Agree that Steve Stevens seems to be a bad miss.
Which explains why we have George Harrison at #11 and Richard Thompson way the hell down at 69.
And I’m glad to see I’m not the only one disappointed that Steve Hackett didn’t make the list (although it makes sense knowing the disdain that RS has for prog rock). If it wasn’t for his innovation and influence, you would not have EVH at #8.
Compiling lists like this is always subjective.
My personal list would have S.R.V. and Mark Knopfler in the top five.
I’m with you on Hackett. RS was no help for prog in the 70s.
I’m not so much against guitarists being judged by the bands material. To me it emphasizes the need for good songs as the musical statement and the guitarist is supposed to support that. If the band isn’t good enough for him to shine like he wants to, he’s got to write some great songs or get another band.
Yeah, I was wondering about Keef as well, but figured he’s in there for writing so many iconic rock riffs. I’m not even much of a Stones fan, but I do have to give him credit for that. Is it enough to make him a “great guitarist”? An argument can be made, but I’d probably put him lower myself. But it’s not “I can’t believe they put him so high on the list!” level of outrage. I can see it. Maybe not quite by my criteria, but it’s within reason.
Aye, I think that’s right. Oddly enough I know the drummer’s name - it’s a nice bit of pub quiz trivia 
a lot of people think fast playing lots of notes = very good. For example for drummers I hear how great Neil Peart is because he has a huge kit and plays very fast. But that does not mean much to me for drums or guitars.
That ain’t what makes Peart great.
(True, he has a massive kit.)
Nigel Tufnel and David St. Hubbins? 
Now that you mention it, is Nigel on the list?
I was never a big country music fan (though I enjoy it more now than in my youth, when it was cool to dismiss the Hee Haw-type entertainers as bumpkins), but I believe the musicianship of top country “pickers” is second to none. Nashville (and environs) breeds stringed instrument virtuosos like rabbits—it must be in their DNA. Clean, flawless, melodious and not dependent on amp effects.
For top guitarists, I’d place Chet Atkins and Glen Campbell in the top 10 and Roy Clark in the top 20.
I respect the analyses of this guitarist/guitar teacher (his obvious enthusiasm is infectious):
Review of Chet Atkins: British guitarist analyses Chet Atkins AND Jerry Reed's stupendous ability level! - YouTube
Review of Glen Campbell: British guitarist analyses Glen Campbell SHREDDING, country style! - YouTube
Review of Roy Clark: British guitarist reacts to the day that Roy Clark WON at playing the guitar! - YouTube
Well I’d guess if you set Richards down at a keyboard he could write riffs as well. Writing great riffs makes him a great writer - not a great guitarist.
Somehow Keith Richards, Neil Young, and John Lennon are ranked higher than John Mclaughlin.
In general lists like this are garbage. Add in the fact that it’s a Rolling Stone list it is truly on a special level of crapitude.
If I were making a 100 greatest bands list, I would have no problem placing the Sex Pistols above Pink Floyd, even though Pink Floyd are definitely more skilled from a technical standpoint.
What I’m saying is, while like everyone I have issues with the list, I agree with whoever said technical guitar skill isn’t the only thing that should be looked at. Personally, constructing strong riffs and composing great songs is more important than being able to do a lot of fancy things. Tony Iommi deserves to be on this list by virtue of the fantastic riffs he wrote for Black Sabbath. I would think that even if the guitar solos on Sabbath songs weren’t that great (but I’m not big on solos anyway, to be fair). For the same reason, I have no issue with Kurt Cobain being here. I’d have put him lower, but top 100 regardless. And I’d probably replace Angus Young with Malcolm Young because those classic AC/DC riffs I believe are more Malcolm than Angus.
I’m not sure he would. I think guitar is what spoke to him, and that’s what he wrote great riffs on, and that talent wouldn’t have translated for him to other instruments. Now, does that make him a great guitarist is still a valid question, depending on whether writing and performing memorable riffs on guitar is as important as general proficiency on the instrument.
Alvin Lee? Larry Coryell? Bill Nelson? Dave Edmunds? Paul Gilbert? Vernon Reid? Greg Ginn? Jimmy Bryant? Junior Brown? Brian Setzer? Stanley Jordan? Harvey Mandel? Robert Randolph?
I could probably think up more if I tried…
The world of people who don’t follow guitar. I immediately recognized Ry Cooder’s name, and never heard of Billy Gibbons.
I have a theory…
…that Rolling Stone articles have been clickbait since before clicking was invented.
Brian May is #26. Mark Knopfler # 44. [sigh]
Rolling Stone has been dead to me since about 1982. It might have been dead to me before that, but I had never read it. When I started reading it, I thought, “This is what everyone thinks is a great R&R magazine? Sheesh.”
How about Ron Nasty and Stig O’hara? Writing parodies that sound like they could be actual songs by the artists being parodied is a special skill. “Hold My Hand, yea yea …”