Oy. Despite having incredibly sore feet from yesterday’s race, I have to kick an extra artist out this week:

73. Elton John (25)
72. Paul Simon (21)
71. Frank Sinatra (16)
70. Brian Eno (16)
69. Roxy Music (16)

Eno and his erstwhile band each appeared on four ballots (the Chairman of the Board was on five), so there’s no tiebreaker this week. Which, by the way, means we’re back on track to having forty artists on the island when phase two begins in…let’s see…seven weeks.

My stompers will feel better by the time we kick out: The Cure (14), Pulp (13), John Coltrane (12), The Smiths (10), The White Stripes (10).

So, we have 68 artists left (which means we’ve deleted a third of the original 101):

The Beach Boys, The Beatles, Beck, Chuck Berry, Björk, Blondie, Blur, David Bowie, James Brown, The Byrds, Johnny Cash, Nick Cave, Ray Charles, The Clash, Leonard Cohen, John Coltrane, Elvis Costello, The Cure, Miles Davis, Nick Drake, Bob Dylan, The Flaming Lips, Aretha Franklin, Marvin Gaye, Al Green, PJ Harvey, Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson, Joy Division, The Kinks, Led Zeppelin, Bob Marley and the Wailers, Massive Attack, Curtis Mayfield, Van Morrison, Nirvana, OutKast, Parliament/Funkadelic, Pavement, Pink Floyd, Pixies, The Police, Elvis Presley, Prince, Public Enemy, Pulp, Radiohead, Otis Redding, Lou Reed, R.E.M., The Rolling Stones, Sex Pistols, Simon and Garfunkel, Sly and the Family Stone, The Smiths, Sonic Youth, Bruce Springsteen, The Stooges, Talking Heads, U2, The Velvet Underground, Tom Waits, The White Stripes, The Who, Wilco, Hank Williams, Stevie Wonder, Neil Young.

Week 9 starts now. Let’s see whatcha got.

1) Beck
2) Nirvana
3) Public Enemy
4) Parliament/Funkadelic
5) The Flaming Lips

That's 5 artists leaving I kind like, especially Roxy Music.

Oh, by the way, what was your time schleuse?

1. (5p) Chuck Berry - I guess he probably did like that song he made, but did he really have to make it over and over again?

2. (4p) Marvin Gaye - I just don't get it. If I had the choice of being shot by my father, and listening to all of Marvin Gaye's albums, I'd choose the Marvin Gaye albums, but it's a tough choice.

3. (3p) The Police - Listening to Sting is like tantric sex. It seems to just go on and on, and there's no end to it.

4. (2p) James Brown - Eh! Wackalamockahacka! Huh?!? YEAH!

5. (1p) The Byrds - They had some tough competition in their time, and they came out losing.

Umm...not as fast as I'd hoped, Neo. 4:53. I started way too fast and hit the Wall--hard--at Mile 19 (km 30). Still, I finished, and it was my best time yet, so I can't complain too much.

(This had nothing to do with the hard-drivin' tunes on my iPod, which I didn't even start listening to until Mile 9 (km 14)--the crowd was HUGE, and I didn't want to knock anybody over because I was engrossed in the Flaming Lips.)

Thanks to you and Henrik for askin'. Kilometer conversions for all my European pals!

That's pretty good I'd say, I probably wouldn't even finish 1/2 a marathon. Congratulations. :)

As voted off before:
5 pts - Nick Cave
4 pts - John Coltrane
3 pts - Leonard Cohen

The saga continues without chairman of the board and the vomit has lost its head, meaning I have two new entries this week:
2 pts - Parliament/Funkadelic - Nice to hear in a pub or disco once in a while, but the funk of George Clinton & Co. don't get me into the groove elsewhere.

1 pt - Al Green - A tough choice, for I like soul music a lot, but don't know Green's music well (yet). A few listens could change my mind for next week.

Congratulations, schleuse!

Maybe we (everyone interested) can meet up somewhere in the world and run a marathon, celebrate with a few beers and a healthy music discussion!!!?

Those not fond of a 42 km race could go directly to the beer.

BTW, congratulations with and a deep bow for your running milestone, schleuse! I've never run a marathon (and probably never will), my best record is 10 km in about 46 minutes ...

Yes, Henrik, I'm interested to meet at that beer stand

Back again:
1. MASSIVE ATTACK
2. THE BYRDS

New this week:
3. THE CURE. It’s official—we’re now pretty much down to artists I like (and Led Zeppelin, but that’s surely a wasted vote at this point). According to the good people of South Park, Disintegration is the greatest album ever made. I only have it at #90, but it’s excellent. And I like a lot of their songs--“Why Can’t I Be You?,” “Friday I’m in Love”--although they don't do so well when they slow it down. As for the silly mascara, if I’m willing to tolerate David Bowie’s ridiculous Ziggy haircut, I’m sure not gonna blast Robert Smith for his goofball-goth thang. But (NFL reference) they’re like the Chargers going up against the Patriots this week: a fine group, but clearly overmatched at this point. They’re a B+ band in a group of A’s.
4. JOY DIVISION. They invented New Wave, for better or worse—a terrific, minimalist sound with a lot of synth (which is fine by me), but laden with unfortunate baggage: a gloomy mood that sometimes veers into the preposterous*. Also, I like New Order better.
5. PARLIAMENT/FUNKADELIC. More a legend than a band. George Clinton’s collective seems like a kind of bridge between Sly and Prince, but with an aesthetic that mixes Sun Ra and Frank Zappa (who but Clinton would name an album Hey Man Smell My Finger?). But among the funksters left on the island, I put them sixth behind (in chronological order) James**, Sly, Stevie, Prince, and OutKast.

* - On a related note, I’m saving the Smiths for now, jonmarck, because I think their musical accomplishments outweigh Morrissey’s very silly persona, but Moz is even worse than your comments—he’s not a hypochondriac, he’s a wannabe-martyr without portfolio.

** - An aside: in my opinion, voting out James Brown because he doesn’t enunciate his lyrics is like voting out Bob Dylan because he doesn’t play the tuba.

Well done, schleuse. I know the "day-after-a-marathon" feeling; it's not pleasant to say the least.

Hey, count me in Henrik!

Can't quite understand why artist like The Smiths and Pulp are on the brink of going out when totally ordinary artists like The Police and Lou Reed (solo) sit there all smug

5 points The Police
4 Sonic Youth
3 Springsteen
2 Simon % Garfunkle
1 Wilco

We celebrated with margaritas, but beer works, too.

I've got the ideal race for an Acclaimed Music marathon team: the San Diego Rock 'n' Roll Marathon. Their shtick is that they've got 45 live bands (about one per kilometer) along the route.

On the other hand, I'm itching to try the London Marathon, which, apart from being in my favorite European city, has a reputation as the friendliest of the five major world marathons for middling-to-slow runners.

Mitchell, why are Simon & Garfunkel and Wilco on your ballot? (I'm not asking to be provocative--I need an explanation for those votes to count.)

1. Pavement
2. Michael Jackson
3. Parliament/Funkadelic
4. Hank Williams
5. Chuck Berry

I see that none of my picks are even on the 'nearly' list. But ay - whatcha gonna do?

It’s nice to see Reginald and Frank leave the island. While Frank lit a cigarette and sashayed his way onto the dock, I hear Elton threw a tantrum and refused to take the charter boat; he wanted to ride a ferry.

Ok, what've we got here...

1. PULP
2. JOY DIVISION
3. THE CURE

Fresh fish:

4. THE SMITHS: The number of Smiths songs I can tolerate can be counted on one hand. The number of Smiths songs I actually enjoy can be counted using a single finger.

Since nicolas’ vote provided the shock value, mine won’t seem alarming, right?

5. SEX PISTOLS

Controversy and influence can only get you so far in my book; rock n’ roll antics such as cutting yourself, vomiting on desks, and murdering your girlfriend on a heroin-induced binge are fun, yes, but after a while, you just gotta say “yeah, so?” The musical merit of a band like the Pistols is unimpressive to say the least; they were a boy band with a bass player who couldn’t play and a singer who possessed all the lamprophony of a patient in the dentist’s chair. Even if their one album was great (which, in my opinion, it’s not), one album is not sufficient enough to warrant a placing in the hallowed halls of rock lore – even if that one album was hugely influential. The reason for their acclaim is that they achieved their sole purpose - to be shocking and provide something for misunderstood teenagers to relate to; and in that regard, they succeeded admirably. Hell, NMTB could be considered a bonus in the grand scheme. However, any band’s legacy should be the culmination of musical achievement, cultural achievement/influence and musical merit. As far as I’m concerned, the group was successful in one aspect (and is still bringing together droves of youths high on frustration but low on self-esteem), but sorely lacking in the other departments. John, Steve, Paul and Sid – you might be wanted in the hall of fame, but you’re not wanted here.

1. The Byrds
2. Hank Williams
3. Al Green
4. Van Morrison
5. Bob Marley and the Wailers

I think all the artists that are left officially have at least a few songs I don’t mind listening to. Bob Marley enters the top five, because I think there are probably a wider range of dynamic regaee artists, and too much of the bland aspects his sound has assimilated into the music of less authentic artists and musicians. I was want to give a little dig to the tripped-out Bob Marley obsessives I remember seeing from college. You all know who they are. If you were/are one of them, I apologize. You’re still cool.

5 pts. - Michael Jackson - The icky stuff is now outweighing Thriller and Off the Wall (which I appreciate but never really loved). Time to get off my island Jacko.

4 pts. U2 - Please stop preaching at us bono. And, yes, we know you are a superstar.

3 pts. Pavement - You guys are just too cool for this island. And a little too derivative.

2 pts. The Police - If Bono's going, so must you go Sting.

1 pts. Björk - Not really my thing. The swan dress can stay.

schleuse wrote: "An aside: in my opinion, voting out James Brown because he doesn’t enunciate his lyrics is like voting out Bob Dylan because he doesn’t play the tuba."

In my opinion, because I guess you're writing about me, it's a perfectly good reason. I find his way of singing annoying. Anyway I think disliking an artists way of talking and singing is a better reason to vote them off here, than, say, calling Elton John vomit in a head. And the comparison doesn't make sense.

Same old crew
1. Outkast
2. Michael Jackson
3. Pulp
4. Public Enemy
5. Massive Attack

Anthony: It probably doesn't make any difference to your opinion of the Pistols, but I'm pretty sure that Sid didn't play on any of the tracks on NMTB (for that matter, I'm also pretty sure that he couldn't have even if he'd wanted to). I think Glen Matlock was with the group for all of the album.

Rune: I was jes' having a little fun...my point with that comparison was that clear enunciation is irrelevant to James Brown's music, just as tuba-playing is irrelevant to Dylan's music (well, except "Rainy Day Women #12 & 35," but that wasn't him playing it).

As for the whole "vomit with a head" thing, I assume that was just absurdist invective, like the Python sketch in which someone is called a "vacuous, toffee-nosed, malodorous pervert." I doubt it applies specifically to any of Sir Elton's music or personal habits. Or do you know something we don't, Andre?

It sounds like the Smiths are nearly out of here so I'm going to push them up the list just to be sure.

1. The Smiths - I just assumed he was a hypocondriac. He seems like the type.
2. Pulp
3. Leonard Cohen
4. Pavement - Couldn't care less about these garage-mopers. I also don't see why it isn't cool to tune your guitar.
5. Sex Pistols - I actually like their album...but it's the only one they did, and it definitely has its problems. Hardly top 50 material if you ask me.

1. John Coltrane
2. Wilco
3. The Byrds
4. Parliament/Funkadelic

5. The Who - As with Elton John, who I just helped voting out, they started out as great innovative artists (I really like The Who Sell Out + many great singles), but they emerged into something I don't like at all (in the case of The Who: rock operas). However, there's a big difference between Elton and Who in that those rock operas are actually acclaimed. I don't think I'll ever understand why The Who is actually a top 10 artist.

Henrik,

I found a website produced by a Russian music fan who wrote some very interesting band and album reviews, mostly about classic rock. He's got a great take on The Who and why they are worthy of acclaim: George Starostin's review of The Who.

I think a lot of you would enjoy his perspective on rock music. His critical opinion of Springsteen may rile some, but I think it too is an interesting read.

Anyway, sorry to interrupt survivor....

1. The Motherfucking White Stripes
2. John Coltrane
3. Bjork
4. Blondie

New

5. Pavement - Each of their 5 albums (and some of their EPs) has a few incredible tracks, and their influence is beyond measure. However, they are in large part responsible for college rock's turn towards a more intellectual (less emotional) aesthetic. In Pavement's wake, ironic detachment and willfully clever/oblique lyrics have been abundant. Westerberg's heartfelt slacker anthems were all but forgotten when Malkmus' wise-ass slacker anthems hit the college stations. Yes, Malkmus was the smartest, but let's not forget about Superchunk and the Archers of Loaf (indie ROCK rather than INDIE rock) and the best indie band of the '90s, Guided By Voices, whose melodic gifts outstripped, just as their concerts - and career - outlasted, those of their contemporaries.

1. White Stripes- Moving them up for one week to get some people to put freakin' Tom Waits on their lists one of these weeks....alright one more week.
2. Tom Waits- Your not getting so lucky next week, buddy....maybe.
3. Blur
4. Nick Cave
5. Joy Division- I love New Order...Joy Division does nothing for me. I should have had these guys on earlier but you have to pick your battles I guess.

1 The Police: I almost want them to stay now-it's going to feel like the ravens leaving the tower when they're no longer my number one bete noire.
2 Michael Jackson
3 The Clash
4 U2: The supposed early classics like The Joshua Tree just seem over-produced and mired in 80s bombast. The reinvention of the Achtung Baby period was ridiculuosly self concious-everything seemed more soaked in irony than Axl Rose's appearance at the Freddie Mercury tribute concert. And, obviously, Bono is a complete twat.
5 The White Stripes: This is the first act I've nominated that I've really got nothing against. The albums I've got are pretty cool, but hardly all killer, no filler.

Looks like Pavement are back in the frame this week. In terms of the criticisms raised, firstly there's a big difference between using unconventional guitar tunings and not tuning your guitars. Greg may have a point about Malkmus popularising ironic detachment and oblique lyrics, but then attempts to contrast that with Guided By Voices(one of my favourite bands) whose song titles and lyrics actually surpassed Pavement's in terms of cool-sounding meaninglessness.

ed, you're right, pollard and malkmus are birds of a feather when it comes to lyrics, but i think gbv's songwriting is leagues ahead of pavement's - obviously in quantity but also in quality. as for personae, however, the two are radically different. malkmus looked like a college kid (which brings to mind the old joke that so many american rock critics love elvis costello because they look like elvis costello); pollard looked more like a professor - a fucking awesome one. i saw them several times but the best time was about 7 years ago at cat's cradle in north carolina - pollard (in his 40's) came out visibly drunk, then proceeded to drink at least another 10 beers on stage. during the course of the 3-hour show, he managed to knock over the drumkit twice, pick a fight with a fan and try to hit him with the mic stand, talk shit about sebadoh, and perform all his usual moves - the signature one being when he hops on one foot for a few beats and then does some kind of karate kick with the foot he's been hopping on. totally sweet. by far the most ROCK N ROLL show i've ever seen, except for maybe Andrew W.K. pavement concerts were nothing like this - malkmus was more likely to smoke too much pot and forget lyrics.

I don't think GBV and Pavement should be compared to each other. Both are two of the greatest bands of the last 20 years and they really weren't all that alike except that they were both considered indie which everyone now realizes is as generic as calling a band a "rock group". GBV should definitely get more acclaim but that doesn't mean it's Pavement's fault or that they should get less.

Henrik wrote: "I don't think I'll ever understand why The Who is actually a top 10 artist."


I saw The Who last summer, and it was fantastic. Those guys aren't old, they rock harder and better than people half their age. And those songs...! They've got an amazing catalogue of songs. In my opinion, they're better than The Beatles.

I mourn the loss of Roxy Music, and will mourn even more when The Cure (my favorite band) gets the boot. As for "vomit with a head", I must give credit where credit is due: it's my father-in-law's nickname for Sir Elton.

I'll need to include three new acts this week, so it should be interesting.

Same as before:

1. Bob Marley and the Fratboys
2. The Who

On deck for the guillotine:

3. Simon and Garfunkel: Folk just doesn't do it for me.

4. Aretha Franklin: Her churlish persona and diva antics ruin whatever appreciation I could have for her music. A rose isn't really a rose after all.

5. The Beatles: Repeat vote from before.

With Moonbeam’s vote for Aretha [Boo. -Ed.], there are now only twenty artists who have never yet appeared on anyone’s ballot. They are:

The Beach Boys
David Bowie
Johnny Cash
Elvis Costello
Miles Davis
PJ Harvey
Jimi Hendrix
The Kinks
Led Zeppelin
Elvis Presley
Prince
Radiohead
Otis Redding
Lou Reed
R.E.M.
The Rolling Stones
The Stooges
Sly and the Family Stone
Stevie Wonder
Neil Young

The only two artists on this list who are not ranked in the AM top 50 are Polly Harvey and the Stooges.

The highest-ranked artists who HAVE appeared on somebody’s ballot (and are therefore not on this list) are: The Beatles (#1), Bob Dylan (#3), Bruce Springsteen (#6), The Who (#8) and the Velvet Underground (#12).

Quiet, you! I'm really liking how this is shaping up. No need to stir the pot!

Henrik

one good way to realize the Who's importance is to get hold of a video rendition of their concerts, if you didn't already see one..
Woodstock, Monterey, Leeds

Rune and nicolas, funny that you're both mention their concerts when I forgot to say that they're responsible for arena rock.
and

It's really sad that people are starting to vote out the best band of all time,The Smiths. Anthony - the number of Smiths songs I DON'T love can be counted on one finger. Never in my lifetime have I discovered another band so consistently great...

Simon & Garfunkel – There music is nice, inoffensive and it would take a pretty heartless person not to derive some form of enjoyment from their last three albums at least. That said we are getting close to the fifty mark and that should be reserved for artists who have had a colossal impact on the way not just music was recorded after but on the next generation of musicians, I don’t see these two doing that, in fact I think their influence on what came after is largely a negative one when you look at the influence on talent TV shows and the like. Nice isn’t going to cut it at this point for me. I’d much rather people were voting off bands whose music they are indifferent to rather than the basis that the singer is a belllend.

Wilco – Summerteeth and Yankee Hotel Foxtrot are great albums, before those I consider their output before then to be no better than Son Volt’s alt-country whining (a genre I have as little time for as some posters do BritPop) and after the produced the schizophrenic self-indulgent mess of A Ghost Is Born and the coma-inducing dad-rock Eagles boredom of Sky Blue Sky.

1)White Stripes
2)Blondie
3)Outkast - overblown,self-indulgent albums. Probably time for them to go
4)Nick Cave:I guess I was never a big fan of his voice
5)John Coltrane:Talented without question but boring to my ears

funny, Mitchell, but you mentioned my favorite Wilco albums, Sky Blue Sky
That + Springsteen (my favorite artist) in yr list = logical.
And btw, I love the Eagles (and I loved them before being a dad)
Tous les goûts sont dans la nature
(All tastes can be found in nature)
Sky Blue Sky is a magical album, for those who are not obsessed by modernity. It is sensible, cosy, it's like getting in bed. Until you have little children, you never know what a great pleasure it is just to go to bed and feel the sheets around your legs
that's what I don't like with some critics, and Greg you were spot on when you pointed it out : they just can't appreciate simple things. The bands HAVE to be different, whatever they do. I call that vanity.

it's easy to be different, and to write songs with never ending names. Those indie acts can really be a pain sometimes.

In addition to nicolas' comments, see my review of Sky Blue Sky here.

Being There is my favorite Wilco album and I also happen to like Son Volt and Uncle Tupelo. So, Jeff Tweedy may continue his coma-inducing, schizophrenic whining

Great review André
I didn't know you had posted this.
i should listen to Summerteeth a couple more times, and to "Being There" too

In addition to what I said about Sky Blue Sky
Maybe it is a generation thing ? well, those explanations are always partial of course, but SBS refers in its sound to the mid-'70s and yes, to a kind of soft rock (like you Andre, I thought of Steely Dan, Eagles and Neil Young's Zuma)
ANd soft rock was very present when we were kids.
My first favorite bands were Eagles or Supertramp.
SBS has that nostalgic touch (in resumé, everything the punks destroyed)
Well, on top of a mountain of crap there were good bands

nicolas: "on top of a mountain of crap there were good bands"

That could well serve as the AM motto.

5 points)The Flaming Lips
4)The Smiths
3)Bjork
2)Pulp
1 point)The Byrds

I've changed the order of my top 4 since well, there are songs I like from Bjork and Pulp, even if there ain't much, and at least 1 one of their songs in my top 200
While there are no Smiths songs in it... even this charming man does not seem much that genius, how soon is now ? is much too long and I don't see why so many of you worship "There is a light that never goes out"
And all their other songs I know (a little more than a dozen) bore me.

After that 4 artists, there are no artists I really dislike, so I'll start to vote out artists I don't know well or artists which seems average to me... and well, average is a good word to define the only Byrds album I have, Sweetheart of the Rodeo

That's all very well but I don't think that many of you are too forgiving on the nostalgic elements of artists like Coltrane, Sinatra and so on, I don't see it a legitimate criteria to judge on and the blinkers should be taken off. Neil Young's Zuma is a great album, SBS is a boring album in my opinion and citing The Eagles and other soft 'classic' rock only confirms what I'm saying.

Correct, Mitchell, and I don't have any problem with you voting off Wilco. A lot of my friends agree with you in finding SBS boring. No problem either, still same good friends (I hope)

My music knowledge is quite limited. I base my votes mainly on personal taste, not so much on the quality of the music (is it good or bad?), cultural or political influence, nostalgy or originality. Who am I to judge on that anyway? Other voters in this game may have this ability. Purely based on what the music does to me, I've voted off artists like Zappa, Pet Shop Boys, Sinatra or Coltrane.

I assume, the whole idea of this Survivor game is to get these kind of discussions going, and schleuse even called it 'evil' at announcement. I mean, we're talking about the most acclaimed artists, so no need to feel sorry about voting them off. To quote Jim Morrison: "Nobody gets out of here alive". Well, in Survivor only one will.

I'm not judging anything
Funny you use words like "legitimate or "judge"
Man, we are just expressing our tastes
In my reviews, my lists, this game, the only "legitimate" criteria is (and IMO should always be) "do I feel pleasure (or any other emotion) in listening to this group ?"
That's all

funny, we answered at the same time, Dre

I don't mean no harm either of course , but I really think, whatever my knowledge of music is (and I think it's growing with the years) my ratings and reviewed are based on my feelings.
Of course those things are very personal. The good part of this site is that we realize we have different tests, but also that 2 AMers always find some common ground (whether it's the size of Canada or of a matchbox). Here : Zuma

tastes and not tests (I was listening to the Flaming Lips "fight test" that's why)

Same as last time.

1. Bob Dylan.
2. Van Morrison.
3. Bruce Springsteen.
4. The Smiths.
5. Pixies.

It bugs me seeing the criticism of James Brown, Coltrane, and P-Funk where it comes pretty clear that those criticizing haven't really listened to much of their stuff. Oh well, taste is taste.

1. U2 - I just cannot take Bono as a singular presence anymore, and their handful of fine songs have been destroyed by radio. Also, their music, at least since The Unforgettable Fire or so, is shockingly boring.

2. Lou Reed - I find Transformer terribly overrated, and while Berlin and Coney Island Baby are both pretty great, the rest of his career is an inexorable trudge of boredom. Cale was and is way more interesting.

3. The White Stripes - A fine, rockin' blues-revivalist combo, but certainly not worthy of rubbing shoulders with the greats. (And that counts the greats of their own time, much less all time.)

4. Wilco - Lots of pleasant and interesting songs, lots of dull songs, very few great songs.

5. The Sex Pistols - Yeah, they were "important", and I still love the singles, but it's just 1 album (that doesn't work that well as an album), y'know?

sonofsamiam wrote: "It bugs me seeing the criticism of James Brown, Coltrane, and P-Funk where it comes pretty clear that those criticizing haven't really listened to much of their stuff."

Why on earth would anyone listen to music they don't like, or even don't want to like? I've heard enough of the music I'm voting off.

Why on earth would anyone listen to music they don't like, or even don't want to like? I've heard enough of the music I'm voting off.

Why would you "not want to like" any kind of music, without really trying it? Sounds self-defeating.

(And why does it invariably seem to be "non-rock" artists that this gets applied to?)

I guess the way people wave off some formidable artists that have incredibly rich and diverse ouevres bothers me, mainly because other people might take note and follow suit. Many just ends up missing out as a result.

To me a lot of this seems about geography - much loved British artists such as the Smiths,Joy Division,New Order,The Cure and Pulp just don't seem to be 'understood' as well by American ears - I think that stuff is the best music ever...

Changing things up this week. It seems inevitable the White Stripes are leaving, which is very unfortunate. But if they must go, so must the Smiths.

1) The Smiths - "How Soon Is Now" is a great track, and The Queen Is Dead, while overrated (I just listened to it again yesterday), is still very good. But Morrissey's affected worble is one of the most annoying vocal delivery styles I've ever heard.
2) The Cure - Is this the week? I just finished reading Tom Reynold's "I Hate Myself and Want to Die (The 52 Most Depressing Songs You've Ever Heard)" Read a quote from that book below.
3) Nick Cave - I don't mind the gloomy Aussie, but not minding someone doesn't keep them on the island.
4) Ray Charles - Hit the Road, Ray.
5) Leonard Cohen - He's tied with about 10 other acts that I'm fairly neutral on, but comes first alphabetically.


Tom Reynolds on the Cure:
"Selecting the most depressing Cure song is like choosing your favourite locust in a locust swarm: you pretty much have your pick, but does it really make any difference?
"Never mind the omnipresent chill, why does Robert Smith write such interminable intros? I can put on "Prayers for Rain," then cook an omlette in the time it takes him to start singing. He seems to have a rule that the creepier the song, the longer wait before it actually starts. I'm not sure if Smith spends the intro time applying eye-liner or manually reducing his serotonin level, but one must endure a lot of doom-filled guitar patterns, cathedral-reverb drums and modal string synth wanderings during the opening of "Prayers for Rain."
"Smith love minor keys the way Samuel Beckett loved futility, and the band lumbers back and forth between two menacing chords like Frankenstein deciding which villager to pummel."

To me a lot of this seems about geography - much loved British artists such as the Smiths,Joy Division,New Order,The Cure and Pulp just don't seem to be 'understood' as well by American ears - I think that stuff is the best music ever...

Oddly, I'm American, and 5 years ago or so those bands all would have been high on my list. I've just burned out a bit on them recently. (Though they certainly belong in any discussion of important and/or great bands.)

"Smith love minor keys the way Samuel Beckett loved futility, and the band lumbers back and forth between two menacing chords like Frankenstein deciding which villager to pummel."



I actually think for many, that would be a positive review!

I think you're somewhat on to something there, Midaso. I feel fortunate to have a perspective from both sides of the Atlantic. I was born in London and raised in England until I was 12, and my mother's side of the family all lives there.
When I was 12, I moved to the States and have lived here since. So I feel I have perspective in being able to appreciate music that is either uniquely British or uniquely American.
That being said, it comes down to more of a artist-by-artist approach for me. And it doesn't matter what country I'm from, I still wouldn't like the Cure. Pulp on the other hand I really enjoy, while I can see why other Americans wouldn't get as much out of them as I do.

"To me a lot of this seems about geography - much loved British artists such as the Smiths,Joy Division,New Order,The Cure and Pulp just don't seem to be 'understood' as well by American ears - I think that stuff is the best music ever..."

Could be. Not for me, I like all of those bands except Joy Division. But, except for The Cure none of those bands had much radio play in America so a person would have to seek those artists out and there really wouldn't be much nostalgia involved.

sonofsamiam wrote: "Why would you "not want to like" any kind of music, without really trying it?"

There's a lot of music. Sometimes you read or hear about a band that sounds interesting, and you'd like to check it out. Simply, you want to like the band. Or if there's an album you've been recommended by someone who knows what you like, but you can't seem to get it at first, but you want to like it.

However, if you've heard some songs of an artist, and didn't quite like it, there's no reason wanting to like it, even if it's an acclaimed artist or group. It's easy.

I don't want to like James Brown. I won't go out buying James Brown albums, simply because I don't want them. That's based upon my general interest in music, and the songs I've heard by him.

This might be a bit controversial: I believe that all of artists in the top 100 are truly great artists with great, deserving works. That's how they got there in the first place, isn't it? If so many music lovers like your work, there has to be some value.

So, if an individual fan dislikes a highly acclaimed artist, I suspect the most reasonable explanation is that the indivdual fan just doesn't "get it," (and I mean that in the nicest possible way), and not that the vast majority of critics made a mistake in heaping so much acclaim on an "undeserving" artist.

There are highly acclaimed artists that I, personally, don't like (or where I can't figure out the attraction), but that's MY problem, not the critics or the artist. An interesting challenge is to discover the greatness in an acclaimed artist that may not be immediately apparent to you. It's there. You just need to figure out where to find it (even with bands like The Smiths, The Sex Pistols, John Coltrane, or Frank Sinatra).

Loophole

So if the critics love it, and the audience loves it, there's definitely something worth loving with it? That would make Titanic the greatest movie ever (11 Oscars and 1 billion dollars or so). It's an ok movie, I guess everybody would agree on that, but it's not _that_ great.

Goodness, anyone who really thinks The Cure are that depressing really aren't well versed in their catalogue. And I, for one, adore the long intros. Not everything has to be a 3-minute pop song, and I don't see the same criticism being lumped on prog acts, which I find much more pretentious.

I've been terribly busy, and don't have time to eulogize Paul Simon. While recognizing the elements that turn people off, I think he is a unique talent. I refer to my comments on Rhythm of the Saints from the forum album poll.

Also, sad to see Bryan Ferry pip bandmate Brian Eno. Should have been reverse order.

Oldies:

1) The Cure
2) Joy Division
3) Van Morrison
4) The Flaming Lips


Newbie:

5) Tom Waits - Again I'm hampered by an admittedly less-than-desired knowledge of his work. (Remember, I'm into artists now that I respect and admire, but for whom I have not yet felt the tug to try and like or even love.) His is clearly an evocative (if largely-alien) voice. But evocative less (for me) of real emotion than some sentimentality for a largely-forgotten past. I can identify with that sort of nostalgic artistry. But the uniqueness wears off for me, and what's left is a voice that seems to not be tied to strong emotion so much as trying to drag it from the bottom of a whiskey bottle.

Rune,

That's not exactly what I said. Forget about popular sales. I'm saying that if an artist, song, or album is respected the consensus of professional critics, then we can be confident that there is something worth loving about the artist, song, or album. With so many interested voices being heard, the stuff on top is going to be good.

If one music fan doesn't agree, then the music in question might not be right for that individual fan, but it would be wrong for the individual fan to assume that the art lacks merit.

A number of people who post here have given very confident, authoritative-sounding opinions about why something loved by the critics really isn't that good. In my opinion, the problem is that they just don't see the value of the work or artist in question. In other words, they don't get it. Just like I don't get Radiohead. (The only other explanation would be that the consensus of critics are wrong.)

That's not a knock on a person who doesn't like something. No one person is going to like every acclaimed artist, but I think we should be a little more circumspect about how hard we bash something that we don't understand.

Your Titanic example relies more on popular opinion (sales) than a critical consensus. If you check out the 1,000 greatest films over at TheyShootPictures.com, you will see that Titanic is not a consensus critical favorite. And I do thing that there is something worth loving about the top 100 films, whether I, personally, "get it" or not.

Wow, did I almost miss an entire argument on musical taste? Actually I don't really remember what you guys are arguing about (I think the Smiths and the Cure are involved somehow) but I don't want to be left out so just pick a side for me to defend and pretend I said something thought-provoking. Thanks.

No. That was just me rambling on with a bunch of typos...

If you boil it down, my brilliant conclusion is that the music in the AM 100 is good stuff.

Schwah,
a voice that seems to not be tied to strong emotion so much as trying to drag it from the bottom of a whiskey bottle
All I can say to you is that you don't know Tom Waits indeed.
Listen to "Time" (on Rain Dogs), to "Tom Traubert's blues" (on Small Change), you'll hear his emotions are not fake.
I don't understand why people can't get past his voice. After all, Howling Wolf had the same. But as you say those people are "largedly" forgotten.

Loophole - I agree with you!

Loophole, I can also follow and support your thinking. My weak spot definitely is jazzy music, I've listened to them enough to see that I don't 'get' the music from Sinatra, Coltrane, etc.

Now, all these discussions about artists being rightfully acclaimed or not, and about taste, is interesting, but what I don't like about this game so far, is that the focus is on what we don't like. Besides picking on artists, we even start picking on each other once in a while.

For the next two weeks and as of March (I'm gone in February) I'm gonna try to restrict myself to only mention positive things about the artists that I vote off. Similar to giving a farewell speech to a well-appreciated colleague, that decided to work somewhere else. Not sure how that works out, let's see.

I'm writing only negative things about the artists I vote off, even if I kind of like them. That's a strategy I've chosen, and also feel I've succeeded with.

As for the talent of the artists in the top 100, yes of course they're talented. But looking down through the list, you'll find artist equally talented, or even better, just with a lower number of sales. Some artists, like U2, are simply ranked so high because their sales numbers have made it an easy task for lazy critics to include on eoy lists and all time lists.

I'll heartily disagree with that one ^^^ (unless I'm a lazy critic).

nicolas -

I understand your frustration with my comments. When I read comments about my favorite artists that seem like they are based on a surface knowledge, I get frustrated too. That is why I try to be up front about my general knowledge of a particular artist before giving critical comments.

Was my comment about the whiskey bottle unduly snarky? Probably. I often exaggerate my opinions on this forum for a number of reasons: in order to stoke debate, work through my own opinions on a subject, hopefully entertain every once and a while, and to experiment with my own critical voice. I can only ask Tom Waits fans for forgiveness and forebearance, and give a promise to give him another try sometime in the future (in amongst the avalanche of other music that this site has brought to my attention).

BTW, I don't much care for Howlin' Wolf's voice either.

At least somebody else is finally voting that bum off the island.

Schwah,

No offense taken
I realized TW is generally appreciated by people with an interest in roots music.
And he's the example of the non-consensual arist, so I won't be surprised when his time to leave will come.
But disliking him just for his voice is a little short (i'm not speaking both of you, I know you are smarter than that) , that's what my grandmother told me when she heard him... (and she was not a very open-minded person)

1. The Smiths, 5 points : I'm driving the nails a bit deeper in Morrissey's livid flesh (and his companions' too)
2. Blondie 4 pts : I'm checking the list one more time, but, yes, they're still there... Puzzles me.
3. Talking Heads 3 pts
4. Pavement 2 pts
5. (new) PJ Harvey : I can't name a PJ song I really love. Well, I don't know her music very well. I know the last album which can be wonderful AND extremely irritating at the same time, and her early stuff. Well if I like the lady herself, I'm not paricularly happy with her music. To me she's a sort of modern Patti Smith. As you probably noticed, I don't think that musicians who inject noise, weirdness and aggressivness into their music are automatically top cool.

oops !
Sorry Schleuse, can I correct my list ?
Please accept the following instead of the previous one

1. Pavement 5
2. Smiths 4
3. Blondie 3
4. Talking Heads 2
5. PJ Harvey 1

I'd been too kind with Pavement. Not that I hate that group, but well... I wouldn't mind too much to see them leaving. They're not my cup of tea.

I can honestly say I've never, ever thought of PJ Harvey as injecting noise, weirdness and aggressiveness into her music. Are we listening to the same PJ Harvey?

From PJ I own "Rid Of Me". It is pretty dissonant, isn't it ?
The last one is good, although a bit repetitive.

That is true, nicolas. I tend to forget about 'Rid of Me' because it's only my fourth favorite Harvey album. And I don't really like the new one much. If you're not a big fan of either of those albums, try 'To Bring You My Love' or 'Stories from the City, Stories from the Sea." Both are great in my estimation.

ok, I'll try, because I like PJ and know she's got potential.

Hmm, somehow I forgot to vote last week. Can't believe we're near to losing The Smiths and Pulp. Whaddupwithat?!?

1) Al Green. Too smooth for my liking, he's been on my ballot for a while now.
2) Pavement. I love my 90s alt.rock, so it remains one of the great mysteries to me exactly why Pavement have the status that they do. I moderately enjoy CR,CR and S&E, but not that much really.
3) Curtis Mayfield. A lot of admiration for the statements he was making at the turn of the 60s/70s, but musically it doesn't quite click.
4) Simon & Garfunkel. After that it gets hard. S&G's hits are excellent, imo, but damn that competition is difficult.
5) The Byrds. I think maybe if i could see, or hear, more evidence of their own songwriting, then they wouldn't be here on my list. I quite like them, but quite like just don't cut it anymore.

5 points: Chuck Berry - If this were the Bachelor, Chuck would get a withered tulip.

4 points: Ray Charles - I got Modern Sounds and I still don't really care for him a whole lot more than I used to.

3 points: Blondie - I also gave Blondie a try, but they don't do a lot for me.

2 points: Michael Jackson - I personally don't think Thriller or Off the Wall was as good as a lot of people, but they did have some primo cuts on them. I don't listen to a lot of his stuff anymore besides "Billie Jean" and "Don't Stop Til You Get Enough."

1 point: Parliament/Funkadelic - I listened to "Night Of The Thumpasorous Peoples" a lot this week so I can't bump them up above 1 point.

Any band that has a song called "Night Of the Thumpasorous Peoples" deserves to stick around a little longer. Fried ice cream is a reality, people!