Those artists from 40 years ago, or 30, maybe even 20, very likely weren't in the minds of the 25-35 year old writer of the article. he/she probably Googled up a list and went from there.
I think it's true to these lists are about as important and viable as me deciding on what I want to drink with dinner.... last Sunday.
The "Top 100 fill in the blank" lists are so wacked they don't bare me wasting time perusing them. Vocalists, Groups, Albums, it don't matter... they're geared for controversy rather than accuracy. Most are just plain ridiculous wastes of time.
It's like saying what is the biggest/best selling movie of all time?
Unless only the number of tickets is tallied, and not the money spent, every new blockbuster production will claim that title as tickets get more and more pricey. Even counting the ticket numbers has quickly been skewed, as their are lots more poeple around now than in the 50s, 60s, 70s, etc.
Lists are made just to p*** everybody off.... like 'shock jock radio' personalities.
I think it's true to these lists are about as important and viable as me deciding on what I want to drink with dinner.... last Sunday.
The "Top 100 fill in the blank" lists are so wacked they don't bare me wasting time perusing them. Vocalists, Groups, Albums, it don't matter... they're geared for controversy rather than accuracy. Most are just plain ridiculous wastes of time.
It's like saying what is the biggest/best selling movie of all time?
Unless only the number of tickets is tallied, and not the money spent, every new blockbuster production will claim that title as tickets get more and more pricey. Even counting the ticket numbers has quickly been skewed, as their are lots more poeple around now than in the 50s, 60s, 70s, etc.
Lists are made just to p*** everybody off.... like 'shock jock radio' personalities.