Do you ever wonder?

Can't agree with all your choices, especially, Rickie Lee Jones, although she does seem to be in a long lasting slump. The single one that puzzles me the most these days, (other than EVERYONE from those stupid TV talent shows) is U2. No rhythm, no melody, no musicianship, no nothing. I don't get it, there is just no music here. Sorry U2 fans, just my stupid opinion, I even like Tom Waits, so chalk me up as a complete lunatic... "with stains on his pants". While I'm at it, let me just say that Dylan sounds terrible these days. I loved Bob Dylan, and cherish his earlier Lp's. "Masters of War", "God on our side", etc... amazing songs. But, the voice is just terrible now. My wife who actually is/was also a fan, just calls him Frog Man.

RE Phil Collins: Mostly a combination of talent, personality and business sense/management combined.

In general, all three are needed for an artist to enjoy long term continued success on a large scale. Having said that, I can take or leave most of his commercial solo output.

I suspect most in the list benefit from all three of these things to different extents. All are undeniably talented for a start.

Re Boston: THeir first album was unique at the time, largely accessible and quite well done overall. HAving said that, they get way too much air time on classic rock stations in proportion to their output these days resulting my being extremely sick of them.

RE Joe Cocker: He got a lot of exposure back in the day. Also, singing a well known Beatles tune in the opening credits of a highly regarded series like "The Wonder Years" back in the day didn't hurt. OVerall, he's never been my cup of tea.

Meh regarding most of the others although there are a few tunes from most that I enjoy.

One recent artist whose level of success I do not get is "Nickelback". IF that's the pinnacle of modern success, rock may truly in fact be dead.

I like many also could not understand Taylor Hicks winning American Idol but his career since would seem to bear me out on that one.

BTW I'm enjoying Dylan's more recent work over the last 10 years more these days then a lot of his older classic stuff. I admire that guy for doing his own thing at his age and still being successful. A true legend!

U2? They're OK and have a lot of good tunes but I have never been a big fan.

It would also seem that quirkiness can help an act remain in the public eye over the long haul. Michael JAckson anyone?

Santana--enough already
Whitney Houston--not then, not now
Bob Dylan--Blood on the Tracks, fine. But that don't make poet laureate.
Sting--should have stuck with the boys.
Madonna--packaged to last forever.
Phish--Jesus, please...just stop.