Okay, Okay... I'll admit McCartney could sing a little. I mean, the Frog Chorus. Amazing. But seriously I was a bit harsh on 'Macca.' But Bon Jovi really can sing. He's a blow-dried clown of course, but he can still sing.
Hey Crowbone, if you want tattered destroyed vocals, listen to Territorial Pissings by Nirvana. Cobain's voice by the end of that track is shot to pieces.
Proteus said: FF, that is one righteous rant, and I'll sign right on to it myself.
Thanks! I'm snarky so others don't have to be. 
And, in related news:
Proteus said, with emphasis added by me: Well, and there's another soul singer - older guy, big in the early 60s then dropped out of the profession to be a minister and fuginal home director - bit of a comeback album a few years ago, which I have.And I can't remember his name. --snip--
Edit: Solomon Burke is the name.
Mr. Burke is an inductee in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame... apparently, that didn't take too well.
Paul/FF909
You're trying to get me started on the RR HoF, aren't you?
I always thought Rock Singers were part singing ability and mostly attitude and delivery. That goes to David Lee Roth IMHO
DangerousMan: Hey Crowbone, if you want tattered destroyed vocals, listen to Territorial Pissings by Nirvana. Cobain's voice by the end of that track is shot to pieces.
I considered adding Cobain to my list, but on the whole album, he really does not rip up like these others do. It's not that that track doesn't rock, it sure does, but his vocals, on Nevermind, go from barely there, to full out. Great for the dynamic thing Nirvana was known for, but I was looking for consistency on a record.
I put him in the same league with Michael Stipe, David Byrne, and David Bowie, although very different singers.
I neglected to mention Gene Vincent, a brilliant singer that often gets overlooked.
True that RL!
Gene had a beautiful voice.
Jackie Wilson
Roy Orbison
Timi Yuro
Stipey is a good choice actually crowbone - a very unique singer. Not many (if any) sound like him.
I don't much care for Queen after the first three albums, but not having Freddie Mercury above Bob Dylan is absolutely insane...he could make material compelling that in anyone else's hands would have been ludicrous ("Radio Gaga" and the utterly over-the-top supersonic Edith Piaf of "Who Wants to Live Forever" spring instantly to mind).
my complaint about Aretha as Number One isn't so much her style as that she really does only one thing--the Rev. Cleveland gospel shout that gradually shreds the melody on its way to exaltation--more or less well and/or louder/softer depending on the material. i actually really like Aretha, but is she really a "greater" singer than Gladys Knight? or Patti Labelle? (talk about obnoxious melismatics...oy!)
it's also kind of amusing that one of the most obnoxiously, insistently secular subsets of commentators you could find chose two fallen gospel singers as the two greatest...makes me wonder whether it's the "gospel" part they like or the "fallen" bit.
DangerousMan said: if you want tattered destroyed vocals...
five words: Neil Young, Tonight's the Night. i think i'll listen to that record on the way to work today...fits my mood.
Singing? You mean that naff stuff between the guitar solos.
Proteus said: You're trying to get me started on the RR HoF, aren't you?
Who, me? No, not at all.
It's the off-season for that. 
Paul/FF909
I dropped my Rolling Stone subscription in the early '80's. Even as a young goof, I was tired of their hipper-than-thou attitude. Almost from the git-go, the editors have seen themselves as the self-appointed arbiters of cultural coolness. These lists of all-time best stuff are their own way of maintaining their position. To be true to their own egos, they'd be better off having the 100 Most Tragic Victims of L.S.D.*
*Lead Singer Disease
Listomania (heh) is one reason i quit reading music mags altogether...every damn issue of MOJO or Q had a list of the One Hundred Best Whatevers. when WIRE started doing it every third issue i said "enough." i can do that High Fidelity thing at home and it doesn't cost eight dollars an issue.
For me Gene Vincent will ALWAYS be the real deal for rock n roll, with Sam Cooke as Mister Soul..
I agree CnW, Rolling Stone isn't worth buying for toilet paper. They take behind the back shots at almost every artist, then kiss their asses when they do an interview. It's one thing to be a 'critic' - but the holier than thou petty insulting crap wears thin real quick. Attacking moderate conservative values might have made you cool in the 60s, but most people have grown up by now.
It's hard to say who is the better singer of the pair but John Doe and Exene Cervenka are definitely high on my list. Jeffery Lee pierce also had a way a resolving tension unlike any other kinda like he was so bad he was good. Oh and how could i forget Iggy Pop. Eric burdon and Kurt Cobain were pretty good too.
sam kinison-
Aw now come on guys....STEVE MARRIOTT is and always will be the Guv'nor!
CnW said: I dropped my Rolling Stone subscription in the early '80's. Even as a young goof, I was tired of their hipper-than-thou attitude. Almost from the git-go, the editors have seen themselves as the self-appointed arbiters of cultural coolness.
Man, its like you are reading my mail.
These phrases ("hipper-than-thou," "self-appointed arbiters..") come from from other sources and stuck in my mind 'cause they're so apt. I honestly don't remember where I might have read them and I'm too lazy to Google.
Maybe it's your stuff from an old thread? 
I am not a plagiarist.
fieldhdj said: Man, its like you are reading my mail.
I thought Lou Christie was the greatest singer of the.........Wait, what exactly is the rock era? Is it over?
This is just too hard.
CnW said: I am not a plagiarist.
I meant those are my thoughts exactly! Creem was more fun to read back then anyway. I don't think they published "Top" lists, either.
Well, If my integrity remains unsullied, I'm happy.
Speaking of lists, I hate missing the CMA awards last nite. Some hot babes on there, to be sure.
