Axl at #10 in Billboard's "The 50 Greatest Rock Lead Singers of All Time"

[Blackstar]

We all know that all these lists are subjective, but this is nice. And, interestingly, even Axl's fashion choices in the '90s are appreciated from a present day (I'm sure some would say "woke" ) perspective.

*

During the late ‘1980s, Axl’s remarkable vocal abilities and slithering live presence stood out from the pack and made him a dominant force in hard rock. Evoking strong emotions and delivering high energy through his songs, Rose hit powerful high notes in ripping rockers like “Welcome to the Jungle” and “Sweet Child O’ Mine” but showed his full range in unforgettable ballads like “Patience,” “Don’t Cry,” and “November Rain.” And when it came to fashion trends, he was 20 years ahead of us: His short shorts with a shirt around his waist, open leather jackets with no shirt underneath, and Scottish kilts as a tribute to his Scottish heritage challenged gender norms, and popped both onstage and on MTV.

https://www.billboard.com/lists/best-rock-singers-bands-lead-vocalists/axl-rose/

Edited August 17, 2023 by Blackstar

[Martin Riggs]

The biker shorts will never be cool. I also don’t think he was challenging “gender norms” by wearing a kilt (you know as they were worn by fucking men throughout history). Glad he’s in the Top 10 though. 

[Blackstar]

3 minutes ago, Martin Riggs said:

The biker shorts will never be cool.

Apparently that's subjective.

[Sausagebrain]

4 minutes ago, Martin Riggs said:

 I also don’t think he was challenging “gender norms” by wearing a kilt (you know as they were worn by fucking men throughout history).

 

I know, right?

 

[Martin Riggs]

 

Just went through the list..Hayley from Paramore at #13 and no Michael Hutchence anywhere. Complete shit. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by Martin Riggs

[MildlyArtistic]

11 minutes ago, Martin Riggs said:

 

Just went through the list..Hayley from Paramore at #13 and no Michael Hutchence anywhere. Complete shit. 

I'm not sure I can argue against Hayley Williams being on the list or at #13. She's a genuinely phenomenal vocalist, both live and in-studio.

[Martin Riggs]

7 minutes ago, MildlyArtistic said:

I'm not sure I can argue against Hayley Williams being on the list or at #13. She's a genuinely phenomenal vocalist, both live and in-studio.

Hmm, maybe I’ll check her out again. No Michael Hutchence was my main gripe. 

[adamsapple]

I find those lists stupid, redundant and amusing all at the same time. Too bad some kids grow up reading that shit and take it for gospel because the media prints it. I don't see any rock singers in that top 10 except Plant and Axl. Technically, Jagger is an rnb/blues singer and Mercury was an opera tenor. Cobain was a good songwriter but not a great singer. So bored of people praising him to moon and back. His tragic death doesn't make him a better singer than he was. People should rather discuss ptbs and depression instead of putting one of its victims on a fucking pedestral for their talent. He was a fucking popstar during his time. And he hated it. If anything grunge, Layne Staley should be on there, also Chris Cornell. Those guys could truly sing and hold their own among the greatest. That being said, Axl should be #1. I've never heard a better singer no matter the genre, that stuff he did live on stage between 2006-2010 was inhuman, totally underrated and underappreciated.

[body]

I always laugh when I see Cobain at the top of any ranking. The most overrated musician ever.

 

[Georgina Arriaga]

They included Gustavo Cerati. Great to see him recognized. Truly one of a kind

[RONIN]

Cobain in the top 5...but of course.

[GoForJMark]

1 hour ago, Martin Riggs said:

Hmm, maybe I’ll check her out again. 

I'd recommend their song All I Wanted, released in 2010 and she never sung that live until this year.

[TheGeneral]

2 hours ago, RONIN said:

Cobain in the top 5...but of course.

Same reason people rank Kennedy that high as a president. A bullet to the brain will do that to you.

EDIT: I just saw that they ranked Steven Tyler at 14. Behind Cobain. Wtf. I bet if Steven Tyler put a gun to his head he'd outrank Jesus.

Edited August 18, 2023 by TheGeneral

[Karice]

Speaking of Top 10, I remember VH1 having something like,"Top 100 Shocking Moments in Rock And Roll History, and Axl's, infamous Riverport Concert Riot "Thanks to the lame ass Security, I'm going home!")was number 10. I remember thinking,"This Axl Rose guy seems like a maniac, and I love it!" 🤣🤭

Edited August 18, 2023 by Karice

[MattyIce3924]

3 hours ago, adamsapple said:

Cobain was a good songwriter but not a great singer. So bored of people praising him to moon and back. His tragic death doesn't make him a better singer than he was. People should rather discuss ptbs and depression instead of putting one of its victims on a fucking pedestral for their talent. He was a fucking popstar during his time. And he hated it. If anything grunge, Layne Staley should be on there, also Chris Cornell.

I’ve always thought that if Layne Staley died before Cobain that AIC would be what Nirvana became. 

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, adamsapple said:

I find those lists stupid, redundant and amusing all at the same time. Too bad some kids grow up reading that shit and take it for gospel because the media prints it. I don't see any rock singers in that top 10 except Plant and Axl. Technically, Jagger is an rnb/blues singer and Mercury was an opera tenor. Cobain was a good songwriter but not a great singer. So bored of people praising him to moon and back. His tragic death doesn't make him a better singer than he was. People should rather discuss ptbs and depression instead of putting one of its victims on a fucking pedestral for their talent. He was a fucking popstar during his time. And he hated it. If anything grunge, Layne Staley should be on there, also Chris Cornell. Those guys could truly sing and hold their own among the greatest. That being said, Axl should be #1. I've never heard a better singer no matter the genre, that stuff he did live on stage between 2006-2010 was inhuman, totally underrated and underappreciated.

That would narrow the scope of rock music to just hard rock, though. And not considering Jagger a rock 'n' roll singer is a very unusual take.

I don't necessarily agree with the ranking, but, all legitimate objections about the nature of these lists aside, I think it's a good list. It's not a list about lead singers only as vocalists, but about the whole package that includes voice, stage presence, personality, charisma, impact and even songwriting. As such, I don't see much I would object to regarding who is included or excluded. I would have included Johnny Rotten/John Lydon and maybe a couple of others for the "package", and I agree it's a bit unfair that Staley isn't in it, although the other three from Seattle are (Cobain, Vedder, Cornell) are. But other than that I don't see anything over the top or outrageous.

As for Cobain, I think the reason he and Nirvana are ranked so high in those lists (best singers, best guitarists, best bands, best albums etc.) is that Nirvana, rate them or not, was the last rock band to emerge that had such a big cultural impact, and Kurt's death undoubtedly contributed to that.

 

[adamsapple]

16 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

That would narrow the scope of rock music to just hard rock, though. And not considering Jagger a rock 'n' roll singer is a very unusual take.

I don't necessarily agree with the ranking, but, all legitimate objections about the nature of these lists aside, I think it's a good list. It's not a list about lead singers only as vocalists, but about the whole package that includes voice, stage presence, personality, charisma, impact and even songwriting. As such, I don't see much I would object to regarding who is included or excluded. I would have included Johnny Rotten/John Lydon and maybe a couple of others for the "package", and I agree it's a bit unfair that Staley isn't in it, although the other three from Seattle are (Cobain, Vedder, Cornell) are. But other than that I don't see anything over the top or outrageous.

As for Cobain, I think the reason he and Nirvana are ranked so high in those lists (best singers, best guitarists, best bands, best albums etc.) is that Nirvana, rate them or not, was the last rock band to emerge that had such a big cultural impact, and Kurt's death undoubtedly contributed to that.

 

Those lists are always subjective, but for me primary "rock" singers are people like Axl, Bon Jovi, Bon Scott, Robert Plant etc. while others like Jagger or Mercury are singers of technically/culturally different roots or style who brought that to rock music and in that expanded and connected.

Nirvana's cultural significance goes without saying, but it just pisses me off that kids today might read those lists searching for reference and starting points of what to listen to from the past, thinking Cobain was the be all end all those lists make him out to be - and might end up overwhelmed with say In Utero or just disappointed expecting too much. In my opinion, the correct answer to "The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?" will always be The Doors and Led Zeppelin, if you catch my drift.

Gotta give it to those journalists they have Axl at least in the top 10, but putting him lower than Cobain or David Byrne as a vocalist is outrageous.

[BillConnor_1982]

Iggy and Ozzy but no Alice Cooper?  No Robin Zander?  Dave Grohl?? Really?  Typical RS trash.  Best thing Rolling Stone ever did was publish the article about the leaks so the world will know PERHAPS isn't new!!  LIBERE OS BICHOS-DA-SEDA

[Blackstar]

4 minutes ago, adamsapple said:

Those lists are always subjective, but for me primary "rock" singers are people like Axl, Bon Jovi, Bon Scott, Robert Plant etc. while others like Jagger or Mercury are singers of technically/culturally different roots or style who brought that to rock music and in that expanded and connected.

Nirvana's cultural significance goes without saying, but it just pisses me off that kids today might read those lists searching for reference and starting points of what to listen to from the past, thinking Cobain was the be all end all those lists make him out to be - and might end up overwhelmed with say In Utero or just disappointed expecting too much. In my opinion, the correct answer to "The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?" will always be The Doors and Led Zeppelin, if you catch my drift.

Gotta give it to those journalists they have Axl at least in the top 10, but putting him lower than Cobain or David Byrne as a vocalist is outrageous.

Yes, even the definition of rock is subjective. But I suspect that even Axl wouldn't want to be seen as a rock singer in this narrow sense, as he has a lot of versatility and many different influences as a singer.

For me David Byrne is rightfully up there - he broke a lot of ground.

4 minutes ago, BillConnor_1982 said:

Iggy and Ozzy but no Alice Cooper?  No Robin Zander?  Dave Grohl?? Really?  Typical RS trash.  Best thing Rolling Stone ever did was publish the article about the leaks so the world will know PERHAPS isn't new!!  LIBERE OS BICHOS-DA-SEDA

It's Billboard.

[Live Like a Suicide]

No Layne Staley or Michael Hutchence = bullshit list.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Live Like a Suicide

[jamillos]

6 hours ago, adamsapple said:

I find those lists stupid, redundant and amusing all at the same time. Too bad some kids grow up reading that shit and take it for gospel because the media prints it. I don't see any rock singers in that top 10 except Plant and Axl. Technically, Jagger is an rnb/blues singer and Mercury was an opera tenor. Cobain was a good songwriter but not a great singer. So bored of people praising him to moon and back. His tragic death doesn't make him a better singer than he was. People should rather discuss ptbs and depression instead of putting one of its victims on a fucking pedestral for their talent. He was a fucking popstar during his time. And he hated it. If anything grunge, Layne Staley should be on there, also Chris Cornell. Those guys could truly sing and hold their own among the greatest. That being said, Axl should be #1. I've never heard a better singer no matter the genre, that stuff he did live on stage between 2006-2010 was inhuman, totally underrated and underappreciated.

I would agree, except I'd say Plant, Axl, and Freddie. And as for Axl's "that stuff he did live on stage", the era I'd use is 1987-93. Other than that, absolutely. 

[BillConnor_1982]

1 hour ago, Blackstar said:

Yes, even the definition of rock is subjective. But I suspect that even Axl wouldn't want to be seen as a rock singer in this narrow sense, as he has a lot of versatility and many different influences as a singer.

For me David Byrne is rightfully up there - he broke a lot of ground.

It's Billboard.

Well then my Seagrams VO is working tonight

[thunderram]

10 hours ago, body said:

I always laugh when I see Cobain at the top of any ranking. The most overrated musician ever.

 

I wouldn’t go as far as saying “most overrated”, but there’s absolutely no doubt that his tragic death at the peak of Nirvana’s short lived existence is the reason why that band and specifically Cobain have been immortalized. 

I mean, there are those that claim GN’R doesn’t have the catalog to be considered among the greatest bands of all time. Well, what about Nirvana?? They released fewer albums and songs than GN’R and didn’t have the same number of hits. Yet they get the same or even greater acclaim?? 

At least to whatever extent GN’R is overrated, it ain’t because one of the primary band members died tragically and at a young age.

Furthermore, as far as Cobain is concerned, not only was he not much of a singer or guitarist, he wasn’t even the most talented musician or song writer from that band. Dave Grohl has proven as much. Grohl has more talent in his left pinkie than Cobain ever had. Cobain’s major talent was being at the right place at the right time with a unique twangy voice.

Had he not died young and tragically, he’d never be remembered the same way.

Edited August 18, 2023 by thunderram

[thunderram]

6 hours ago, MattyIce3924 said:

I’ve always thought that if Layne Staley died before Cobain that AIC would be what Nirvana became. 

A valid argument can be made that they were a superior band. Everything is subjective, we all know that. But from my own POV, many of the musicians I know and have come across and have read quotes from respect the likes of AIC and Soundgarden more than Nirvana.

The difference is the timing and impact of Cobain’s tragic death. It exaggerated and immortalized him and that band.

To a degree, you can say the same about Jimmy Hendrix. And even though he’s not a musician, the same applies to Bruce Lee.

Full disclosure, I’m a fan of all three fallen stars. I’m just being objective and real about it.

Edited August 18, 2023 by thunderram