impact. Which 28 (or more) are they?

*list of artists*

I don't know enough about some of these artists to be sure, but I think you're right about a lot of them, and there might even be a few you could have included. Pink Floyd and Buddy Holly for example.

Yngtchie Blacksteen · **Posted:** Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:36 pm

"I Believe" has a great buildup.

Bruce · **Posted:** Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:51 pm

Yngtchie Blacksteen wrote:

"I Believe" has a great buildup.

He said "rock" numb nuts.

The Bachelors were the UK version of the Lettermen.

diane · **Joined:** Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:42 am **Posts:** 205

Sampson wrote:

diane wrote:

Sampson wrote:

There is absolutely no way that those major plot points, as accurate as if Walter Cronkite was reporting them, were coincidental, especially coming from someone as intelligent as Chuck Berry. It was a thinly veiled protest commentary. If you haven't read "Freedom Riders" by Raymond Arsenault or seen the PBS documentary on the Freedom Rides, I highly recommend both. In the book Berry's song is recounted in two different points and in the endnotes they go into detailed analysis of the precise similarities between his lyrics and the actual events.

That's very interesting. But I can't help but wonder why they didn't ask Berry himself for confirmation. Frustrating.

Because Chuck Berry is the most prickly rock 'n' roller ever when it comes to answering questions. You'd have a better shot at asking Elvis why he's been hiding in Kalamazoo MI for the last three decades plus and getting a handwritten personal response than you would asking Chuck Berry what time it is if you were standing next to him in an open field in the middle of nowhere with nobody else around.

I should point out that I grew up very much under the influence of Susan Sontag's "Against Interpretation" and "On Style," landmark essays in which the cultural critic argued that we should not waste our time "interpreting" a work of art or insisting that it has to *mean* something. At the same time, Bob Dylan--my idol, at the time--was writing and performing stuff like "Hard Rain" with poetic, evocative lyrics that people spent endless hours trying to decode, while the artist himself insisted that they meant whatever you heard in them. So that's my background, and that's why I'm skeptical about hidden meanings in lyrics unless the artist himself confirms that they were deliberately put there. (IOW, Sampson, I want you to understand that I'm not doubting *you* on this point.)

Brian · **Joined:** Wed Oct 06, 2010 1:52 pm **Posts:** 2339

Eric Wood wrote:

Brian wrote:

(list of 68 artists who have more "musical impact" than Madonna snip.)

Okay... I can count 50-60 artists in the top 100 who are more popular than Chuck Berry, even being generous to Berry's potential "lasting popularity."
If James Brown ranks about 20th in popularity based just on the US singles charts, he might drop down to 40th or 50th in popularity all things considered.
Similarly, Dylan ranks high on just the album chart rankings but probably drops to at least 40th or 50th in that category overall.
In terms of sheer musical influence, the Stones might be borderline top 50 given they get mostly secondary influence and are mostly a long distance from the source material.

Being consistent, those artists can't possibly rank 3-6th if one marginally weaker area pulls Madonna down to 15th.

OK, when I do what was going to be comparison of artists 9-14, I'll expand it to include Madonna. But I'll have to draw the line there, because 7 artists are already a lot to look at at one time.

Sampson · **Joined:** Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:35 pm **Posts:** 950

diane wrote:

I should point out that I grew up very much under the influence of Susan Sontag's "Against Interpretation" and "On Style," landmark essays in which the cultural critic argued that we should not waste our time "interpreting" a work of art or insisting that it has to *mean* something. At the same time, Bob Dylan--my idol, at the time--was writing and performing stuff like "Hard Rain" with poetic, evocative lyrics that people spent endless hours trying to decode, while the artist himself insisted that they meant whatever you heard in them. So that's my background, and that's why I'm skeptical about hidden meanings in lyrics unless the artist himself confirms that they were deliberately put there. (IOW, Sampson, I want you to understand that I'm not doubting *you* on this point.)

I understand. I listened to that song for years without thinking of it as anything more than a travelogue. Then I got into the Freedom Riders and when I heard the song again it jumped out at you how explicit it was. I agree though that reading into lyrics is generally a waste of time and says more about the person doing the interpreting than the artist themselves, but in this case the specific incidents at the specific places are identical, the timing of it, when and where he wrote it (considering he himself had just been locked up essentially because he was black, since the Mann Act charge was bogus and was used to "put him in his place"), and even the fact he based the song on Wabash Cannonball rather than come up with an original melody, make it seem like direct commentary rather than artistic fiction. If it wasn't intentional then it contains a series of the most utterly remarkable and inexplicable "coincidences" ever heard in a song.

Bruce · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:58 pm

Brett Alan wrote:

Sampson wrote:

Brett Alan wrote:

If The Beatles hadn't come along, social conscience probably would have remained the province of folk music, and rock and roll may well not have become the overarching force we think of it as being today.

I find it hard to see any social conscience in any of the songs of the Beatles did other than "Revolution" really, maybe one or two others ("Blackbird"). Unlike Bruce I actually do appreciate lyrics, and I do think very highly of the Beatles as songwriters, but their social conscious is largely a myth when it comes to their music.

Not the point. The Beatles weren't writing socially conscious songs at that point, it's true. (They wrote a few more than you give them credit for, but not all that many.)

Would this be one of them?

Negative Creep · **Joined:** Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:21 pm **Posts:** 11709

Eric Wood wrote:

Okay... I can count 50-60 artists in the top 100 who are more popular than Chuck Berry, even being generous to Berry's potential "lasting popularity."

Berry absolutely KILLS in musical impact and influence though. He's as massive as anyone else in those two areas.

Bruno · **Joined:** Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:00 am **Posts:** 1686

Negative Creep wrote:

Eric Wood wrote:

Okay... I can count 50-60 artists in the top 100 who are more popular than Chuck Berry, even being generous to Berry's potential "lasting popularity."

Berry absolutely KILLS in musical impact and influence though. He's as massive as anyone else in those two areas.

I agree with you in Influence, but less so in Musical Impact. I can not see it as top 10.

Negative Creep · **Joined:** Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:21 pm **Posts:** 11709

You're kidding me.
Berry is one of the most revered artists in the history of rock. Even people like Rob Zombie, whose music is as far removed from Chuck's as you can get, has raved about him.
And it's not just guitarists, it's musicians in general. Imo his musical impact is right up there with Dylan...

Bruno · **Joined:** Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:00 am **Posts:** 1686

Negative Creep wrote:

You're kidding me.
Berry is one of the most revered artists in the history of rock.

And I said that he is not? Of course he is revered as well as big names from the list. Just think, IMO, taking into account all the criteria, it is not in the top 10. But it's pretty close.

Negative Creep · **Joined:** Tue Oct 12, 2010 5:21 pm **Posts:** 11709

So who do you think beats him in musical impact besides The Beatles, Elvis and Brown?
Madonna? LOL...

100 Greatest Rock Artists (under revision)

Who is online