Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
- WhiskeyJack
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11620
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:48 pm
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I made it thru the list. I just has a feel of some editors at Rolling Stone throwing 300 names of the usual suspects in a hat and drawing 250 to be honest. Kinda sad Frankie Stubbs never showed up on that list or any list of the sort. Not a lot of Lefties: Courtney Barnett, Dick Dale & Kurt.
Cool to see Marissa Paternoster and Kim and Kelly Deal on there though. very cool.
Cool to see Marissa Paternoster and Kim and Kelly Deal on there though. very cool.
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I'm kind of surprised Mike Ness didn't make it. Not that he's anything super special but his tone and gear is bad ass and he's a pretty big name in punk rock and roll.WhiskeyJack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 12:38 pm I made it thru the list. I just has a feel of some editors at Rolling Stone throwing 300 names of the usual suspects in a hat and drawing 250 to be honest. Kinda sad Frankie Stubbs never showed up on that list or any list of the sort. Not a lot of Lefties: Courtney Barnett, Dick Dale & Kurt.
Cool to see Marissa Paternoster and Kim and Kelly Deal on there though. very cool.
Rebel Yell
- WhiskeyJack
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11620
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:48 pm
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I agree. For all the reasons you listed, yes he 100% should be on these silly lists. Especially even more so now in his later years as he's embraced alot more of a Blues Lawyer style of riffing and lead work as heard on the last two records and less of his more aggressive punk roots. You'd think it would land more in the radar of some of those turds at places like Rolling Stone. Kind of a mystery entirely.Greg_L wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 12:43 pmI'm kind of surprised Mike Ness didn't make it. Not that he's anything super special but his tone and gear is bad ass and he's a pretty big name in punk rock and roll.WhiskeyJack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 12:38 pm I made it thru the list. I just has a feel of some editors at Rolling Stone throwing 300 names of the usual suspects in a hat and drawing 250 to be honest. Kinda sad Frankie Stubbs never showed up on that list or any list of the sort. Not a lot of Lefties: Courtney Barnett, Dick Dale & Kurt.
Cool to see Marissa Paternoster and Kim and Kelly Deal on there though. very cool.
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Yeah if you're talking top 10 or top 50 maybe Mike Ness doesn't make the cut. But 250 names? He could easily be on there.WhiskeyJack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 1:11 pm
I agree. For all the reasons you listed, yes he 100% should be on these silly lists. Especially even more so now in his later years as he's embraced alot more of a Blues Lawyer style of riffing and lead work as heard on the last two records and less of his more aggressive punk roots. You'd think it would land more in the radar of some of those turds at places like Rolling Stone. Kind of a mystery entirely.
Rebel Yell
- WhiskeyJack
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11620
- Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:48 pm
- Location: Canada
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I'd put him in the top 50. But i am also fanboy McGee over here.Greg_L wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 1:22 pmYeah if you're talking top 10 or top 50 maybe Mike Ness doesn't make the cut. But 250 names? He could easily be on there.WhiskeyJack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 1:11 pm
I agree. For all the reasons you listed, yes he 100% should be on these silly lists. Especially even more so now in his later years as he's embraced alot more of a Blues Lawyer style of riffing and lead work as heard on the last two records and less of his more aggressive punk roots. You'd think it would land more in the radar of some of those turds at places like Rolling Stone. Kind of a mystery entirely.
- vomitHatSteve
- Posts: 6764
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 11:06 am
- Location: Undisclosed
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I think the thing with these lists is nobody has any idea what the criteria for "best" is, including the list makers themselves.
Is it the most technically competent?
The most innovative?
The ones who've had the most impact on other guitarists? (I don't think Orville Gibson was even on the list!)
The most popular all-around musicians? (There were two Beatles on the list but neither was George)
Is it the most technically competent?
The most innovative?
The ones who've had the most impact on other guitarists? (I don't think Orville Gibson was even on the list!)
The most popular all-around musicians? (There were two Beatles on the list but neither was George)
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
It's probably all of that.vomitHatSteve wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 2:05 pm I think the thing with these lists is nobody has any idea what the criteria for "best" is, including the list makers themselves.
Is it the most technically competent?
The most innovative?
The ones who've had the most impact on other guitarists? (I don't think Orville Gibson was even on the list!)
The most popular all-around musicians? (There were two Beatles on the list but neither was George)
For example...I think Mr Les Paul should have been way higher on the list. Not just for his namesake guitar, but that guy was an amazing guitar player and innovator of equipment and techniques we still use today.
I don't think anyone would argue Hendrix for #1 but the rest of those top 20-30 names could be thrown into a hat and drawn at random.
Rebel Yell
- CrowsofFritz
- Posts: 2606
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:02 pm
- Location: Bristol, VA
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
George is 30th I think.vomitHatSteve wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 2:05 pm I think the thing with these lists is nobody has any idea what the criteria for "best" is, including the list makers themselves.
Is it the most technically competent?
The most innovative?
The ones who've had the most impact on other guitarists? (I don't think Orville Gibson was even on the list!)
The most popular all-around musicians? (There were two Beatles on the list but neither was George)
“Naaaaaaaaaah man. I ain’t touching that mic. That thing’s expensive!”
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I can't imagine any objective guitar-centric scenario where Paul or John are better than George.
Rebel Yell
- vomitHatSteve
- Posts: 6764
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 11:06 am
- Location: Undisclosed
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Oh, you're right. He's 31 and John and Paul are above 100CrowsofFritz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 3:09 pmGeorge is 30th I think.vomitHatSteve wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 2:05 pm I think the thing with these lists is nobody has any idea what the criteria for "best" is, including the list makers themselves.
Is it the most technically competent?
The most innovative?
The ones who've had the most impact on other guitarists? (I don't think Orville Gibson was even on the list!)
The most popular all-around musicians? (There were two Beatles on the list but neither was George)
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Should do a cover of "You're So Vein"...WhiskeyJack wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 12:03 pmYou just had to stop at Kevin Frasard really. Kinda the last stop in roided out guitarists.
- CrowsofFritz
- Posts: 2606
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:02 pm
- Location: Bristol, VA
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
I feel like Paul was better before 1968. Especially in 65 through 67. George had no big licks then while Paul did: Taxman, Paperback Writer, Drive My Car, Sgt. Peppers, etc.
Plus, George was really into the sitar at the time.
Once he left the sitar behind around the White Album and started developing his signature style that really became more apparent in Let It Be and Abbey Road did George leave them both in the dust. And it’s not even close.
George’s solos in the early years were just…something. They were something.
“Naaaaaaaaaah man. I ain’t touching that mic. That thing’s expensive!”
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
You mean when he was allowed to write songs for albums and therefore his playing style - one that best suited his songs - was allowed to develop?CrowsofFritz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 11:52 pm
Once he left the sitar behind around the White Album and started developing his signature style that really became more apparent in Let It Be and Abbey Road did George leave them both in the dust. And it’s not even close.
He played standard licks on the 1st few LPs - it was what was asked of him and what he knew. They were gigging & recording so often getting new ideas would've been quite difficult.
When you write "I feel" is it becasue that's what you feel or what you think based on listening? I can't seem to nail people down on the use of the "I feel" thing...rather like the impermanence of "I'm loving".
Cheers
rayc
rayc
- CrowsofFritz
- Posts: 2606
- Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 1:02 pm
- Location: Bristol, VA
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Doesn’t matter whether he was allowed or not. The fact is, he didn’t.rayc wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 1:22 amYou mean when he was allowed to write songs for albums and therefore his playing style - one that best suited his songs - was allowed to develop?CrowsofFritz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 18, 2023 11:52 pm
Once he left the sitar behind around the White Album and started developing his signature style that really became more apparent in Let It Be and Abbey Road did George leave them both in the dust. And it’s not even close.
He played standard licks on the 1st few LPs - it was what was asked of him and what he knew. They were gigging & recording so often getting new ideas would've been quite difficult.
When you write "I feel" is it becasue that's what you feel or what you think based on listening? I can't seem to nail people down on the use of the "I feel" thing...rather like the impermanence of "I'm loving".
It never occurred. You can’t take a scenario and say it doesn’t apply simply because there’s another plausible scenario out there that could have happened.
Honestly Ray, you’re such a contrarian. It’s frustrating.
“Naaaaaaaaaah man. I ain’t touching that mic. That thing’s expensive!”
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Ringo's guitar playing is criminally underrated IMO...
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Ringo was the best Beatle.
Proof? They were nothing before him, then he joins, then they were The Beatles.
Ringo > all the other dumbass stupid Beatle boys.
Proof? They were nothing before him, then he joins, then they were The Beatles.
Ringo > all the other dumbass stupid Beatle boys.
Rebel Yell
- vomitHatSteve
- Posts: 6764
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 11:06 am
- Location: Undisclosed
- Contact:
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
Been mulling posting this take for days, tbh.
Are you disparaging Pete Best here? I would remind you that he was the Best of The Beatles.
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
The best member of the Beatles was George Martin.
Re: Rolling Stone’s new (and always controversial) greatest guitarists of all time list
The best Beatle was Yoko Ono.
Rebel Yell