I think someone said it was impossible for Dylan to be second on the most influential or greatest rock artist list here well here is another one. I don't have a huge problem if the this list has Dylan over the Beatles. What I am getting at the consensus is the Beatles/Dylan are one/two in many lists where the 50's rock and rollers are outside the top 5.

http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/F ... utionaries

Gibson.com’s Top 50 Most Revolutionary Artists


Gibson fans who contributed to the final tally, as well as our Gibson.com editorial and writing staff.

1. Bob Dylan
2. The Beatles
3. Jimi Hendrix
4. Elvis Presley
5. Les Paul
6. Miles Davis
7. Chuck Berry
8. John Coltrane
9. George Gershwin
10. Muddy Waters
11. Frank Zappa
12. Hank Williams
13. David Bowie
14. Brian Wilson
15. John Lennon
16. Frank Sinatra
17. Bill Monroe
18. Robert Johnson
19. John Cage
20. Buddy Holly
21. Bob Marley
22. Ray Charles
23. James Brown
24. Nirvana
25. Sex Pistols
26. Madonna
27. The Velvet Underground
28. Little Richard
29. Prince
30. Django Reinhardt
31. Cole Porter
32. Charlie Christian
33. Michael Jackson
34. Eddie Van Halen
35. Led Zeppelin
36. Radiohead
37. Brian Eno
38. The Carter Family
39. Run-DMC
40. Jimmy Page
41. Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five
42. Eric Clapton
43. Johnny Cash
44. Charlie Patton
45. Louis Armstrong
46. Metallica
47. Stevie Wonder
48. Charlie Parker
49. Sam Cooke
50. The Stooges

Gibson.com Readers Poll – Top 25 Most Revolutionary Artists
Although many of the fans’ picks made the final Top 50 list, the readers poll results aren’t without their share of surprises. Votes for Pete Townshend, U2, Jack White, the Allman Brothers and Jon Lord weren’t enough to get those amazing musicians on the Top 50. Perhaps most surprising (although very deserving) choice was the readers’ top vote-getter – the Father of Bluegrass, Bill Monroe.

1. Bill Monroe
2. Les Paul
3. Jimmy Page
4. The Beatles
5. Jimi Hendrix
6. Iron Maiden
7. Bob Dylan
8. Frank Zappa
9. Chuck Berry
10. Angus Young
11. Led Zeppelin
12. John Lennon
13. The Allman Brothers Band
14. Jack White
15. Robert Johnson
16. Eric Clapton
17. Elvis Presley
18. Pete Townshend
19. U2
20. Eddie Van Halen
21. Miles Davis
22. Leonard Bernstein
23. Duane Allman
24. Kurt Cobain
25. Jon Lord

Why are you bringing this up? This is a POLL, a collection of people's OPINIONS, something that has NO CRITERIA. Why are you so goddamn biased against Elvis? The only argument you can come up with in regards to Elvis vs. Beatles is 'blah blah blah Beatles wrote their own material blah blah blah', which is only one part of being an artist. You penalise Elvis for being an 'interpreter'; by that logic, the Beatles should be penalised for shunning the concerts, like ClashWho pointed out.

Besides, what kind of a list is this? Brian Wilson, Eddie Van Halen and Jimmy Page, but no Beach Boys, Van Halen or Led Zeppelin? Sex Pistols and Velvet Underground? Django Reinhardt, Les Paul and Charlie Christian revolutionary artists?
Metallica above Stevie Wonder?

Led Zeppelin and Jimmy Page are on both lists separately. I don't know why they wouldn't just roll all the Jimmy Page votes into Led Zeppelin's tally. It's not like the Jimmy Page voters think he did his revolutionary work with The Firm.

you wanna know why this list means absolutely shit?

why the hell wouldn't they be? they sure as shit weren't revolutionary scientists. (although i suppose many would argue Les Paul's biggest contributions were technical rather than musical)

even if you take Les Paul out of the sentence here, why would Django and Christian not be considered revolutionary artists?

Sorry, I phrased it wrong. What I meant was, while Django and Charlie were both influential, do they really belong in the top 50 most revolutionary artists of all time? (I assume this list is of all time)

maybe Christian would fall a bit. but i have no problem with Django being up there. i assume Christian, and many of the guitar players, are raised because the source of the list is guitar based. but Django would be up there regardless.

Has to be in the top 10, and could even be #1.

Can we stop talking about this bollocks list please?

The lack of The Who is why it's absolute shit. They're prime contenders for the second-most revolutionary rock band after only The Beatles. It's a shame the readers had to remind Gibson of Pete Townshend.

Seriously, when will Musicfan and Echoes stop posting worthless lists compiled by clueless gits? Tearing the lists apart is just too easy.

Who are you?

Uh, because someone said it was inconceivable for him to see Bob Dylan over Elvis when I have seen plenty of other opinions that differ. If you think that songwriting capabilities is only thing the Beatles have over Elvis that you obviously can't comprehend that there is a difference between someone just singing and someone who performs, writes and sings their own material.

I don’t dislike. First you comparing a band for example went through so many musical parameters on Revolver and that is one album TO A SOLO ARTIST WHO SANG AND WAS AN INTERPETER.

But comparing to Elvis to the Beatles actually dismisses what the Beatles were as musicians/songwriters and vocalists. It’s a joke that in terms of harmonic organization, meter, vocal harmonization, and performing styles or musical styles that you guys are comparing Elvis to the Beatles. If Elvis needed someone to play the parts the Beatles were doing he would have to have a backing band or other musician who could actually play the styles the Beatles were doing.

I don't think anyone even mentioned Elvis vs. The Beatles. Why can't you let this go?

Like Frank Zappa declared that, "Most rock journalism is people who can't write, interviewing people who can't talk, for people who can't read"