50 Best Songs of All Time According to Rolling Stone's BRAND NEW, 100% Revamped Top 500

I guess I'm going with hypercanonicity and hyperagreement by voting for the representative of the RS album #1 (I was very happy with that choice)
I could have gone for Joni Mitchell, but Case of You isn't my fave from the album
Talking Heads and Notorious B.I.G certainly good options. Wonder if Heroes takes this. Or maybe there will be revenges carried on from the "worst" poll :)

And I hope some people are less cowards than me and vote for Nuthing but a G thang

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

Go straight to hell, ILM.

Lol

Go straight to hell, ILM.

― i carry the torch for disco inauthenticity (Eric H.)

how does it feel to be on your owwwwwnnn

5 votes for "dancing on my own" is about as ridiculous as its recent overrating itself

1 vote for what's going on
what's going on

its not as good as 'dancing on my own,' obviously

I'm not the biggest Dylan fan and I voted for something else but "Like a Rolling Stone" is a 100% deserving winner. I never fail to find it compelling any time I hear it.

"Strange Fruit" is a great record and a greater cause, but Holiday has had much better records.

Well, many not MUCH better, but better records, at least performance-wise and musically speaking.

*maybe (not many)

These are so nauseating and I don't understand the impulse to rank music at all, but "I only have eyes for you" is the only song I can think of where a magazine could say "this is the #1 greatest song of all time" and I would think 'yeah, that sounds about right'

Think I'm gonna FP anyone who posts a list from here on out.

I voted for Gimme Shelter. One of the few songs that I keep hearing pretty regularly on the radio or in movies that I somehow never really tire of and still think is great.

I think ranked lists are bound to lead more to argument/derision than assent or constructive debate, though I do like interesting lists (esp if they're not ranked, which I guess is rare).

But how else do we know what the best songs are?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2FGRVRzXZM

Both of Otis Redding’s songs shut out.

The arguments and debates bother me as much as the lists or more, the idea that such a list could potentially be good if only they were more inclusive, or informed, or ranked in a different order, or whatever. No, the idea of a '500 greatest songs' is totally irredeemable, there are no best songs, just stop it imo

What if were just called "500 Cool Songs You Should Totally Hear and Stuff"?

How about: "500 Songs. Have at it."

500 songs. Some we like, some we had to add begrudgingly for clicks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzdEd1dZJjA

At the risk of being flagged, I'll link here to the Top 50 that I contributed to Scott Woods's ongoing roundup on rockcritics.com. Much more canonical than some of the lists that have been collected thus far (including clemenza's), but less canonical than others, I guess:

https://rockcritics.com/2021/10/12/top-50-favourite-songs-jeremy-fairall/

Good list.

8. “No Easy Way Down,” Dusty Springfield (1969)
33. “Move With Me,” Neneh Cherry (1992)

hell yeah

Thanks! I made several drafts before finalizing, and those two songs were never not on my list.

"Inverness" is a nice pick if you only have one Scott Miller song.

Questlove's new list-based Music Is History sounds promising (comments & song excerpts):
In his new book, Roots co-founder Ahmir "Questlove" Thompson starts in 1971 and moves year-by-year through his life, writing about memories, turning points and the songs he listened to.
stream/download/transcript (Fresh Air)
https://www.npr.org/2021/10/12/1045247409/questlove-spins-the-soundtrack-of-his-life-in-music-is-history

Bashing "Strange Fruit" because of someone else's alleged motivations in posting it is some of that ol' classick reductive ilx religion---to say the least---

Aaand I took the bait, sry

But by that logic, any artist on here who's ever been subject of a documentary etc. could be exculded; hell whole list could be dismissed because it's pantheon-sucking trend-molesting Rolling Stone

This will seem weird, but it's meant to address an obvious problem.

I mentioned above that Scott Woods has been posting Top 50s on rockcritics.com--not an answer to the Rolling Stone list, but prompted by it and kind of related. Anyway, Scott's running into the same problem I encountered putting out a fanzine in the '90s where we rated hit singles: it's one male contributor after another. At the time, I was able to recruit a few female contributors, but it wasn't easy. The world has changed a lot in 25 years, but it in this regard, time seems to have stood still: females evidently aren't that big on rating or listing pop songs.

So this is a recruitment list, meant for ILM's female posters: if you'd like to put together a Top 50, with or without a short intro/comments, Scott will post it.

https://rockcritics.com/

Ladies, please make unpaid content for us

females evidently aren't that big on rating or listing pop songs submitting free work with no discernable benefit beyond peacocking the breadth and depth of your performatively diverse and eclectic tastes

"Unpaid content"--if you use language like that, I suspect you and I are from different universes. I've been doing this for 35 years, and I could take all the money I've made and go buy a few pizzas.

A few pizzas does sound pretty good tbh

JFC

People should be paid for their writing, but if it's just a ballot or list of 50 favorite songs and nothing else, I'm not sure I'd expect much compensation - maybe a free record I guess. If you offered real pay for an accompanying essay (assuming it's worthy of publication), that would be a nice incentive.

People should of course be paid when writing for venues that make (or at least attempt to make) money. Really and truly, this is not any different than the polls that go on here. (And it's not even a poll, just a bunch of a lists.) Rockcritics.com is a fan site that has been around for 20 years. I'd have to check with Scott, but I am 99% sure it generates 0% revenue.

Do you have to be a Rock Critic to contribute(?)

I'm actually not against what you're doing at all - all you're asking for is lists. If I ran a publication, I'd pay for an article, whether it was pitched to me or if I assigned it to someone, but if I got a list of 50 songs put on my desk, regardless of how much time or thought is put into it, it's still a list of 50 songs. I don't think Sight & Sound or Pazz & Jop give any monetary compensations for any of the thousands of ballots they've sent out for their esteemed polls, and though they don't require comments, people frequently give them.

Pazz & Jop used to pay a tiny bit, then they stopped a few years ago. For what it's worth, this is to help a friend--it's his site.

(xpost) Here's the very first iteration of rockcritics.com, going back to 2000. It's changed over the years, but I think the right answer is "no."

https://web.archive.org/web/20000823130535/http://www.rockcritics.com/

Pazz & Jop used to pay a tiny bit, then they stopped a few years ago.

Wow, I stand corrected. When you say stopped, do you mean because the Voice (before it was re-animated) closed shop?

we'd get paid for blurbs too

No, this was before they went under. It wasn't much, believe me--$10 per printed P&J comment?

I might be able to submit one! Not really sure if I have that unique of a perspective and I suck at blurbs since I’m not a writer or a native english speaker but yeah… I could maybe give it a try. I have probably such a list more or less curated by now.

Please do! If you look at the short intros that are there, I think you'll find them as informal as humanly possible.