Ranking CSN&Y by order of significance

Sorry, but does this type of thread have to happen, where we rank human beings?

 

YCSN

 

Personally I go Stills, Young, Nash, Crosby. As Neil himself admitted, "Stephen made it all happen." Hell, just listen to the Couch album...

IMO CSN were better off without Neil whether they knew it or not. Stills, Crosby and Nash are all immensely talented individuals, but they're not Neil Young.

How I see it, Stills gave them the musical credibility, Crosby gave them artistic credibility, Nash gave them commercial credibility. As Dave Zimmer put it in the CSN bio, "Eventually Nash realized, 'Hey, I'm the one feeding this group!'" People can say what they will about "Our House" or "Teach Your Children" but those songs sold a lot of records and put a lot of bums in seats at the live shows. I'd be brazen to say that if Joe Shmoe (i.e. not a CSN superfan) knows one of their songs, odds are it's one Nash wrote.

I remember you posted those clips in the CSN album by album discussion you did years ago...pretty nasty stuff! I wonder what Stills would say if saw those clips now...

Hearing Manassas for the first time can be a life changing experience.

Well, we could always hash out the differences between the American and British Beatles albums for the seventeenth time this month...

 

Y
















S







c
















n

 

You nailed it. Great post.

 

Young-a class above each of a songwriter. Very prolific.
Stills-more of a leader than the others. Good writer and guitarist. The key guy in Buffalo Springfield
Nash-good writer. Had good work in Hollies. Less prolific than two above him.
Crosby-gets points for singing. Least prolific writer. Drugs hurt him.

 

We don't rank human beings, we rank musical talents. There always has been best guitarist, bass player, singer etc. lists. This is no different.

 

that would be my call too, if pushed

 

Back in the glory years:
Stills, Nash, Young, Crosby
(Young loses points for not being a team player)

80s - Turn of the century:
Young, Nash, Stills, Crosby

Now:
Crosby, Stills, Young, Nash
(based roughly on the quality of recent output and how much I’d pay to see them in concert. Hint: you’d have to pay me to see The Homewreckers - that’s Young & Nash - these days)

 

Haven't paid much attention to any of these guys since the mid-70's. At that time, I would have ranked them Stills/Young/Nash/Crosby. Even though Neil's had the biggest career since then, I wouldn't change it.

 

It’s totally different. We are pitting one person against another in CSNY. It amounts to a versus thread, and I’m particularly opposed to it.

 

All due respect to a fellow Albertan, but NOBODY IS FORCING YOU TO READ THIS THREAD.

 

IMHO, I’ve always thought the Forum Rules regarding “ Vs “ threads were harsh - because, as humans, “constant evaluation of comparable quality” is part of our DNA.

However, rules of this house, are rules we should abide by...
So, ranking CSN&Y is a kind of :
C
vs
S
vs
N
vs
Y

@Chemguy , I don’t take offence by this thread, however, I agree with you.

 

Every time I am reminded of Stills almost being part of the Monkees, I wonder what would have happened if the others had joined him.
Stills = Peter Tork
Nash = Davy Jones (it's the English bit)
Young = Mike Nesmith
Crosby = Micky Dolenz (it's the only position left, even though Nash is the one who would know what a randy scouse git was...)

 

Stills 5/5
Nash 5/5
Crosby 5/5
Young 3/5

For me, Stills first. He's done very little I haven't enjoyed. I love his playing, writing & singing, and from his earliest recordings through to The Rides, his work has been consistently strong. People say his voice has gone but when I saw him live on his Man Alive tour, he sang well through both the acoustic & electric parts of the show. Truthfully, it was one of the greatest concerts I've attended.

Nash comes next, just shading the Croz. Yes he can be a bit hippy/dippy but that's part of his charm and his writing is usually amazing. Cathedral is by some distance my favourite CSN song. Innocent Eyes was a bit of a mis-step but other than that, he's been superb. The recent This Path Tonight is an excellent return to recording.

Crosby. Third by a nose. Wonderful singer obviously & really charming on stage. Slightly less consistent as a songwriter but when he's on form - the Seventies Crosby/Nash albums, for example - he's stunning. Not quite as enamoured with his recent output as some. I like Lighthouse a lot but I find the other two a bit dreary. Conversely, I love Oh Yes I Can! and Thousand Roads more than most.

Young, a long way last for me. Still decent - at his best, brilliant - & I always pick up his records on the off chance there'll be some good stuff there but sadly even from back in the day, too much of his work is sub standard in comparison to the other three. I much prefer his acoustic work to when he tries to rock it up.


Just my two penn'orth, obviously. Happy for others to disagree.

 

Young, Crosby, Nash, Stills

 

Well, they don't really need us for that... But I respect your opinion.

 

Looking only at work within CSNY, it is Stills number one. Neil was a part time member who didn’t do his best work with the band. Stills wrote songs that were at least the equal of any of them, and his carrying of the instrumenal and arranging load in CSN puts him easily over the top. The “couch album,”which is the best thing the group ever did in any form, has his fingerprints on everything, including Crosby classics like Long Time Goon and Wooden Ships. And I give him points for having a great song like Haven’t We Lost Enough on the complete stinker “hot dog” album.

If we include work outside the band, it is Neil #1, no doubt. His work towers over the rest of them. Stills has the Springfield work, and his solo work up to 77, which was great and much more prolific than Crosby. And Crosby was less of a force in the Byrds than he was in the Springfield. Since Daylight Again, if not earlier, Stills has slowed down. And Crosby has had a late career burst that makes it close, but Stills is still ahead by a nose.

I actually like Graham’s work a lot, I just think the others are a notch above him. If he is your #4 guy you are doing damn good, which is why CSN is generally considered underachievers. And he did his best work in CSNY. His CSNY work is consistent in quality and quantity , he wrote the hits, his great work on the 77 CSN album is often overlooked, and on Daylight Again Crosby is just a ghost. Given how unprolific Croz was and how rarely Neil was in the band, Nash actually battles for the 2 spot in work with CSNY.

So, CSNY work only: Stills, a tie between Crosby and Nash, and then Neil.

Whole careers: Neil by 20 lengths. Stills in second with Crosby gaining. Nash.

 

Thanks for posting this, I haven’t heard this in some time now! Such an incredible take on a great Crosby tune. Have you heard the alleged story of when Miles showed Crosby his take on the tune?

 

Y













that’s all

 

Young is my favorite, but I don't think he was of top importance for this group. For, that I'd say Stills

 

Stills is an amazing guitarist, and Young has been by far the most prolific, eclectic, and visionary, but judging strictly by their songwriting talents (taking into consideration inventive melodies, intricate chord progressions, well-crafted lyrics, and catchy tunes), today I will go with Crosby, Nash, Young, and Stills. By other standards, the order may be different.

 

Without Stephen Stills - there would have been no Buffalo Springfield, no CSN, no CSNY, no Manassas, and none of his solo work.

Without Neil Young - Buffalo Springfield would have lasted longer, as well as their reunion - which Neil bailed out on.

Without Neil Young, CSNY was CSN - the original incarnation of the group and by far , the best.

Neil is a great artist, but is best left to his own whims and undisputed leader of his own bands, not a team player.

The alchemy of CSN was the essence, rating or ranking them imdividually is like separating the elements of H2O —it ceases to be water .

 

If you were to compare CSNY with a starting pitching staff and evaluate them for a Hall of Fame: in no particular order:

Crosby: long career, brilliant on occasion, has one kill pitch- his harmonies, but mixes several,other pitches to make him a complete - but often times unreliable player and can be disruptive to team.

Nash: steady with good stuff, consistent, reliable and an extraordinary team player. Makes the best of his talents which has produced some historical highlights. Lacks the overwhelming talent of others, but knows his limits which keeps him out of trouble.

Young: Has brilliant stuff, many epic games in his career, but sometimes, he throws junk out there and gets bombed. Doesn’t play well with his team-mates and his bull headed -ness has resulted in team disruptions and miscommunications with his catcher resulting in passed balls and opportunities. Traded often and often changes teams via free agency.

Stills: has several “out” pitches and one of the best fastballs (electric guitar) in the game. Yet, he has a variety of pitches and equally features the soft stuff (folk). Has a great sense of history (the blues) and often evokes past greats on the mound.
Has had some “off” years, historically, but has proven to be extremely consistent and resilient. Generally gets on well with mates and has been a proven leader.
MVP of three different teams he has played with.

 

This is a hard one. I know Young is the favorite in these parts, but I haven't valued anything he's done in the last forty years except for a few stray songs. I will always feel Stills had the most talent although I think he pi#&ed it away by the late seventies. Crosby & Nash had good moments together and solo, but I think I'll go SYC&N