Acclaimed Music Top 45 Songs from 2015 poll

yeah that was part of the blackstar stage musical that bowie oversaw, and including donny mccaslin and a bunch of the other musicians who played on the album

i remember reading something about the production, and i know bowie came to visit them in december or so, but i can't recall if the players were aware of the extent of his decline when putting on their initial performances

Yea "Trap Queen" is def a 2015 hit released a year earlier. It won ILM 2015 poll.

Following its December 2014 re-release, "Trap Queen" became Fetty Wap's nationwide breakthrough and the first major hit single for 300 Entertainment.[13] It debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 at number 86 for the chart dated February 7, 2015.[34] The song entered the chart's top ten seven weeks later, largely on the strength of its streaming activity and digital download sales.[35][36] It peaked at number two for three consecutive weeks beginning on the chart dated May 16, 2015, held from the top spot by Wiz Khalifa's "See You Again" featuring Charlie Puth.[37]

the fetty wap self-titled album was 2015 and trust me when i tell you that it holds up. "again," "rgf island," "joog," all bangers. i even have come around to liking "1738," which was played-to-death at the time.

*679, not 1738. i was only 1,059 off.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

tame impala's "let it happen" is the 165th most-acclaimed song ever? that seems nuts!

LOL, three slots higher than "Purple Rain"

like, there is *something* to the site and the rankings it generates are not exactly meaningless but i think ppl should keep in mind that as a project it is far less 'objective' than its presentation may lead one to believe. i know they have standards that they try to follow as far as what gets incorporated into their dataset, but as one can easily tell by glancing at their community discussions, the exercise is ultimately carried out by people with their own strong biases about what music is good and which critics of music are credible, which are hardly discarded when decisions are made about how strongly different sets of data are weighted. i'm not sure i would go as far as to call the site a pseudoscientific prop for already-canonized works, but it's not that far off either

anyway, my point is that the specific rankings do not mean as much as the ranked-list format implies, especially not for for the 'all-time' lists