Greatest Songs of All Time

[vitanola]

Well, Rolling Stone magazine (for the first time since 2004) issued an updated list of the "500 Greatest Songs of All Time". One would, of course, expect an immense amount of presentism in any list drawn up by a group of people so heavily steeped in current popular culture, but there is not one song on the list which pre-dates 1955. No Berlin, DeSylva, Brown and Henderson. No Gershwin, Kern or Cohan. No Work, Sankey, Schubert, or Huldegard von Bingen.

 

[GHT]

That's hardly surprising, we have a radio station called "Classic Gold." They are forever announcing that they play: "The Greatest Hits of All Time." Popular at the time, that sixties music was, those bands were inspired by others, but you wouldn't believe it if you were to tune into Classic Gold, where they play 60's, 70's & 80's and that's about it, apart from a passing nod to the 50's.

 

[Fifty150]

The magazine started in The 60's. That is what I would expect. 60's to today. I don't expect Rolling Stone to crossover into every genre either. Since I am not a Rolling Stone magazine reader, whatever they publish does not influence me.

Fair enough that Rolling Stone Magazine's list is for their audience.

I suspect that in the 2020's decade, there are very few people who are seeking pre-1955 music, and that audience represents very little advertising value. They won't be making any money off you. Pre-1955 music is probably not being sold or downloaded enough for music industry people to care about. Nobody cares about my music either.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Paul Butterfield Blues Band - Born in Chicago

 

[tonyb]

Time started in 1955, I suppose.

The joke of it is that several of the most influential songsmiths of the rock ’n’ roll era — Brian Wilson, Paul McCartney, Jimmy Webb, etc. — would acknowledge their debt to the popular songwriters who dated from long before them.

 

[belfastboy]

Paul Butterfield Blues Band - Born in Chicago

One of the greatest albums of all time.....wore out the album and had to buy the CD as a replacement. I think I will dig it out and play it this morning!

 

[belfastboy]

The magazine started in The 60's. That is what I would expect. 60's to today. I don't expect Rolling Stone to crossover into every genre either. Since I am not a Rolling Stone magazine reader, whatever they publish does not influence me.

Fair enough that Rolling Stone Magazine's list is for their audience.

I suspect that in the 2020's decade, there are very few people who are seeking pre-1955 music, and that audience represents very little advertising value. They won't be making any money off you. Pre-1955 music is probably not being sold or downloaded enough for music industry people to care about. Nobody cares about my music either.


View attachment 378973

I read the blurbs for #500 down to #400 and recognized so few of the songs I gave up.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I could easily come up with The 500 Greatest Songs Of All Time without ever mentioning anything written after WWII, let alone 1955. But the older I get the more I realize that listicles are chewing gum for dull minds.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Well, Rolling Stone magazine (for the first time since 2004) issued an updated list of the "500 Greatest Songs of All Time". One would, of course, expect an immense amount of presentism in any list drawn up by a group of people so heavily steeped in current popular culture, but there is not one song on the list which pre-dates 1955. No Berlin, DeSylva, Brown and Henderson. No Gershwin, Kern or Cohan. No Work, Sankey, Schubert, or Huldegard von Bingen.

'Smatter bud, you got something against Cole Porter? Huh? Robin 'n Rainger? Harry Warren? Gordon 'n Revel? GUS FRICKIN' KAHN?

 

[tonyb]

…
the older I get the more I realize that listicles are chewing gum for dull minds.

“Click bait” is what those crazy kids call it.

It’s of a kind with stories that promise a payoff that almost always disappoints. Our online world is rife with those, too.

When it’s as easy and as inexpensive to put out crap (no printing and distribution costs, no higher-priced talent, etc.) as something of higher quality, you get a lot of crap.

 

[tonyb]

^^^^^
It’s also a staple of the sorts of publications you’ll find at the supermarket checkout stands — not all of ’em, but the ones most prominently displayed are thick with that kinda crap.

 

[GHT]

But the older I get the more I realize that listicles are chewing gum for dull minds.

And there was me thinking that they were what the doctor grabbed when he said: "Cough!"

 

[Fifty150]

'Smatter bud, you got something against Cole Porter? Huh? Robin 'n Rainger? Harry Warren? Gordon 'n Revel? GUS FRICKIN' KAHN?

In today's world, The Woke Mob would tear them apart. What's left would he riddled with scandal. At least 2 of them would be tied in with Queen Elizabeth's other kid, and the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. At least one would issue a nonsense statement about the Covid vaccine. Middle age women would come out of left field to file civil lawsuits for monetary recompense, for some sort of harassment involving Quaaludes at a TGIFriday. It would turn out that Friday restaurant would be franchised to Magic Johnson. Dean Martin's granddaughter's cousin's friend in Trinidad would get swollen testicles.


Better to leave the sleeping dog alone.

 

[belfastboy]

And there was me thinking that they were what the doctor grabbed when he said: "Cough!"

I have long thought the unspoken part of that is the...."or else"

 

[Fifty150]

Joe Walsh has the worst backup singers and dancers I've ever seen. His stage manager needs to be fired. No choreography. They don't even know the words of the song, to harmonize.

 

[Edward]

The magazine started in The 60's. That is what I would expect. 60's to today. I don't expect Rolling Stone to crossover into every genre either. Since I am not a Rolling Stone magazine reader, whatever they publish does not influence me.

Fair enough that Rolling Stone Magazine's list is for their audience.

I suspect that in the 2020's decade, there are very few people who are seeking pre-1955 music, and that audience represents very little advertising value. They won't be making any money off you. Pre-1955 music is probably not being sold or downloaded enough for music industry people to care about. Nobody cares about my music either.


View attachment 378973

Quite so. Post 60s in the main, and at that nothing particularly off-mainstream or uncommercial. Or, indeed, all that artistically interesting. Unthreatening, prima facie rock and roll in Burton suits.

"They got Burton suits, ha, you think it's funny,
Turning rebellion into money."

The Clash, White man in Hammersmith Palais

 

[tonyb]

I could easily come up with The 500 Greatest Songs Of All Time without ever mentioning anything written after WWII, let alone 1955. But the older I get the more I realize that listicles are chewing gum for dull minds.

Almost everybody else capable of compiling a list such as yours is dead. And dead people don’t see the ads appearing in Rolling Stone.

As those with fond memories of the popular tunes of the 1950s die off (teenagers from that time are dropping like flies now), we can bet that the onset of “all time” will creep into the 1960s.

 

[Fifty150]

I personally cheer on the death of disco.

 

[belfastboy]

I personally cheer on the death of disco.

Donna Summers gonna gitcha!

 

[MisterCairo]

Well, Rolling Stone magazine (for the first time since 2004) issued an updated list of the "500 Greatest Songs of All Time". One would, of course, expect an immense amount of presentism in any list drawn up by a group of people so heavily steeped in current popular culture, but there is not one song on the list which pre-dates 1955. No Berlin, DeSylva, Brown and Henderson. No Gershwin, Kern or Cohan. No Work, Sankey, Schubert, or Huldegard von Bingen.

At the risk of sounding like a jerk, this is a magazine that is about the rock and roll era.

Which started in 1955.

I suspect the lack of pre-55 music is therefore quite deliberate. Use of the term "of all time" assumes time started in 1955. To them, it did.

That these lists of so-called greatest songs need to be updated, and revised, speaks to their value.

Mildly amusing to read, immediately forgotten.