Northern Soul Top 500 Time For A Review

[Sceneman]

its twaddle .the snake at no4 ?rubbish selection

[Steve G]

Why do we even need a "Top 500" ?

 

Or rather to agree what it is?

 

Or worse be told by someone else what it is?

 

Like a few others I suspect my favourite records are the ones I've just bought.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Steve G

[Mark S]

The top 500 has become a good way of describing certain events after that it serves no purpose . and to those of you that claim to like lists ...........get out more interact with people

[Pete S]

The top 500 has become a good way of describing certain events after that it serves no purpose . and to those of you that claim to like lists ...........get out more interact with people

 

The top 500 is a list of records, some great, some not.  It serves a very useful purpose, it reminds us of the great records that have been played over the last 50 years.  People are boring, lists rule.

[Mark S]

All I can say is peoples cognitive function must be up the Swanee if they need a list to remember trully great records

[Pete S]

All I can say is peoples cognitive function must be up the Swanee if they need a list to remember trully great records

 

Nobody 'needs' it, it's just there, what's the problem?

[Robbk]

All I can say is peoples cognitive function must be up the Swanee if they need a list to remember truly great records

I'll bet I've listened to over a million songs in my life since 1950.  I'd bet that a LOT more than 500 of those are "Truly Great Records".  I'll have to admit that i don't think about all 1,000 or 5,000 or 10,000 of those truly great records every day.  So, I might appreciate when someone brings up one that I haven't thought of for maybe 10 or 20 or 30 or even 40 years.  then I can go back and listen to it, and get some nice enjoyment and reminiscence.  When you are old, and have heard many songs in your life, or met many people in your life, you get busy, and may not have time to think of all of them each day, or even once a month, or even once a year (or even not for a 20 year period).  That doesn't mean they weren't great, or even that they didn't have much influence on your life.  people are busy with the details in their lives they are confronted with at a given instance.  The years fly by like nothing.  That is especially true the older one gets.  My last 30 or 40 years have flown by like a few weeks.  Every year goes by faster than the one before. 

 

I appreciate meeting or hearing someone I haven't seen or heard from for many years.  the same is true for songs (even on records I have sitting on my shelves, that I haven't heard in 40 or 50 years.  I just recently heard a great song I hadn't heard since few months after I bought it in 1956 (ballad side of Robins on Whippet 203).  i loved it when I first heard it, and I still do very much.  I just, somehow didn't hear it over the years, not on the radio as an oldie, and I just forgot to play it.  That doesn't mean it had low quality.  I'm sure there will be several recordings on different people's "Top 500" here that I have in my collection, that I haven't played (or, possibly haven't heard) in 10, 20, 30 or 40 years, that I'll be glad to remember and hear again, as well as a few songs I've never even heard (not being involved in The NS Scene).

[Mark S]

Your in an unusually confrontational mood tonight Pete  have you had your tea yet ? not got a problem with the list as such but it has been used as a measure of naffness for venues etc so apart from a memory jogger it serves no purpose .

 

Each to their own and all that

[Pete S]

Your in an unusually confrontational mood tonight Pete

 

Not at all, just trying to understand why people are so anti, at the end of the day - it's just a book!

[Guest BAKUNIN]

Tomangoes......and the rest.

[Sceneman]

he seems to have missed Gloria Jones Heartbeat ,surely a top NS 45,or did i miss it?

[Rick Smith]

The fact that Nosmo King is included in the top 500 is mind boggling when you think of all the brilliant sounds that aren't even included.

It's all differing opinion, pehaps Soul Sourse could do a poll and make their own chart every few years would be very interseting.

[Premium Stuff]

The fact that Nosmo King is included in the top 500 is mind boggling when you think of all the brilliant sounds that aren't even included.

It's all differing opinion, pehaps Soul Sourse could do a poll and make their own chart every few years would be very interseting.

 

Think we tried that a while ago - can't quite remember - it was the alternative 500. Might even be mentioned above in the thread 

 

Cheers

 

Richard

[Premium Stuff]

The top 500 is a list of records, some great, some not.  It serves a very useful purpose, it reminds us of the great records that have been played over the last 50 years.  People are boring, lists rule.

 

Right on Pete! Lists certainly do rule     

 

Richard

[Mattbolton]

Surely by definition this will only ever be a meaningless, constantly shifting list of 500 soul songs? I've read 300 today in sales lists. And since there appears to be no Jackie Wilson in the new one it's pretty much worthless.

[Guest gaz thomas]

pete's on the ball guys,....it's all about enduring popularity, and that exists in  one form or another through generations..."postioning" certainly isn't something that should govern a books format...because that's exactly the argument you don't want but will be if you try....NO-ONE, no matter who they are, can truly say or decide what is the number 1 record of all-time...and by the same token, the 500th...kev's book IS truly based on popularity but he's not claiming that frank wilson SHOULD be number one because it's the greatest record ever,..it became to most, at the most PIVOTAL time of the scene, when wigan was in it's zenith, THE popular northern soul tune to dance to, AND AS WE'VE SEEN OVER THE NEXT 3 DECADES, it still commands attention.of course we don't have to like it, we're entitled to tire of it or despise it...but it's there, isn't it? and it can't be denied. eddie parker isn't down there at 485 because it's ONLY ranked the 485th best record ever....IT'S ONE of 500 genuinely popular records to be played on the scene.....it can just as easily be claimed to be the best, it's personal opinion and choice, isn't it? if you want to add REAL extenuating circumstances why a certain record/ records don't appear in the book...it's exact;ly the same reason that stops rare/connoissuers soul nights from being the norm.......RAREITY......how many influential djs own exactly what and how few copies there are to go round....THAT'S why  so many don't make kev's book...a record CANNOT be popular in 50 places on the same night if there are only 3 COPIES doing the rounds...the term LEGEND, applies to this theory, because people get to hear ABOUT the tune, but won't hear it unless they go to a certain venue. in this day & age we are fortunate ( or are we? ) that there are so many gigs to go to in the calender year and thus, chances of hearing something unique and different, are greatly enhanced....BUT it still dosn't mean they will become popular enough to make a book's references about the most popular sounds to ever be played on the scene....BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL JUST TOO RARE!. if you also take into account that kev did orchestrate a reappraisal of the first book to include a 100 of the most popular tunes since the beginning of the millenium, then he did go someway to addressing people's concerns. if you catch my drift from the earlier entry in this debate...a book collating the top 500 most popular discoveries of the last 3 decades is your answer, i'm sure it wouldn't discriminate, because i suspect that a lot of undervalued/underplayed cheapies would register in there ( think totw, yes these tunes were throwaways back then ) along with the detroit "hoard" and the dedication of messrs croasdell & rix, to name but two for putting unissued gems on the map......or what the heck,......we'll all just carry on arguing about this til the cows come home!...i don't see ANYONE sticking their neck on the block to produce ANYTHING  of comparison to kev's book in our lifetime's that can be referred to as DEFINITIVE....OR DO YOU WANT TO SPEND A LIFETIME DOING IT?      

it has made a lot of folk focus on 500 records that are oldies

 

what about 500 vintage 45s that are still pretty unknown

 

great vinyl still out there in my oppinion

 

the price lists made info available to the usa dealers, so made no sense to me

 

if they updated them honestly, i would suspect that it would reflect the smaller group that are collecting thesedays, but i doubt it

 

the top 500 was 15 years ago

 

and was a oldlies top 500 then

 

So if you think that this was all good, then good for you

 

i dont think any of it is good

Edited November 12, 2013 by gaz thomas

[Guest Gogs]

try Refosoul on here

Hi simon, good shout pal (only 2 out the top 50 that i couldn't find)(wish it was more) out of 30 that i hadn't heard before there are only 5 that i wouldn't mind hearing again. Slowly,(going on what iv'e heard) very slowly going through the other 150.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Gogs

[night nurse]

"‹At the end of the day its a book u don't have to buy it and if you don't you wont have to read it.  I bet every one could right down there own top 500 and they would all be different. i take it this is only one persons view of there top 500 may be wrong in saying that but tis life we all have the right to make our own opinion about things .........Or do we