PJ #23 on Rolling Stone 50 Greatest Live Acts Right Now

frisbiec · July 2013

Rolling Stone magazine's most recent ridiculous list, discuss:

1. Bruce
2. Prince
3. Rollings Stones
4. Arcade Fire
5. Neil Young
6. Jay Z
7. Radiohead
8. Jack White
9. Rage
10. MMJ
11. U2
12. Wilco
13. Tom Petty
14. Black Keys
15. Paul McCartney
16. Alabama Shakes
17. NIN
18. Metallica
19. The Roots
20. Kanye West
21. RHCP
22. Tom Waits
23. Pearl Jam
24. DMB
25. Phish
26. Leonard Cohen
27. Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds
28. Patti Smith
29. Muse
30. Madonna
31. David Byrne
32. Sleigh Bells
33. Beyonce
34. Foo Fighters
35.Bruno Mars
36. Florence & the Machine
37. The National
38. QOTSA
39. Rush
40. Eric Church
41. Tame Impala
42. Skrillex
43. Mumford & Sons
44. Janelle Monae
45. Lady Gaga
46. Tool
47. Sigur Ros
48. Green Day
49. Taylor Swift
50. Fiona Apple

SD63653 · July 2013

WoW. That's insane......

I hate getting bent over stupid shit, BuT.........(I'm not.)

Love me some Neil Young, but I sat front row, and he's not top 50........no way

PJ DMB M & S. all need huge move up.........

Citizen Cope could be on top 50.........and Super Diamond. :fp:

Gawd I despise RS.......

Going to bed angry.

:(

At least.......it's Jordan's number......

drew42e · July 2013

Besides PJ being way low, Foo Fighters 34 is absurd.

CButt2 · July 2013

They're just opinions, that's all. No need to get your panties in a twist. As long as you know the truth that's all that matters.

dimitrispearljam · July 2013

copy paste from my post on facebook

PEARL JAM IS THE BEST FUCKIN LIVE BAND OF ALL TIMES..

and Madonna is by far in top 5

Porchsitter · July 2013

Honestly, I don't think we'll ever see PJ that high on a list like this because publishers like Rolling Stone know that this will drive traffic to their site, and we shouldn't expect anything different. RS has lately resorted to nothing but chicanery to drive sales/ad revenue. They're a dinosaur trying to remain relevant in a world that's long past them.

tremors · July 2013

Rolling Stone is an obsolete rag

Wherefore for instance is, erm, Laura Marling?

:twisted:

Merkin Baller · July 2013

Like Louis CK said, RS put the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover, so I don't give a f*ck what they say.

youngster · July 2013

If they played more frequently they would probably be higher on the list. Can't argue with Bruce being #1. His shows are unreal. He does shit at his shows that Eddie stopped doing in 93.

veddertown · July 2013

youngster wrote:

If they played more frequently they would probably be higher on the list. Can't argue with Bruce being #1. His shows are unreal. He does shit at his shows that Eddie stopped doing in 93.

Bruce is THE man! Unbelievable performer and seemingly ageless. Three and a half hour sets of high energy at 63... :shock:

PJ are much better than most of the acts on that list but lists are pointless. Especially ones published by Ro***ng St*ne.. :?

MayDay10 · July 2013

Dont want to comment on acts I havent seen....

Mmj, black keys, and petty in front of the foos and pj is insane... (and I like those acts). Pj and foos arent in the same universe as anyone else currently

A ton of people hold springsteen to that level. I like the boss, saw them one time and actually felt bored. I wonder if I saw a bad show.

Havent seen tool, but from all the accounts I heard, they should be much higher

mjservs806 · July 2013

Pj, phish, and DMb three of the best live acts going in the 20s
This list is a joke.. The only ba in the top ten I agree with us radiohead!

DewieCox · July 2013

frisbiec wrote:

1. Bruce
2. Prince
3. Rollings Stones
4. Arcade Fire
5. Neil Young
6. Jay Z
7. Radiohead
8. Jack White
9. Rage
10. MMJ
11. U2
12. Wilco
13. Tom Petty
14. Black Keys
15. Paul McCartney
16. Alabama Shakes
17. NIN
18. Metallica
19. The Roots
20. Kanye West
21. RHCP
22. Tom Waits
23. Pearl Jam
24. DMB
25. Phish
26. Leonard Cohen
27. Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds
28. Patti Smith
29. Muse
30. Madonna
31. David Byrne
32. Sleigh Bells
33. Beyonce
34. Foo Fighters
35.Bruno Mars
36. Florence & the Machine
37. The National
38. QOTSA
39. Rush
40. Eric Church
41. Tame Impala
42. Skrillex
43. Mumford & Sons
44. Janelle Monae
45. Lady Gaga
46. Tool
47. Sigur Ros
48. Green Day
49. Taylor Swift
50. Fiona Apple

Ya know, for alot of those bands it's splitting hairs so PJ doesn't necessarily have to be number 1, but to have some of those bands ahead of acts like PJ just make this a farce. My biggest beefs with the list.....

Jay Z at #6-From the very little live footage I've seen from him, I not sure he deserves a spot on the list. Now Kanye, he's a massive douche, but his shows look like an amazing spectacle.

Radiohead-great band and really good live act, just not that good. Some of the stuff they pull off live is impressive, I just don't think as a whole package it deserves a spot in the top 10

Rage-Really? No doubt they are pretty epic live, but do they even tour or is it just sporadic shows?

Black Keys-Just one of the most boring shows I've ever been to.

Muse-I've heard nothing but epic things describing their shows.

Tool- these guys need to be clustered somewhere towards the top with the other top tier live acts.

Alot of those names seem to have gotten their spot, just so RS could raise their hip factor.

I think they nailed the Foo Fighters. Looks like they'd be a fun time, but I've heard mixed reaction about how good they sound live. I know for one Grohl's screaming crap ruins shit for me.

Thank you frisbiec, for posting the list so I don't have to add traffic to the website.

Kimmiebyrom · July 2013

Merkin Baller wrote:

Like Louis CK said, RS put the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover, so I don't give a f*ck what they say.

+1

DewieCox · July 2013

Merkin Baller wrote:

Like Louis CK said, RS put the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover, so I don't give a f*ck what they say.

What an overblown bunch of crap that is. Countless other magazines have put terrorists, murderers, dictators,etc etc on their cover and this is the first time I've ever heard it blow up like it has.

There's plenty of reasons to not give a shit about RS, but putting someone shocking on the cover really isn't one of them, unless you've been offended by every other magazine that's done it.

guypjfreak · July 2013

PJ should be higher that that surly :fp:

tribejammer05 · July 2013

Rush needs to move up on that list big time. They always play for about 3 hours, each musician is highly skilled in their particular craft, and they have great theatrics.

RedMosquito02 · July 2013

tremors wrote:

Rolling Stone is an obsolete rag

Kimmiebyrom · July 2013

tribejammer05 wrote:

Rush needs to move up on that list big time. They always play for about 3 hours, each musician is highly skilled in their particular craft, and have great theatrics.

Agreed. Next to PJ, my favorite band to see live. They always deliver. And their fans are amazing.

Whywhyzed · July 2013

Kimmiebyrom wrote:

tribejammer05 wrote:

Rush needs to move up on that list big time. They always play for about 3 hours, each musician is highly skilled in their particular craft, and have great theatrics.

Agreed. Next to PJ, my favorite band to see live. They always deliver. And their fans are amazing.

Absolutely - my gripe with Rush (and I'm a Rush fan from waaaaayback) has been that their live show is so rigid. But really I've come to terms with it - it's much more of a theatrical performance than a PJ show. They have definitely been loosening up a little the last few tours, also, which helps. Plus 2014 is going to be R40 (40th anniversary).

The current Clockwork Angels tour is absolutely stunning Live; go see them if you have a chance.

Both are amazing though.

Merkin Baller · July 2013

DewieCox wrote:

Merkin Baller wrote:

Like Louis CK said, RS put the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover, so I don't give a f*ck what they say.

What an overblown bunch of crap that is. Countless other magazines have put terrorists, murderers, dictators,etc etc on their cover and this is the first time I've ever heard it blow up like it has.

There's plenty of reasons to not give a shit about RS, but putting someone shocking on the cover really isn't one of them, unless you've been offended by every other magazine that's done it.

I Respectfully disagree, being on the cover of Rolling Stone equates to reaching a certain level of pop culture fame. It's not Newsweek or Time, it's a cover that artists aspire to make as it's akin to having become a pop culture icon in the eyes of many people. Do a google search of David Drayman's (sp?) letter to RS on the subject, he sums it up way better than I ever could. A lot of people feel this way

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would implore you to do a google image search of 8 year old Martin Richard, the youngest of that scumbag's 'alleged' victims, then tell me it's been overblown. I would think his family, as well as the families of the other 3 victims, as well as the hundreds of others who are still dealing with amputations and other injuries probably also disagree with you.

F*ck Rolling Stone. I hope they go out of business.

EDIT: Sorry if I hijacked this thread, it was not my intention.

curmudgeoness · July 2013

It looks as if they compiled the list by drawing names from a hat. :?

DewieCox · July 2013

Merkin Baller wrote:

I Respectfully disagree, being on the cover of Rolling Stone equates to reaching a certain level of pop culture fame. It's not Newsweek or Time, it's a cover that artists aspire to make as it's akin to having become a pop culture icon in the eyes of many people. Do a google search of David Drayman's (sp?) letter to RS on the subject, he sums it up way better than I ever could. A lot of people feel this way

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would implore you to do a google image search of 8 year old Martin Richard, the youngest of that scumbag's 'alleged' victims, then tell me it's been overblown. I would think his family, as well as the families of the other 3 victims, as well as the hundreds of others who are still dealing with amputations and other injuries probably also disagree with you.

F*ck Rolling Stone. I hope they go out of business.

I think being on the cover of any major magazine equates that. I think it's absurd that just b/c it's Rolling Stone, that people are going to look him like he's some rock star or he's an example of what's cool.

I'm sure the families of every other horrible thing that's been glorified by a big magazine cover feel the same.

I'm not saying don't be pissed at Rolling Stone, I'm saying be pissed at every rag that puts that crap on the cover.

chorduroy · July 2013

Merkin Baller wrote:

DewieCox wrote:

Merkin Baller wrote:

Like Louis CK said, RS put the Boston Marathon Bomber on the cover, so I don't give a f*ck what they say.

What an overblown bunch of crap that is. Countless other magazines have put terrorists, murderers, dictators,etc etc on their cover and this is the first time I've ever heard it blow up like it has.

There's plenty of reasons to not give a shit about RS, but putting someone shocking on the cover really isn't one of them, unless you've been offended by every other magazine that's done it.

I Respectfully disagree, being on the cover of Rolling Stone equates to reaching a certain level of pop culture fame. It's not Newsweek or Time, it's a cover that artists aspire to make as it's akin to having become a pop culture icon in the eyes of many people. Do a google search of David Drayman's (sp?) letter to RS on the subject, he sums it up way better than I ever could. A lot of people feel this way

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would implore you to do a google image search of 8 year old Martin Richard, the youngest of that scumbag's 'alleged' victims, then tell me it's been overblown. I would think his family, as well as the families of the other 3 victims, as well as the hundreds of others who are still dealing with amputations and other injuries probably also disagree with you.

F*ck Rolling Stone. I hope they go out of business.

EDIT: Sorry if I hijacked this thread, it was not my intention.

I couldnt agree with you more Merkin Baller. F--k Rolling Stone and their heartless BS rag. They got plenty of attention and publicity from their recent cover. Sickening as it is they knew what they were doing. Here's to hoping for cancelled subscriptions and musicians declining interviews, photos etc...

Merkin Baller · July 2013

DewieCox wrote:

Merkin Baller wrote:

I Respectfully disagree, being on the cover of Rolling Stone equates to reaching a certain level of pop culture fame. It's not Newsweek or Time, it's a cover that artists aspire to make as it's akin to having become a pop culture icon in the eyes of many people. Do a google search of David Drayman's (sp?) letter to RS on the subject, he sums it up way better than I ever could. A lot of people feel this way

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would implore you to do a google image search of 8 year old Martin Richard, the youngest of that scumbag's 'alleged' victims, then tell me it's been overblown. I would think his family, as well as the families of the other 3 victims, as well as the hundreds of others who are still dealing with amputations and other injuries probably also disagree with you.

F*ck Rolling Stone. I hope they go out of business.

I think being on the cover of any major magazine equates that. I think it's absurd that just b/c it's Rolling Stone, that people are going to look him like he's some rock star or he's an example of what's cool.

I'm sure the families of every other horrible thing that's been glorified by a big magazine cover feel the same.

I'm not saying don't be pissed at Rolling Stone, I'm saying be pissed at every rag that puts that crap on the cover.

I can't think of any songs written about how great it would be to be on the cover of US News & World Report.

SVRDhand13 · July 2013

frisbiec wrote:

Rolling Stone magazine's most recent ridiculous list, discuss:

1. Bruce
4. Arcade Fire
5. Neil Young
6. Jay Z
7. Radiohead
8. Jack White
9. Rage
10. MMJ
12. Wilco
14. Black Keys
17. NIN
18. Metallica
19. The Roots
20. Kanye West
21. RHCP
23. Pearl Jam
32. Sleigh Bells
34. Foo Fighters
37. The National
38. QOTSA
41. Tame Impala
46. Tool
48. Green Day

I've seen the above acts- no one comes close to Pearl Jam.I think several of them don't belong on the list at all. Tame Impala is definitely high on my list.

NWOntario · July 2013

Alabama Shakes? I saw them last week at the Calgary Folk Fest; they weren't among the top fifty live acts at the festival, let alone in the world at this point in time.

btw...

1. Bruce x10
3. Rollings Stones x3
4. Arcade Fire x3
5. Neil Young x3 (+ 1 PJ cameo)
8. Jack White (do the White Stripes count?)
10. MMJ x4
11. U2 x4
12. Wilco
13. Tom Petty x2
14. Black Keys x2
15. Paul McCartney
16. Alabama Shakes
17. NIN
18. Metallica
23. Pearl Jam x34
26. Leonard Cohen
28. Patti Smith x2
29. Muse x2
34. Foo Fighters x3
38. QOTSA x4
46. Tool x4
48. Green Day

Well-done, me.

Gludfssr · July 2013

Can not complain with the top 2 choices, right on the money. There is no one better than Bruce right now. Check out his set lists for his European tour this year. He is pulling out songs that have not been played in years and even some that have never been played before live. Prince although he does not tour as much, you will not see a better performer who can play just about any kind of music and one of the best guitarist around when he does play. For me these would be my choices as well with Pearl Jam being 3rd.

JimmyV · July 2013

Fuck Rolling Stone. Honestly surprised Nirvana didn't make the list. :roll:

NWOntario · July 2013

Gludfssr wrote:

Can not complain with the top 2 choices, right on the money. There is no one better than Bruce right now. Check out his set lists for his European tour this year. He is pulling out songs that have not been played in years and even some that have never been played before live. Prince although he does not tour as much, you will not see a better performer who can play just about any kind of music and one of the best guitarist around when he does play. For me these would be my choices as well with Pearl Jam being 3rd.

Springsteen killed his last tour. I wish I could've seen this last European swing; I got to one or two shows on each of the North American legs and it was astounding even then...and those didn't hold a candle to what he was pulling out this past month.

BF25394 · July 2013

Have any of the people criticizing Rolling Stone for putting a picture of Dzkokhar Tsarnaev on the cover actually read the text that accompanies the picture, let alone the article? Rolling Stone branded Mr. Tsarnaev "THE BOMBER" on the cover-- not the bombing suspect, or the alleged bomber, which is what he is since, like every criminal suspect, he is entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.* We have a criminal justice system that works very well in cases like this, so let's let it run its course and give Mr. Tsarnaev the fair trial he is constitutionally entitled to.

In addition, the premise of the article, as spelled out on the cover, is that it is an examination of how a seemingly socially adept, well-adjusted teenager turned into "a monster." How anyone could determine that branding Mr. Tsarnaev as "a monster" and "THE BOMBER" is glamorization is beyond me.

The controversy over this cover is one of the dumber ones in recent memory, and that's saying something. Charles Manson has been on the cover of Rolling Stone. Rolling Stone regularly offers lengthy works of investigative journalism on topics ranging from politics to the drug war to campaign finance to climate change, etc. None of this is new, and it shouldn't be controversial.

* Please don't bother responding to this by arguing about his guilt. I have very little doubt that he's guilty. That's not the point. And anyone who thinks they know for certain should remember that all of the evidence they think they know is either what has been selectively communicated to them by law enforcement sources through the press, or what was contained in the indictment, which is, by definition, unproven.

PJ #23 on Rolling Stone 50 Greatest Live Acts Right Now

Comments