My criteria for inclusion in this poll were:

1. Must have actively recorded/performed in each of the previous five decades ('60, '70s, '80s, '90s, and '00s).

2. Must have not sucked for more than 10 years straight.

3. Must have influenced other artists, who have openly acknowledged such influence.

Criteria 1 excludes Elvis Costello, because he didn't hit the scene until the '70s.

Criteria 2 excludes Elton John, because he hasn't done anything decent since at least the early '80s...more like the mid-'70s.

Criteria 3 excludes Van Morrison, because while you can certainly hear his influence in certain artists, none (at least of which I am aware) have ever credited him as such.

Others quality solo artists (Aretha Franklin, for example) were also eliminated by the above criteria. So, let the debate begin!

Radiohead.

I voted Bowie just 'cause he's my favorite, but I can appreciate the other two.

I pickd Neil

Id consider Leonard Cohen too

Mr. Osterberg

1) Lionel Richie
2) Phil Collins

Iggy's a legitimate option. Good call, though I'd probably place him in the second tier.

Could Emmylou Harris qualify?

gots to be neil young. hes done so many genres of music so well for so long, forgetting most of the 80s.

Actually, she definitely could, but if I'd had my C&W radar up when making this list, I'd have probably included Willie.

Phil Collins was not making music in the 60s, and has sucked since the early 90s.

Yeah, I dig that too.

I went with Neil. Love all three, but overall in terms of my likes, Neil's work over all those decades appeals to me more than the others. Next to the Stones, he occupies the most space on my ipod. Even his weirdo 80s stuff is interesting. Whereas I lost interest in modern Bowie and Dylan pretty much through their 80s and 90s work.

Bowie from the list.

Using that criteria those seem like the best three choices. I think you could add Caetano Veloso and Van Morrison but I'm not complaining.

I'm sure you're wrong that no one has acknowledged a big VM influence. There was recently a huge piece on him in Uncut or Mojo and I'm quite sure that many artists did. And I don't need to hear Nicolai Dunger acknowledge any influence to know that its really strong.

And I'm totally not voting because all three are the best...it just depends on my mood.

You're probably right about Van, but I needed to try and come up with some sort of pseudo-semi-legitimate justification for leaving him off. I love him, but in the final analysis, thought these would be the best three to duke it out. And there is NO DOUBT that Dunger is heavily influenced by Van.

yeah, but what's the criteria for "solo"?

I mean, they all have work that at some point can be largely attributed to another artist (Band, Ronson, Crazy Horse) in their careers.

Fair enough, but I think his output has been way more consistent than Bowie's. Bowie's highs were definitely higher, but man, when Bowie chooses to suck, it's ugly. I'll take a Blah Blah Blah over Never Let Me Down any day of the week.

I'm not a big fan, and I know he ain't too popular on this board, but wouldn't Eric Clapton qualify?

I would say anyone who has done a significant amount of solo work - like Neil Young.

?????

Eric Clapton has objectively sucked since he released "From the Cradle" in 1994.

If by legitimate, you mean, OPEN GARBAGE, you are right.

I guess cos Elvis is dead, he can't be in it.

The answer to this poll is Bob Dylan

Depends on your threshhold for "sucking." I guess it COULD be argued that he's had some decent output over the past decade or so, though I won't be the one making that argument. But yeah, he's primarily a solo guy who's been around for eons and has influenced plenty of marginal guitarists.

I think these criteria exclude everyone.