The 100 Greatest Singers of All Time (70's)

lucifer_sam · 11-24-2008, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

and the cheerleading chant in "Small Victory". But somehow it was integrated into more of a singular sound.

Goddamn Mike Patton ripoffs, they were.

(I think you meant Be Aggressive, not A Small Victory).

**Janszoon** · 11-24-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Goddamn Mike Patton ripoffs, they were.

(I think you meant Be Aggressive, not A Small Victory).

D'oh. What's worse is I started to type "Be Aggressive" and then thought, "No, wait that's not what that song is called" before proceeding to refer to the wrong song.

Gazz_Evans · 02-02-2009, 02:05 PM

Axl Rose Should be no.1!

hah, that'll start a debate

but he should

Stamper · 02-02-2009, 09:40 PM

McCartney is too high. And where is Michael Stipe?

dac · 02-03-2009, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazz_Evans

Axl Rose Should be no.1!

hah, that'll start a debate

but he should

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stamper

McCartney is too high. And where is Michael Stipe?

Stipe does have a fantastic voice... one of the most recognizable of all time if you ask me.

groovemongrel · 02-03-2009, 10:41 AM

I thought Freddie Mercury would be higher.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 02-03-2009, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dac

Stipe does have a fantastic voice... one of the most recognizable of all time if you ask me.

Only recognizable because it took him about 6 albums to stop it sounding like he was smothering himself with a blanket.

dac · 02-03-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Only recognizable because it took him about 6 albums to stop it sounding like he was smothering himself with a blanket.

Oh you

Roemilca · 02-03-2009, 04:45 PM

Pos.

Scratchy7929 · 02-04-2009, 03:47 AM

Rolling Stone editors must be in their 70's going by some of the lists they come out with.Why do the even bother printing the thing anymore??? Or perhaps get some new editors that have actually listened to new music in the last 20 years.

02-02-2009, 09:40 PM	#124 (permalink)
Stamper Music Addict Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 60	McCartney is too high. And where is Michael Stipe? __________________ My soul has grown deep like the rivers -Langston Hughes-

02-03-2009, 04:45 PM	#129 (permalink)
Roemilca Music Addict Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Virginia, USA Posts: 412	Pos. __________________

02-02-2009, 02:05 PM	#123 (permalink)
Gazz_Evans Groupie Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 9	Axl Rose Should be no.1! hah, that'll start a debate but he should

02-03-2009, 10:41 AM	#126 (permalink)
groovemongrel Groupie Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: cool treehouse Posts: 9	I thought Freddie Mercury would be higher.

02-04-2009, 03:47 AM	#130 (permalink)
Scratchy7929 Groupie Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 10	Rolling Stone editors must be in their 70's going by some of the lists they come out with.Why do the even bother printing the thing anymore??? Or perhaps get some new editors that have actually listened to new music in the last 20 years.