"But there are people on here who like to give opinions, but don't back them up. And when I come along and ask them (politely, I might add) "why do you say that?", I get shit on for it."

'Meh' to that, among other comments.

As of these songs are masterpieces, titans in their genres, epitome of their era, etc., it's easier for me to explain my rankings by describing things I don't like with each of the songs. That being said...

BRACKET Q
1. Bob Dylan, “Like a Rolling Stone” - Ideally, I like my songs to have a little bit more rock than this. Other than that, flawless
2. Chuck Berry, “Johnny B. Goode” - Sounds just the slightest bit dated. Sounds just the slightest bit formulaic. Of course, both are to be expected for a such a legendary 49-year old song.
3. The Rolling Stones, “Sympathy for the Devil” - Fairly straightforward lyrics: We get it Mick, you're the devil. We figured that out fairly quickly. Also, a 2 minute playout is a little excessive, no?
4. Led Zeppelin, “Stairway to Heaven” - An indulgence in excess, which means that it's an amazing song which happens to be a tad too long, a tad too bloated, and a tad to mythological.

BRACKET R
1. The Beatles, “A Day in the Life” - It's not so much "rock" as it is "art". Which is as much of a criticism as I can make.
2. The Beach Boys, “God Only Knows” - The previously mentioned middle section sticks out, simple because it's not as transcedent as the rest of the song.
3. U2, “One” - A bit too syrupy. Has resulted in far too many mediocre covers, advertisements, and parodies by Bank of America executives.
4. Nirvana, “Smells Like Teen Spirit” - You know, I don't care how acclaimed the song is - When it takes plenty of close listens to understand what Cobain is singing about, that's a problem. Which against this competition is a pretty big strike.

BRACKET S
1. David Bowie, “Heroes” - Lyrics are fairly simplistic. Which I realize is sort of the point of the song, but I can have illogical opinions if I want to.
2. Pulp, “Common People” - Like a number of songs here, I find it a bit too repetitive; after the 3-and-a-half minute mark, there isn't that much new to the song. Other than that, I got nothing.
3. The Rolling Stones, “Gimme Shelter” - Great beat, great mood, but never reaches that point where I want to get out of my seat and start moving to it. For whatever reason, I really like the first part of the song, but by about the 3/4 point, I'm ready to move on.
4. The Clash, “London Calling” - Too straightforward. Also, hard to appreciate this song independent of the rise of punk, the band itself, and the album itself.

BRACKET T
1. Michael Jackson, “Billie Jean” - I have to pretend that Michael Jackson has been a figment of the media's imagination since 1990. If I can do that, this song has no faults.
2. The Who, “Won’t Get Fooled Again” - Unsuprisingly, I find this too long for it's own good. Leaving that aside, the final minute might be my favourite minute in all of rock.
3. The Beach Boys, “Good Vibrations” - As an example of studio genius? Perfection. As a song? Disjointed.
4. Marvin Gaye, “What’s Going On” - I like this as much as I can like any souul music. Sadly, soul is like scissors for me - it loses out to rock every time.

Goodness. I never knew my comments would be taken so seriously. I've written about my feelings for many of these songs previously, and I thought a short comment would be less inflammatory than a long diatribe. I can go into further detail if you so wish.

As for my interaction with Anthony, I have never, ever directed a pejorative comment toward any poster here, and I'm not about to start. My comment of "eat your heart out, Anthony" was meant to be a joke, toying with what I felt was a resolved issue.

Let me add that suggesting I leave the forum is not exactly the same as politely asking me to back up my opinions. I'm sorry if my curt responses get you wound up- I'm not trying to provoke anyone. I apologize about the Coldplay comment, even if those two words do pretty much summarize my feelings for them as a band.

Thank you to Damosuzuki for jumping to my defense. He is the perfect example of the reason I come here. I disagree with his opinions very often (actually, most of the time- he ranked Bowie last- LAST!- out of the top 20 acclaimed artists), but I adore the way he writes about music, and I feel I greatly benefit from reading his posts. I feel the same way about many people here, including Anthony. In fact, the only posts I genuinely take issue with (besides the mudslinging ones) are the ones that spam the board. Everyone else seems to contribute a lot of knowledge and passion about music, which is what brought us all here.

I haven't exactly been graced with a lot of free time lately- I'm about to start a PhD in statistics and have been working as a full-time lecturer. That is probably why I haven't produced as many lengthy, carefully constructed posts lately.

I don't agree with ANYONE on here. One week I'll think a poster is brilliant, the next week they're an idiot (for not giving Sympathy for the Devil the respect it deserves). But getting personal with people, to the point of insulting them, is just silly. AM's only good if it's light-hearted, music-nerdery. There's no basis for causing sh!t. Starting shit on AM is like trying to stand up on jello. There's just no ground. Besides, we only know each other through the five or six sentences we through up here at a time. This isn't exactly the place to start judging character.

Yes, let's close this little argument with those words from jonmarck.

Cheers!

I didn't take your comment as a joke, Moonbeam. I just thought you were being a smartass by ranking the Beatles last, because you know that I'm a Beatles fan and the vote seemed to be made for no other reason than to piss me off. My mistake for misinterpreting the joke? Guess so.

This is a first, but I agree with jonmarck... well, to a point. Insults don't belong here, and I apologize because I've been guilty of one or two recently. I enjoy coming here for the "music-nerdery", and I don't want to be known as an asshole. My only excuse for it is that music is such a personal thing, so it's hard to not take others' comments personally. Not only that, but when I open my mouth, even when I think I'm being completely diplomatic, there's an onslaught of people against me.

Actually, no. It's not the comments that I take personally, it's the lack of comments. Something like "Beige. Yawn." - I have no clue what that means, Moonbeam; it just doesn't tell anyone much. And don't even get me started on "meh" - it's even worse! Because it's the verbal equivalent of shrugging your shoulders, to denote almost a complete indifference. I just don't understand how a person could be indifferent to a classic Beatles tune, OR a classic Stones tune.

Anyway, I guess I need to lighten up. Sorry guys.

Anthony, what is diplomatic about suggesting someone should leave the forum? I've donated money to this place, and I feel that I should have the same rights that everyone else has here. I'm sorry if my opinions stir you up- they're not meant to. Moreover, if I feel indifferent about a "classic" song, that is every bit my right.

About Coldplay, my "beige" comment means that I think they are the musical equivalent of the color beige- boring, neutral and inoffensive. I feel that they appeal to the lowest common denominator and their music seems to be coffee table fodder- stuff to put on display that would arouse much of a murmur from anyone. And don't get me started on their bastardization of Kraftwerk's brilliant "Computer Love"!

That should read, "stuff to put on display that would NOT arouse much of a murmur from anyone."

And as for the Beatles comment, I would have ranked them last regardless of any personal vendetta, which would be completely ridiculous. I simply like the other three songs better!

Anthony, i ask what you wish to accomplish with such comments? i can't think of a single answer that won't make me think less of you as a person. hopefully you can. who are you to recommend who should and shouldn't post on this forum?

if for some reason you actually care about moonbeam's comments, then he's probably commented on them all before in the previous rounds. maybe you should go searching.

Wow. I stay away from the forum for a day and look what happens.

It looks like this thing has pretty well died down, and I don’t wish to stir it up again. In my capacity as Your Moderator, I’ll just second jonmarck’s post from last night, which seems the most deft analysis of this controversy.

I bring this up because I’m pretty sure that Survivor will be rather more likely than bracketology to agitate people. Survivor’s going very well so far, and I really don’t want it to degenerate into name-calling; otherwise, we’ll never get through it.

Viva music-nerdery.