I would challenge the more rockish artists here... Ray Charles and Clapton for sure. I love Ray Charles, but I saw him circa '96 and it was a Vegas lounge act. And I think a spin of Blonde on Blonde and then Modern Times would dispel the "Dylan is as good as ever" myth (and I liked Modern Times.) And Stevie Wonder, BeeGees, James Taylor-- not a one of them put out work 40 years on that anyone confuses with their best stuff. To expect a 65-year-old rock musician to put out stuff that can stand side by side with his early work is just unrealistic, and I think betrays the expectation of the listener more than the work of the artist. Oh, and when that artist's early work was BEATLES RECORDS... well, I doubt I need to finish that sentence. ----- Original Message ----- From: "bob" To: Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 12:55 AM Subject: Re: Well, this should keep the McCartney Thread alive for another 1200 posts... > Frank Sinatra > Tony Bennett > Ray Charles > Marvin Gaye > Sarah Vaughn > Ella Fitzgerald > Judy Garland > The Dorsey Brothers, (Tommy and Jimmy) > The Staple Singers > James Taylor > The Persuasions > Johnny Cash > Bob James > Randy Bachman > Segovia > Stevie Wonder > Eric Clapton > The Bee Gees > Dylan > ...probably a lot more...this is just off the top of my head, but there > certainly aren't many rock artists in there. > Maybe David Bowie > Ray and or Dave Davies > Peter Townshend > ...who else? > > bob > > > Josh Chasin wrote: > Just out of curiosity, who has made great records in their 20s and then > was > nearly as good 40 years later? > >