violator said:

I disagree, Mr Hendrix' work has had longer to become ingrained into popular culture. It's relevance is easier to recognise due to the time passed since their release. Furthermore, i believe the sad death of Jimi, along with artists such as Lennon, has exagerrated their greatness to almost to 'god like'. Who is to say that the brilliance displayed by hendrix on his small catalouge of work would have continued? People wrongly assume that he would have continued pushing musical envelope. The fact is, we just cant say. Fortunately, Prince is still with us. However, If Prince were to have died after making the sign of the times LP he would have left a legacy of albums today as great and significant as Hendrix. Prince would have been dead for 16 yrs and i dont think i have heard an album as fresh or innovative and compelling as 'Parade'. Looking back on his catalouge (comprising of released material, vault material and video footage) i would safely say that Prince was the best of his generation.Prince' influence on modern music is equally as great as Hendrix, u can here it everywhere and the man is still with us. Time will reveal Prince to be one of the most important musical forces to grace the planet.

PRNelson said:

What? Yeah right...

familygroove said:

I'm neither a reactionary nor a syncophant, but I also support PR Nelson's comment.
[This message was edited Sun Nov 23 7:02:56 PST 2003 by Number23]

I totally agree with PR nelsons remarks too. Many are so reluctant in allowing Prince pass into the musical ranks of universal greatness. This baffles me. Prince has trancended musical, racial, sexual and gender barriers. He is all those that came before him and more. He was the next step in musical transition. Princes recognition and due appreciation will come with time.It may be a contradicition in terms but the inability to catergories Prince makes him all the more unique and recogniseable. Prince has given us a musical genre all of his own and it is Prince music, it is everything you have heard before and nothing you have heard before. When he's on the money, Prince could match or even out perform any of the so called 'untouchable musical gods' (yawn) on the stage or track for track.

howcomeudontcallme said:

PRNelson said:

What you're saying is completely true. And I don't doubt the possibility that in time Prince's musical influence may in fact rival that of Hendrix. But we're not talking about the future. We're talking about right now. You and I just agree to disagree, I suppose, if your position is that Prince's influence is equal to or greater than Hendrix's.

As a musician Jimi Hendrix completely changed the landscape of electric guitar. Prince, while being an extremely talented multi-instrumentalist (as was Hendrix), has not had near this effect on any of the instruments that he plays. A recent list of the 100 greatest guitarists of all time had Hendrix firmly planted at #1 while Prince didn't even chart. And while I'm not necessarily in agreement with that, I think it does represent a mindset that many folks share. There was a post here recently about Rolling Stone's 500 greatest albums of all-time. Hendrix's 'Electric Ladyland' and 'Are You Experienced' both charted on that list before Prince's first entry. Check my profile, my favorite album of all time is '1999'. I've been a lifelong fan and at his best, nobody's music has touched me as Prince's has. That still doesn't change my feeling that Hendrix's music and musicianship has shown to be more influential than Prince's.

Milty said:

This lists goes by best albums / singles of the year ...

For every appearence an artist gets points:
Jimi has only three studio-albums
James has way to much albums and singles ... so the votes are too diverse to get an album on the top.

blackboab said:

I'd like 2 know how reliable THIS list is & WHO puts it out? R they musical wizards? I'll have 2 do some checking...Guess I'M not familiar with IT. The reason I'M skeptical IS: 1. PRINCE SURELY DESERVES # 5 or HIGHER, (that I will agree with) BUT on these TYPE of "popularity" lists HE usually NEVER makes it WHERE HE RIGHTLY BELONGS. 2. MJ & JB is way TOO LOW 4 their contributions. I mean U2 & sex pistols & the clash, public enemy etc. are way TOO FAR UP there, IMO. R they kidding? The 1st 10 ONLY seems ABOUT right. The rest must have just been haphazardedly added 2 make a list of 40, probably NOT by EXPERIENCED AUIOPHILES. The DOORS also SHOULD be up higher. These lists R usually just opinions of a select group of ppl that KNOW NOTHING about GREAT music.

well you will find all the information you want at...http://www.acclaimedmusic.net/ ...

Prince hit the music with the same impact #1 on this list did. That's why he is the baddest. There were the one's before him but they didn't have all the ingredients Prince did mainly because they came before him! See, Prince is better because of them not in spite of them.

hmmm...I don't agree with this one here.


As much as I apreciate theBeatles for what they have done for music and how great they were and the impact thet made, I don't see them as a great "act". The same goes to TheRollingStones.

When it comes to "acts" U cannot go past contemporary performers who have put together some of the greatest shows as in tecnhnical stage productions and musical arrangements combined,

Prince is the only one who can master this formula better than anyone who has ever graced any stage. His shows have always been musical and visual masterpieces.

Although he now only concentrates on his musical delivery, he still commands grace and style better than anyone else.

There are other artists who have made an impact as performers but lacked musical virtuosity and vice versa.

and in a studio, well, again he's something else...

I think many of you underestimate Prince's, U2's etc contribution. I know it is easy to wax sentimental about JB, Jimi etc, but it has been 30 years or more since they have been relevant and Jimi is dead. Prince, U2 (other bands still plugging away) will not be fully appreciated until more time has passed and people have had a decade or two to look back at their music.

Prince, IMHO, would be number 1, 2 or 3 as a performer if he had of not gone underground after Purple Rain. If he had of released a couple more albums that kept him in front of the general public for another 5 years or so more people would have come to see him for more than just PR and recognized the breadth of his talents. Throw out all the nonsense (slave etc) and I think he would be worshiped by the populous, not just those fans who went underground with him.
[This message was edited Mon Nov 24 15:46:13 PST 2003 by 2funkE]

As much as I apreciate theBeatles for what they have done for music and how great they were and the impact thet made, I don't see them as a great "act". The same goes to TheRollingStones.



no no. i think they use the word "act" to cover solo artists, bands, groups etc. if they said bands then prince wouldnt be in it. by saying acts they cover all types of musicial artist. i think thats what they mean here. at least thats what ive always taken it to mean!!

as for people complaining about who compiled this list. if the people compiling it didnt know their stuff, a) how is prince at #5? only someone who know something aqbout music would do that, plus b) why is it all lists are done by people hwo know nothing? they must know something to be a fucking journalist, or whatever in the industry! i know its annoying when you see shit lists but still, they must know soemthign to be in a position to make these lists! as pointless as they may be!

i agree with you 100%

I am so sick of reading how "over-rated" The Beatles are. They did so fucking much for music. Get a fucking grip.

EddieVanHalen said:

I definitely agree. Despite what's going on with Michael Jackson, he belongs in the top 5. I usually don't pay attention to these things too. I'm surprised at how high they have Public Enemy. That's interesting. I do believe that PE is important.

2funkE said:

Prince didn't go underground after Purple Rain. Around the World in a Day, Parade and Sign O' the Times had great acclaim and sales. He really didn't go underground, per se, until he started the club. His media presence diminished around the time of the Symbol album, but I do remember Sexy MF getting a lot of air time.

No one cares where this list is from? For all you know it could be a real list with Queen or something taken out and Prince replaced.

michael jackson does not belong in the top five, he only released an album every five years and has never released cutting edge music so i would put him maybe in the top twenty.

LOL...The list is nothing more than a complete joke and another bunch of informed opinions.

There are many acts and entertainers not on the list more influencial in the big scope of music.

I laugh everytime such a list comes out. Form your own opinions...nuff said!