All great in their own rites. I don't listen to much by any of them at home anymore, but I can appreciate them all while hearing them out and about. AC/DC flat out rocks. You can say you don't like 'em, but there's no denying that Angus Young's tone defines rock to the letter, and Bon Scott's voice was much the same.

Rush is probably the best rock band ever from a technical perspective, but aside from a few songs I really like, I think the overall product tends to suffer from too much technicality, rendering many songs somewhat disjointed. They do get bonus points for keeping the original lineup intact for so long; that really is impressive.

As for Van Halen, we all know Eddie is a guitar legend. Diamond Dave, despite being a freak, is a great rock singer. Wait... On second thought, I guess being a freak makes him a better rocker. I think Alex is a very good drummer, but I dislike the way his playing gets produced on record (hi-hat is always over the top in the mix). The main thing that annoys me after listening to a lot of Van Halen is the background vocals. They always sound the same, and not good at that. Their cover of "Dancing in the Streets" is horrible, in my opinion. Maybe I just don't like that silly song....

Anyway, all three bands boast some of rock's finest musicians/vocalists, and they are all worthy of "great" status in my mind. That said, as good as all those guys are, none of them rank among the tip top of musicians in general. For example, as good a drummer as Neil Peart is, he doesn't touch some of the jazz guys from the 60s and 70s. The popularity of rock music versus other styles probably has a lot to do with the acclaim some of these guys get as masters of their instruments.

They're all better than me. That's for damned sure.