It looks like you're going solely by a cumulative tabulation, which isn't exactly the best way to go about it. Artists have far different career lengths which accounts for the disparity in lifetime album rankings. By comparison their peak years were roughly the same length of time and even overlapped as well (which means the market was roughly the same during Sly's second half run) and in that regard Sly does better than Sabbath on the U.S. album charts. Sabbath's only Top Ten entry (#8) would only rank fourth highest of the two groups for albums. Sly's got the only chart topper, plus a #2 with their greatest hits, showing their overall music was significantly more popular. You can even make the valid argument that the first few albums Sly released came at a time when all of black rock focused less on LP's and the core constituency wasn't in the habit of buying full length albums if you want, whereas by the early 70's the album-oriented release was in full swing and that's when Sabbath appeared to take advantage of it.

Obviously as you say the singles charts are heavily in Sly's favor, but even more so look at the number of universally known songs by the two groups, regardless of hit or not. Sabbath has just two songs which would approach the universally known level - Iron Man and Paranoid - whereas Sly's got more than a half dozen that are bigger than both (Dance To The Music, Everyday People, Stand, I Want To Take You Higher, Hot Fun In The Summertime, Family Affair, Don't Call Me Nigger Whitey, Thank You Felletinme Be Mice Elf Agin) and Sabbath's second tier songs respectively (War Pigs, NIB, Black Sabbath, Sweet Leaf) don't match the more widespread familiarity of Sly's (M'Lady, You Caught Me Smilin, Que Sera Sera, If You Want Me To Stay, Babies Makin Babies, Fun, Runnin' Away, Everybody Is A Star). If at their peaks Sly & The Family Stone were clearly more popular, then stopped recording altogether, while Sabbath saw their initial popularity fall off at much the same time (mid-70's) yet soldiered on and continued selling in moderate numbers to their core fanbase without ever reaching the broad audience that Sly had, I just fail to see how Sabbath could possibly get a nod in Commercial Impact.

It's similar to sports where players hang on accumulating loftier career stats without ever bolstering their actual star credentials. Is Robin Yount or Rafael Palmiero better than Joe DiMaggio simply because they surpassed his lifetime statistics due to longer careers?

It seems like that's what you're saying, which doesn't sound like you at all.

You've worked hard, so continue the good work. It's not easy making these lists that strive to be as objective as possible, so I totally understand where you're coming from.

While there might not be as many funk bands and funk radio stations today as metal bands and metal music stations, and while Sly may not be as big as Black Sabbath in a worldwide setting, the importance of funk music is far-reaching, and Sly played a huge part in that.

Look at how huge disco was and how huge hip-hop is. In addition, Sly impacted R&B/soul, which is another leading musical genre of the world.

I always thought that Aretha and MJ should be in top 10. Replacing The Who and Stevie Wonder or Beach Boys. Aretha is the greatest female singer of all time, and MJ has popularity and Cultural Impact enough, in whole world, to be in the top 10.

This list just considers EUA and Uk, in the popularity criteria?

If that's the case, they should put the Rock&Roll Hall Of Fame in Stockholm...

Yount surpasses Joe D. in hits, doubles and runs scored, but not in triples, HRs, RBIs, batting average, OBP or SLG%.

Palmeiro is not even among the 100 most valuable players. And that's without deducting anything for his use of PEDs.

Your analogy is bad, because Joe D. beats both Yount and Palmeiro in career value.

But Al Kaline, for instance, has more career value than Joe DiMaggio. Al Kaline contributed more wins to his team over his career than Joe D. over his career.

CAREER WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT PLAYER
34. Al Kaline+ (22) 91.0 R
49. Joe DiMaggio+ (13) 83.6 R
61. Robin Yount+ (20) 76.9 R
109. Rafael Palmeiro (20) 66.0 L


But these analogies don't work for selling records. Part of being a great artist is having a long career, which Sly did not do, mainly because of his personal problems.

Kaline is Black Sabbath, DiMaggio is Sly and the Family Stone. Joe D had greater individual seasons (bigger hits) but Kaline had the more valuable career (total records sold).

When it comes down to it, do you want Sly's royalty checks from record sales, or Sabbath's royalty checks for record sales. More money is more money.

Black Sabbath is clearly more successful commercially than Sly. Numbers are numbers, and they sold more records worldwide by far. Their win is even bigger if you include Ozzy's solo stuff.

That being said, despite the win in commercial sales, I still saw Sly as the greater artist, especially on a pop list as opposed to a rock list. The fact that they appealed to more different types of people means something. The average rock fan knows more Sly songs than Sabbath songs.

My bad it's in Finland. Paranoid is apparently a request song at nearly every concert, regardless of genre. Though that has not much to do with black sabbath's placement, just an interesting tid bit.

Also taking into black sabbath's international popularity, their singles did far better in mid-northern Europe then anywhere else, by a gigantic margine. Like making top 10's and quite a few number 1's in countries like Germany, Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark etc.

Sabbath clearly wins in worldwide commercial impact, to me it's not even debatable.

You're forgetting that metal is big in places such as South America and Japan.

But you're also forgetting just how big hip-hop and R&B are in Europe and other parts of the world.

And yes, Black Sabbath beats Sly & The Family Stone in worldwide popularity, so you're right there.

I do not think that is accurrate at all. Specially considering you used the words "universally known songs". Sly & The Family Stone are nowhere near Black Sabbath in the countries outside US and UK in terms of song and album popularity, what they represent, their influence and the members of the band. I think if you ask some random person in South America who Sly Stone is, he very probably won't know and maybe (MAYBE) he could recognize 'Dance To The Music'. But ask somebody if they know who Ozzy Osbourne is and it's a completely different answer. They will also recognize Paranoid and Iron Man easily. And that is not even debatable.

So you are, or you are not, suggesting that Al Kaline was the objectively GREATER player than DiMaggio? That would be the analogy. You say you have Sly higher and he's greater, but then say Kaline had the more valuable career, that seems to be in conflict. What we're trying to figure out who's objectively greater over the course of a career when the length of those careers varies greatly. Kaline average 4.1 WAR per season, DiMaggio 6.4. DiMaggio's better, hands down, as I'm sure you would agree. Kaline had the longer career which resulted in higher cumulative statistical levels achieved, that's all. One great year versus 15 very good years would be different, there the length would matter significantly, but 22 very good versus 13 great (I know, all weren't very good, nor great in their respective cases, but you know what I mean) is a large enough sample size to outweigh the few added seasons.

In Sabbath's case, their records after 1974 (with a few slight exceptions) were accumulating sales without ever being hugely popular. They weren't adding to their legacy any. It's like Kaline putting up .278, 16, 71 late in his career. It wasn't totally without value, but the addition of those numbers into his career totals don't change his greatness as a player historically. Same with Sabbath. Seventh Star going to #78 on the charts, or The Eternal Idol going to 168 isn't altering their greatness, all it's doing is altering their career totals in album rankings.

A longer career with a longer PEAK is certainly more valuable. But that's not the case here at all. When both made their most significant music, Sly and the Family Stone were certainly more popular than Sabbath. I guess it just matters how you're factoring things.

Oh, I'd rather have Sly's royalties overall, though Michael Jackson's estate now owns them. Sly sold them to MJ in the 80's for drug money. The airplay and sampling alone means more $$$. I'm pretty sure those albums from 1975-now of Sabbath's that made the charts aren't catalog sellers of note. Just a guess though.

The fact is, we're dealing with rock music, a pan-global musical institution.

To ignore other markets of the world is just not right. Yes, the degree of reliability or accuracy is always going to be an issue (problems prevalent even in the US and UK), but it's not at all impossible to gauge which artists are popular worldwide.

I think we're all guilty of saying "universally known songs"...maybe a better word is "some of the most famous" or "some of the most well-known."



There's only a handful of musical artists that have name recognition across a very wide spectrum of people, such as The Beatles and Michael Jackson.

Also, the reality show MTV did on Ozzy and his family did play an important role in his and Black Sabbath's popularity, even shown in the worldwide MTV satellite stations such as MTV Europe.

I agree that Sly, and even REM top Sabbath. Like you said, Sly does better in popularity, cultural impact, and musical impact. The margins by which they win these three categories are at least as big as Sabbath's influence advantage. REM probably does even better in popularity, and also has a good edge in musical impact and cultural impact. Those two have wins in the three categories that are big enough to make up for Sabbaths influence advantage.

In fact, that can be said of nearly any artist until we get down to around the Doors at 43 (maybe Bo Diddley and PE don't be Sabbath in popularity, but surely everyone else does). Even so, I'd say Sabbath and the Doors are pretty close.

DiMaggio is the greater player. but Kaline had the more valuable career. But Kaline played 22 years, DiMaggio only 13 years. When I rate players I give credit for years missed during wars. If you give DiMaggio credit for the three full years he missed during the war, he would pass Kaline. DiMaggio was the far greater player on a "per game" basis.

Sly is the greater artist, but Black Sabbath was the bigger commercial act. That was what I was arguing here, the fact that Brian said that they were even as album sellers, and that you thought that Sly was the bigger commercial act.




They had a platinum album in 1980, and, once again, you seem to forget that there is a big world out there beyond the USA. BS has 6 top 20 albums in the UK between 1975 and 1981. They also had hit singles and albums all over Europe after 1974. I don't think you understand how big the band is outside of the USA. They've sold 70 million records. Sly is well below that number.