As it's probably been mentioned a million times on here. It's not about Dylan's voice, it's about his lyrics.

Although to be quite honest, I love Bob's voice. I'm not saying that from the old "it conveys emotion" nonsense, I feel that certainly in his later albums it really fits his music perfectly. There's the worn down, haggard sense of fatigue in "Can't Stop" and "Cold Irons Bound" from Time Out Of Mind, and later from Modern Times, songs like "When The Deal Goes Down" have a worldly wise feeling that he's lived through the "disappointment and pain" and has "worn the same thorny crown".

Nope, I think Bob Dylan's voice is fine on aesthetic grounds as well.

I have not yet heard one Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen album, and it comes down to the fact that lyrics alone cannot hold my interest in an album, so frankly, I've been afraid to give them a go and end up bored.

I am not a big Bob Dylan fan at all but Highway 61 Revisted is worthy of anyones album collection and it's the only Dylan album I own but it is damn good.

Blood on the tracks is a great record, and I'd hardly consider myself a big folk music guy.

Cohen is certainly worth listening to. You would absolutely love some of his albums, I am sure of that.

I agree Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen are worth listening to.

Ditto for Paul Simon both with Simon & Garfunkel and his solo efforts.

Recommend me two albums by each that I'd enjoy?

Why not start with the greatest hits/best of selection? That's what I do when I want to start with a new artist/band. If I like the sound of it then I begin with collecting their best albums and usually end up with their entire discography (if I really like them).

Otherwise, Bob Dylan - Highway 61 Revisited and Leonard Cohen - Greatest Hits or Essential.

I really like proper albums, so I'm probably not going to pick up a compilation, but I've noted the other rec. Thank you.

I pay more attention to the music than i do with lyrics...my girlfriend is the exact opposite she always pin points all the damn lyrics lol...
Bob Dylan is decent he's definitely more of a wordsmith than a musician..but when I'm in the mood to listen to some folk rock I'll play The Byrds :)

For Leonard Cohen:

Songs of Leonard Cohen
Songs of Love and Hate
New Skin for the Old Ceremony

Not too fussed about Bob Dylan to be honest, Highway 61 Revisited is the obvious stand out, but I really don't get into much of his other work.

i think that to concentrate on either solely the music or the lyrics of an artist is a bit like going to see a play and only listenning to the dialogue or only watching the stage directions. I've never understood the concept of dissecting a song and ignoring half of its content (unless you're trying to learn the song) music is an art and every part of it is art. This includes the music, the lyrics and even the artwork. Bob Dylan (love him or hate him) is a poet, and makes use of lyrics like no other lyricist i've ever heard. You can call him crap and badmouth him all you want but you can never deny that the man has a mastery over words that makes him truly unique.

I totally agree. Dylan gets way too much flak about his voice. He was a good singer in my opinion. The way the voice sounds on the surface isn't everything, the way a singer delivers their message and the sincerity and emotion they put into it is what really counts. Dylans voice sounds just fine on the surface, too. You don't hear leonard Cohen or Lou reed get near as much criticism about their voice and Dylan can sing way better than them in my opinion. Same goes for Neil young, I don't think he's really any better at singing than Dylan. The list goes on. I think Dylan gets so much criticism because he's one of the biggest names in music, hes a big target.

I agree. His voice wasn't as big of a concern to him as his ballads were. It was more about the message he was trying to address. You can argue that his voice stand alone wasn't too great, but the way his music shaped fitted in nicely.

If you listen to one Cohen album, listen to Songs of Love and Hate. That is all.

This. Give if a f*cking break with The Beatles, already.

There's like three people who are obsessed with that band, and they are mostly giggled at.

Don't understand the big consistent popularity The Beatles still get. Always thought they were the kind of band you would move on from with their simple fundamentals. Guess you could understand the older generations who were around, but that's it.

on the other hand i think a lot of people dislike The Beatles simply because they're popular, which is equally as "pathetic" as being obsessed with them. The Beatles were and are popular not only due to their consistent catalogue of hits but also for their individual personalities and legacies. They're not one of my favourite bands but to dislike them because everyone loves them is nothing short of infantile

How do you determine such people? Because I've had tons of people throw that at me. Saying that I only hate them because they are popular.

Well even thought i can completely understand why people don't like them. People say they're boring, too clean cut, too superficial, and that's fair enough. They're some of the reasons why The Beatles will never be my favourite band. But the amount of aggression and hostility that's directed towards them and their fans by certain people is just uncalled for and obviously reactionary because of the general resentment towards their popularity. I didn't start this thread to praise the fab four. It was started to ignite a discussion about what albums are considered the best by "the unseen panel of hipster judges" to quote Max Bemis. The Beatles aren't the only band to feature on the list and yet you homed in on them. Bob Dylan has 2 albums in the list, why not accuse the thread of being a "Bob Dylan fan thread"? I think Blonde on Blonde is a crap album. But there's a difference between not liking something and holding a grudge.

Because the majority of this list is Beatles records.

And it's very annoying when there are at least five new threads a month about how The Beatles are the greatest thing since music began. I'm sorry, but that's just not the case. And constant fluffing of the band's overrated stature breads hostility and does turn a lot of people off. I used to dislike their music; now I absolute loathe it and cannot tolerate anything they've done because the fans have run them into the ground.

I think the reason people have focused on the Beatles is that 40% of the albums on the list are Beatles albums. That really is pretty ridiculous on a list that allegedly represents the best of all styles of music from all eras in which albums were released.

But i didn't write this list...this isn't my top 10 list...I'm not a die hard Beatle fan.....This thread doesn't give additional praise to any band on the list.......There wouldn't be any Beatles albums anywhere near my top 10 list. Your issue lies with Rolling Stone. Not me.

and if you really, really want to get pedantic about it. The "majority" of the albums on this list are actually not Beatles albums .....6:4

I've said that from my very first post. My disagreement isn't with you, it's with Rolling Stone.

That's why I said 40%. :)

My reference to the "majority" was actually directed at Duraddict's mathematical misunderstanding

Quit being defensive. I doubt anyone really cares about your part in this thread. They have issue with The Beatles, not some random internet person.

Come on, do you really think that this was a worthwhile sentence?

Well if no one cares about my opinion in the thread then why are posts being made that accuse the threadmaker of trying to make mb a "beatle fan site?" and yes it was a worthwhile sentence. Because the childish resentment towards a pop group completely overshadows the fact that 60% of the entries on the list are not by that band..........

Viewed in the context of the compiled "500" list. The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan both have the same amount of entries as The Beatles, yet they are not repayed with the same scorn...odd

That's why the quote button is your friend. :)

Are they? If so they're wrong.

Don't you agree that's it's a little crazy to give almost half the "best album of all time" slots to one band though? As I indicated in the second post in this thread, that's just one of many issues with RS's list though. The fact that, according to them, every "best album of all time" was released within the span of two decades, by only the US and UK, almost exclusively within the rock genre is the really absurd part.

It's not really that odd since people are reacting to the top 10, not the top 500.

But i included the list of the bands with the most entries in my original post...It wasn't put there to be ignored. The context of the list is just as important......and the context states that The Beatles, the Stones and Dylan are hogging up the most entries. If the issue is that The Beatles are so over exposed and "run into the ground" by fans why isn't Mick Jagger targeted? The man is a self confessed sell out and the sheer amount of recycled crappy compilations that the Stones release every year makes them far more over exposed. their logo has become a cheap image to tack onto t-shirts but apparently the Beatles are the ones we should all be angry at?

Do I look like your slave? I'm not obligated to click on every link you post just because you post it. I read your post, then I moved on. Quit being a whiny, internet pissant. Jesus Christ. :rolleyes:

I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying here. There's no list in your original post. :confused:

If you take a look at my last reply to you (or at the first post I made in this thread), you'll see that my gripe is with the list as a whole, not just the Beatles.

DJ Shadow - Endtroducing... its different and I like it but TBH I'm not exactly digging it... I'm more into electronica from Thievery Corporation, Prodigy, etc.

Fugazi - Thirteen Songs - I'm digging them!

Swans - Cop - A bit too explicit to my liking (from Amazon) so I've not gotten around to them yet.

i didnt post any links......awkward.....

The context of the list is Rolling Stone. The context of this forum is much broader. I don't think most of us are surprised, offended, or otherwise moved at all by a mainstream publication's top ten.

judging by the crybaby remarks made about the thread i would beg to differ

I know, I just checked. How on earth would I know about a bigger list if you never even mentioned it?

I didn't say i included the list...i said i included a list of the bands that had the most entries on the "500" list.....do you feel silly? cause you should