Slash NOT on Top 100 Guitarist list in RStone

[KissAssSycophant]

Just got mine today...looked through the list 3 times thinking I overlooked him..he's not there.  

Tom Morello was 26
Jack White was 17
Cobain was 12 <--no..not really
Hendrix was  1

buh

[jarmo]

Funny list..... The right guy is at #1 though....



/jarmo

[Mr. Brownstone]

Just because Rolling Stone says something or "anything", doesnt mean that GOD has spoken.

I agree.

But for Rolling Stone Magazine to miss Slash somewhere in the top 100 guitarists just seems inexcusable.

How this happend is sure to be debated and all we can do is wait and see what wil happen with next issue. I am sure someone is writing in to complain about this mishap. I expect to see this in the "letters" section of the next RS issue.

I also agree with number one being correct, but certainly Slash is just as good or better then Curt Kobain.

Sometimes I sense that RS likes to try and get a rise out of Slash and Guns n' Roses fans.

[TrueRock&Roll]

That is definately the absolute worst greatest guitar player list of all time.  No doubt about it.  Ya,  to put Jack White and no Slash.  Who in the fuck came up with that.  It makes me sick to see that

[AxlsPiano]

yeah man hendrix at least got the credit.

just bought a tab book with hendrix shit, man theres some crazy shit in there!

[slashnbuckethead]

There is litterally 99 other people to make fun of besides Jack that Slash can leave in the dust. We can assume any list without Slash is meaningless. Unless slash is so good that he transcends the label "guitarist" and is more of a " Wizard master of sound."

[Pviljoen]

O man... Well... I'm off to the woodshed to bone up on my Jack White solos.

[darkmonth]

Hendrix will get number 1 on all lists.  It's just the way it is.  It's not because he is the best ever.  It's because people just put him at number 1 nowadays.  It's the done thing.  Hendrix was a fucking pioneer of some incredible shit... but fuck it if he is on my number 1 slot.  He is in the top 5 though.

I hate these stupid lists.  It's pointless because it's being judged by a magazine that, let's face it, hasn't written a decent article in years.  Rolling Stone is commercial pap, with no real guts to it.  It's a magazine that trades purely on it's legendry reputation of being this kick ass mag, when nowadays, it blatantly is not.

Ah well.

Dave

[Cornell]

How can this be?  Not in the top 100!  

[Izzy]

This is now being discussed on three seperate threads......

Anyway ignore that crap on the other threads all the reaosns this list is a joke are discussed, Randy Rhoads at 96? er......no

[Pviljoen]

You can see that this magazine is highly commercially/popularity driven. If they play up people like Jack White and Kurt Cobain who people are still really interested in, they sell more magazines... simple as fucking that.

It is a travesty to put people like Eddie Van Halen and Randy Rhoads at such incredibly low positions. I personally do not care about them, but these guys invented the idea of the virtuoso guitarist... an entire element of very popular playing was innovated by these men. That has fallen out of favor however, and they are not put low on the list.

The only reason they didnt put Hendrix at 90 like all the rest of the really important players is because he is too untouchable and too god like to do that to. Even rolling stone with all of its residual clout could not do that and get away with it.

[Mr. Brownstone]

The only reason they didnt put Hendrix at 90 like all the rest of the really important players is because he is too untouchable and too god like to do that to. Even rolling stone with all of its residual clout could not do that and get away with it.

I am not sure what you mean when you say "at 90 like all the rest of the important players". I am very happy with RS's selection of the top five or six in the one hundred. Off-hand, I know after Hendrix, in no certain order, Duane Allman, Eric Clapton and Robert Johnson. I cannort remember the rest but the ones I mentioned deserve to be where they are in my opinion.

[Pviljoen]

There are a great many players that are technically more proficient, more commercially successful, more recognizable, and far more influential than Duane Allman. I don't understand how they rate him greater than Jimi Page, Harrison or Townshend. As a matter a fact, there are far more than that.

[Mr. Brownstone]

There are a great many players that are technically more proficient, more commercially successful, more recognizable, and far more influential than Duane Allman. I don't understand how they rate him greater than Jimi Page, Harrison or Townshend. As a matter a fact, there are far more than that.

As great as Jimmy Page is, and he is a great guitarist, I think Duane Allman deserves to be ahead of him. I think if you have ever listened to the Allman Brothers album "Live at the Fillmore East" you would understand why he is ahead of Jimmy Page.

I am not sure what Jimmy Page was selected as, but I think if I can remember correctly he was above 50. That definitly does not make any sense.

I think if you take historical significance into consideration, which really is the only way to have a top one hundred, players like Duane Allman deserve to be where they are becouse they contributed so much which led to the furthering of guitar playing.

In Duanes Allmans case he comtributed so much in so little time.

[Pviljoen]

Ok, you can say all you want about this album proving that this one guy is so great. Jimmy Page, whether you like him or not (I don't give two shits about zepplin) was the founder of hard blues rock. He furthered what Hendrix did in making the guitar a focus of rock n roll rather than just a necessary evil to back up vocals. Let's also put it this way. Ask the average person who Allman is, and all you MIGHT hear is that he's some redneck from a hick band. Everyone and his mother knows Jimmy Page... read any guitarist's profile and they will usually say that Page inspired them.

I read guitar literature like yu wouldnt believe, and I didnt even know who Duane Allman was until I read a Warren Haynes interview.

[Mr. Brownstone]

Ok, you can say all you want about this album proving that this one guy is so great. Jimmy Page, whether you like him or not (I don't give two shits about zepplin) was the founder of hard blues rock. He furthered what Hendrix did in making the guitar a focus of rock n roll rather than just a necessary evil to back up vocals. Let's also put it this way. Ask the average person who Allman is, and all you MIGHT hear is that he's some redneck from a hick band. Everyone and his mother knows Jimmy Page... read any guitarist's profile and they will usually say that Page inspired them.

I read guitar literature like yu wouldnt believe, and I didnt even know who Duane Allman was until I read a Warren Haynes interview.

I dont think that this was a popularity contest, surely if it were then Van Halen might be close to number one.

Yes Duane Allman is not as known as Jimmy Page maybe for the simple fact that Led Zeppelin is bigger then the Allmans Brothers Band.

However ask most people who Robert Johnson is and I doubt that many would know.

I dont think that the top hundred at least this top one hundred is a popularity contest.

[Pviljoen]

Of course it is. How the hell else would Jack White be up there.

[SwedeChildO'Mine]

A disaster.

Slash is def'netly a top 10

[koas58]

Its logical that Slash is not written there.Everybody was looking and is still looking down on Slash and the old GN'R.Just because he brought with AXL and GN'R a new type of music nobody accepts them cause some motherfuckers like Metallica call themselves a METAL band and sell more with their garbage.Problem is Slash doesn't sell cause almost nobody hears qualitative music.Since 1987 few magazines have supported GN'R and noe VELVET REVOLVER.Slash is and will be  one of the greatest guitarists

[Mr. Brownstone]

Support Guns n' Roses? What was there to support? Every metal magazine made at the time had Guns n Roses on the cover almost every month. Circus magazine had Gn'R on the cover for a like a year straight. Rolling Stone has had Guns n' Roses on the cover twice as a band and many more times with Slash and Axl dawning the cover.

Agreed that outside of music magazines of the time, Guns n' Roses didnt get much publicity unless it was bad. But what band did? That some mainstream magazines did have Guns n' Roses on the cover is just a testament to how great Guns n' Roses were.

I remember when Entertainment Weekly had Guns n' Roses on the cover. This was in the summer of 1991 right as their first North American tour was kicking off. The title said Guns 'n Roses "Outta Control". It was actually pretty cool.

Wait till Velvet Revolver comes out with its album. If its any good which indications so far seem it will, it will make quite a stir.