NME 2014 The 500 Greatest Songs Of All Time

[Bruno]

13 songs:
Blur

12 songs:
David Bowie

10 songs:
Oasis

8 songs:
Arctic Monkeys

6 songs:
Jay-Z
Nick Cave (And the Bad Seeds)
Pixies
Pulp
The Stone Roses

5 songs:
Manic Street Preachers
Suede
The Cure
The Kinks
The Smiths

Oh man ... What a joke!
Blur 13 songs???? Oasis 10??? Arctic 8?
I really like these bands, but with MANY songs in a top 500

On the other hand:

3 songs:
Elvis Presley
Marvin Gaye
Michael Jackson
The Who

2 songs:
Madonna

1 Song:
Stevie Wonder
Led Zeppelin
Aretha Franklin
Chuck Berry
U2

0 Songs:
Ray Charles(!!!)
Little Richard

[Nick]

I'm a huge fan of both Blur and Oasis, but even I think they're a bit overrepresented on this list.

However, I'm hoping that this list will help boost their artist rankings after a significant fall for both of them last update.

[Henrik]

JR, was there a reason why you replaced Saint Etienne's "Only Love Can Break Your Heart" by "Stone Roses' "I Am the Resurrection" at #268? The latter song is placed at #100.

[JR]

Yes there is- because I forgot to update the file from which I pulled the full top 500.

NME's site had the cover art for 268, but no text (not sure if that's changed by now)- and then NME's Spotify list had placed those two tracks in the wrong spots.

I corrected the full 500 list and all is right with the list.

[Harold]

JR, I have another, minor correction. Unless there actually is an artist called Higher Than the Sun that recorded a song titled "Primal Scream," the artist and title for #170 seem to be reversed.

[JR]

Thanks for the heads-up, Harold. It's fixed.

Between all the copying and pasting, and moving quotation marks, band names and song titles around, a couple of typos aren't too bad, eh?

[StevieFan13]

I just like how this list is so varied. Could use more non-English-language songs (like the 1001 Songs book), but just as a fountain of information for a music nerd like me, it does the job.
No Biggie, 2pac, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, Van Morrison, or Billy Joel, though. Bummer.

[Arsalan]

I just want to say that this magazine didn't include "Stairway to Heaven" in their top "500" songs of all time. They also think "Last Nite" (I love Strokes but they are not top 10 material at all) and "Maps" deserve to be in the top 50 but "Imagine" doesn't. At least, NME and I both think SLTS is the greatest song of all time.

Overall this is a good list but excluding STH is a huge huge downgrade.

[Mason]

I just want to say that this magazine didn't include "Stairway to Heaven" in their top "500" songs of all time. They also think "Last Nite" (I love Strokes but they are not top 10 material at all) and "Maps" deserve to be in the top 50 but "Imagine" doesn't. At least, NME and I both think SLTS is the greatest song of all time.

Overall this is a good list but excluding STH is a huge huge downgrade.

I feel the same way with not including Bohemian Rhapsody. If RS putting that song #163 was an insult, NME excluding it altogether is a criminal offense. Led Zeppelin and Queen just don't seem to be favored by NME, unfortunately.

Imagine at #476 is actually worse IMO. Its' a very odd choice.

[acroamor]

"Last Nite" and "Maps" in the top 50 and "Imagine" not is perfectly accurate IMO.

[Mason]

I don't get the hype behind Love Will Tear Us Apart. I understand its lyrics are very personal Ian Curtis, especially since the stress of the events that inspired the song had a hand in his untimely death. But what makes it so much better than any other post-punk song from the era? (1977-84ish). Personally I'd take other tracks in the genre like Psycho Killer, Public Image, Marquee Moon, and even Transmission. I just feel like there's something about LWTUA that I'm missing.

[hero]

Of all the music magazines, I think NME reflects my taste in music the best, or at least they used to. But they are one of the most inconsistent magazines of all when it comes to lists. In their list of their best songs of the 90's they rank Common People - Pulp at the top beating the number 1 track of all time, Smells Like Teen Spirit.

In their 00's list Crazy in Love made the top spot, not even near the best 00 song in this list. Just looking at The Strokes, in their 00 list they ranked Hard to Explain at number 3, here, 4 years later it doesn't even make the list, while Last Night from the same album is ranked at number 5.

Palma Violets had the best track of 2012 according to NME with Best of Friends, here we can find it at number 472. Six years later, when they rank the best of the 10s, it doesn't even make it on the list.

I could easily write many many more examples. I think one of the reasons and my biggest critique against NME is that their journalists rather choose their favorite songs/albums then the best songs/albums. And there is a difference there. One clear example is the 500 greatest albums list when Laura Snapes ranked four albums by The National in her top 5. I love The National but thats just laughable and Kevin Perry did the same but with four Rolling Stones album in the top 5. I could do one list with my favorite albums of all time and one with what I think are the best albums of all time and the lists would not look the same at all.

[Krurze]

I could do one list with my favorite albums of all time and one with what I think are the best albums of all time and the lists would not look the same at all.

I find this view very interesting, as I always try to be as subjective as possible with my lists and I wish that music journalists would be, too. I just value authenticity and sincerity very high, especially when asking the question which journalist to trust for recommendations.

So how exactly do you objectively measure good music? This is an honest question, by the way. I hope it doesn't come across as some kind of offence

[hero]

I could do one list with my favorite albums of all time and one with what I think are the best albums of all time and the lists would not look the same at all.

I find this view very interesting, as I always try to be as subjective as possible with my lists and I wish that music journalists would be, too. I just value authenticity and sincerity very high, especially when asking the question which journalist to trust for recommendations.

So how exactly do you objectively measure good music? This is an honest question, by the way. I hope it doesn't come across as some kind of offence

Not at all, fair question.
All measurements are subjective in my opinion. There are a few publications trying to have a scoring model and rates e.g. lyrics, innovation, melodies etc individually and calculate the different variables into the final score. But in the end, it is the feeling you get when listening to a song or an album that is the most important measurement, doesn't matter if it's because of the lyrics, the melody, the beat or whatever.

Anyway... for me is just trying to be as objective as I can be, taking away my personal attachments to that song. Do i like Two Princes with Spin Doctors because it's a great song or because a girl went down on me for the first time while that tune was playing in the background?

I was a huge Britpop fan in the 90's. Listening exclusively to bands like Oasis, Blur, Suede, Pulp etc. It will of course have an effect on my taste in music later on and what kind of music I will discover. But if I were to put down a list of my favorite albums, it would be very heavily leaning towards Britpop music from the 90's with all of the memories, parties, heartache and whatever feeling those songs bring up. If I were to choose the best albums it wouldn't be a Britpop list at all, even though I might have more than others because of my background, but not necessarily.

So to sum up, it's impossible to be totally objective I think, your individual taste in music will effect your list of the best albums/songs there is. But you can try to put your emotions aside, especially if it's your job. Putting four The National albums in the top five of all time (The National is probably my favorite band right now) should disqualify you for even being a music journalist. And if it was my magazine, she'd be fired before having an opportunity to explain herself

Edit: When raring the best albums you could also include other variables then your personal taste, like impact, inspiring other musicians, innovation, effects etc

[Krurze]

...

Thanks for answering so thouroughly. I think we actually agree on most things, but I certainly wouldn't fire a music journalist for standing up for her personal tastes But I guess in the end it's all a thin line really.