heathilly said:

DarlingKris said:

heathilly said:

jcurley said: And that's where we can agree to disagree because prince in my eyes was a brilliant pop star and he's much closer to mj than Mozart in so many different Ways they have the same musical roots for one. Classical music is worlds away from popular music. And this connotation of brilliance and classical music is so overblown and needs to be laid to rest. Likening Pop Stars and rock stars to classical composers to legitimize their genius is to speak lowly of the very form of music they operate in. That being said prince was wizard with instruments who also did other things well. Mj was a prodigy at singing and dance and was untouchable there. I appreciate them both for what they were gifted and hard working. I'm fair to both let me just say the worst mj fans have blind adoration for the man and will say anything to exalt mj. The worst prince fan are music pseudo-intellectuals who reek of music elitism because prince autocracy. I am niether I look at them as humans flawed limited in a sense and appreciate their genius. [Edited 10/27/16 11:53am]

"Classical music is worlds away from popular music"
— Well that is one heck of music pseudo-intellectual who reek of music elitism statement
if I ever saw one.

Ultimately Music is about the way it makes you feel (pun intended).
Its immediacy, its ease of absorption makes it stand apart from other artistic expressions.
"Clap your hands and stomp your feet" doesn't pretend to be something else.
Pop never tried to compete with Jazz or Classical music, that's why it's called "pop".
But at McCartney/Lennon or Brian Wilson levels (just to drop the easiest names),
it's an art as subtle and as expressive as any 4-movements symphony.

I received classical musical training. I know my Jazz.

Prince IS closer to Mozart.
It took weeks for MJ to come up with a good song. Years to put out an album.
Prince shat "When Doves Cry" in 24 hours, intro, background vocals and overdubs.

I REPEAT: "When Doves Cry", for all its revolutionary sound and arrangements that made it go down in history, was made in one day.
On the other hand, you have Michael, Quincy and Bruce Swedien taking a month on a whole song.


Just visit Princevault, you'll inevitably fall on a paragraph that says something like :

Movie Star
Initial tracking took place on 27 March 1986 at Prince's Galpin Blvd Home Studio, Chanhassen, MN, USA (two days after Love And Sex, on the same day as A Place In Heaven and Witness 4 The Prosecution).


The guy plays, sings, arranges, overdubs Movie Star, A Place In Heaven and Witness 4 The Prosecution,
songs that are amongst the very best The Vault has to offer, in the same fucking day.
And these unbelievable paragraphs are so frequent in Princevault my friend, it makes your head spin.

Oh, wait. He produced them and mixed them too.

Now go on and try to convince us Prince is closer to MJ than good ol' Wolfgang.
To lay down songs at this rate, you have to write them "as they were taken on dictation",
to quote Peter Shaffer's Salieri.

[Edited 10/27/16 13:12pm]

Noodled24 said:

^ Yeah Dylan won it. That's sort of what I was refering to. I have twitter.

[Edited 10/27/16 10:46am]

...but maybe you don't have digested that much Dylan records.

heathilly said:

jcurley said: And that's where we can agree to disagree because prince in my eyes was a brilliant pop star and he's much closer to mj than Mozart in so many different Ways they have the same musical roots for one. Classical music is worlds away from popular music. And this connotation of brilliance and classical music is so overblown and needs to be laid to rest. Likening Pop Stars and rock stars to classical composers to legitimize their genius is to speak lowly of the very form of music they operate in. That being said prince was wizard with instruments who also did other things well. Mj was a prodigy at singing and dance and was untouchable there. I appreciate them both for what they were gifted and hard working. I'm fair to both let me just say the worst mj fans have blind adoration for the man and will say anything to exalt mj. The worst prince fan are music pseudo-intellectuals who reek of music elitism because prince autocracy. I am niether I look at them as humans flawed limited in a sense and appreciate their genius. [Edited 10/27/16 11:53am]

You're right.

NorthC said:

heathilly said:

Songwriting has the added dimensions of music and enunciation that's adds so much to just a written work. Its a whole different artform together just because two things have something in common don't make them the samething. Squares shouldn't be forced into round holes just because there both shapes. [Edited 10/27/16 11:51am]

Novels and poetry and theatre are different art forms. Shakespeare and Moliere are considered literature and their works were meant for the theatre. Poetry can be read before an audience. So if literature can acted, read out loud, then it can be put to music as well. The medieval troubadours who wrote and sang about King Arthur did just that.

Yes thats all fine and well but songs are meant to be heard written text is read. Do you understannd that? Yes there are similarities but like I stated before ther two completely different art forms. But they chose to give bob dylan the award and thats their decision to do that. Do I consider his work literature? No

jcurley said:

DarlingKris said:

It's alll written for a mass audience n that's fine but it shows. You don't sell music on his scale by releasing art. He's the music equivalent of macdonalds. I don't dislike him I simply don't register him. He's not in my frame of reference, I just don't like prince being drawn into it.

Yes that applies to anyone working in popular music they are the fast food chains of music sold as products by giant corprations from prince stevie wonder the beatles all of them its all business. All these people have sold 100 of millions of records. And yes lmao you are a joke comparing mj to brittany spears? Prince a better dance? Maybe you are that delusional but thats problem with some prince fans they cant have a mature sensible convo. Such sensitivity lol smh Prince is your fave I get it but im just having an objective convo dear.

[Edited 10/27/16 14:12pm]

heathilly said:

LBrent said:

I can't...Lol

There's an old southern American saying that always reminds me of these MJ vs P comparisons..."Don't woke em, let em slept".

P's only competition was ever himself. I'm really ok that MJ fans don't see the vast difference...more P for me. LMAO

There somethings prince is better than mj and vice versa prince is not the untouchable genius you think he is. But keep drinking that purple kool aid. Theres comfort in blissful ignorance I hear.

[Edited 10/27/16 9:35am]

Um. lol. After nearly 40 years being a P fan, before and during which I also heard and saw MJ perform live (although those concerts weren't my idea), I can only say that I was bored during MJ's live performances, but seeing P perform live never disappointed me so...M'kay.

NorthC said:

heathilly said:

Songwriting has the added dimensions of music and enunciation that's adds so much to just a written work. Its a whole different artform together just because two things have something in common don't make them the samething. Squares shouldn't be forced into round holes just because there both shapes. [Edited 10/27/16 11:51am]

Novels and poetry and theatre are different art forms. Shakespeare and Moliere are considered literature and their works were meant for the theatre. Poetry can be read before an audience. So if literature can acted, read out loud, then it can be put to music as well. The medieval troubadours who wrote and sang about King Arthur did just that.

I'm with you.

bonatoc said:

bonatoc said:

heathilly said:

jcurley said: And that's where we can agree to disagree because prince in my eyes was a brilliant pop star and he's much closer to mj than Mozart in so many different Ways they have the same musical roots for one. Classical music is worlds away from popular music. And this connotation of brilliance and classical music is so overblown and needs to be laid to rest. Likening Pop Stars and rock stars to classical composers to legitimize their genius is to speak lowly of the very form of music they operate in. That being said prince was wizard with instruments who also did other things well. Mj was a prodigy at singing and dance and was untouchable there. I appreciate them both for what they were gifted and hard working. I'm fair to both let me just say the worst mj fans have blind adoration for the man and will say anything to exalt mj. The worst prince fan are music pseudo-intellectuals who reek of music elitism because prince autocracy. I am niether I look at them as humans flawed limited in a sense and appreciate their genius. [Edited 10/27/16 11:53am]

"Classical music is worlds away from popular music"
— Well that is one heck of music pseudo-intellectual who reek of music elitism statement
if I ever saw one.

Ultimately Music is about the way it makes you feel (pun intended).
Its immediacy, its ease of absorption makes it stand apart from other artistic expressions.
"Clap your hands and stomp your feet" doesn't pretend to be something else.
Pop never tried to compete with Jazz or Classical music, that's why it's called "pop".
But at McCartney/Lennon or Brian Wilson levels (just to drop the easiest names),
it's an art as subtle and as expressive as any 4-movements symphony.

I received classical musical training. I know my Jazz.

Prince IS closer to Mozart.
It took weeks for MJ to come up with a good song. Years to put out an album.
Prince shat "When Doves Cry" in 24 hours, intro, background vocals and overdubs.

I REPEAT: "When Doves Cry", for all its revolutionary sound and arrangements that made it go down in history, was made in one day.
On the other hand, you have Michael, Quincy and Bruce Swedien taking a month on a whole song.


Just visit Princevault, you'll inevitably fall on a paragraph that says something like :

Movie Star
Initial tracking took place on 27 March 1986 at Prince's Galpin Blvd Home Studio, Chanhassen, MN, USA (two days after Love And Sex, on the same day as A Place In Heaven and Witness 4 The Prosecution).


The guy plays, sings, arranges, overdubs Movie Star, A Place In Heaven and Witness 4 The Prosecution,
songs that are amongst the very best The Vault has to offer, in the same fucking day.
And these unbelievable paragraphs are so frequent in Princevault my friend, it makes your head spin.

Oh, wait. He produced them and mixed them too.

Now go on and try to convince us Prince is closer to MJ than good ol' Wolfgang.
To lay down songs at this rate, you have to write them "as they were taken on dictation",
to quote Peter Shaffer's Salieri.

[Edited 10/27/16 13:12pm]

When Im speaking of classical music I speaking about the structure, standards so much of it is vastly different pop music today and the past 100 years for that matter. As far as mj and prince creative methods and process they were different one worked alone and tried to shit out (your words not mine) as much as possible the other tried to emulate walt disney having a and b teams to compete to come up with the best thing sculpt something over time. One method does not indicate greater genius than the other it just indicates different methods. Im just repeating myself with you people an artist being autocratic (prince) the lone genius working by candlelight at night is so romantized is more valued than they delegator is a fallacy and the end product is what matters at the end of the day. You made no mention of the fallacy brillance and genius being associtated with classical composers. Why does a popstar need to be likend to an old dead white guy to legitimize their genius? But since you did it Ill do the same. Wouldnt mj being the child prodigy and unorthedox compostion methods be actually closer to mozarts story than prince. Not that it matters any way.

I think your so caught up in the one man band thing any other method of creation pales in comparsion if thats the case this convo is pointless to have as I obviously dissagree. One man bands are impressive to say the least though But as the old saying goes two heads are better than one and prince best music ussally came out of collaberation no matter how small. And also all the vault songs I heard so far to me add nothing of great regard to prince canon which dove off a cliff 90s onward but im sure theres some inspired works in there amongst the trash. Cant wait to hear them.

[Edited 10/27/16 14:25pm]

LBrent said:

heathilly said:

There somethings prince is better than mj and vice versa prince is not the untouchable genius you think he is. But keep drinking that purple kool aid. Theres comfort in blissful ignorance I hear.

[Edited 10/27/16 9:35am]

Um. lol. After nearly 40 years being a P fan, before and during which I also heard and saw MJ perform live (although those concerts weren't my idea), I can only say that I was bored during MJ's live performances, but seeing P perform live never disappointed me so...M'kay.

Nothing wrong with a personal perference Im just being objective and your comment was irrevleant to mine I was speaking about there indvidual skills.

[Edited 10/27/16 14:16pm]

LBrent said:

heathilly said:

LBrent said:

Um. lol. After nearly 40 years being a P fan, before and during which I also heard and saw MJ perform live (although those concerts weren't my idea), I can only say that I was bored during MJ's live performances, but seeing P perform live never disappointed me so...M'kay.

Nothing wrong with a personal perference Im just being objective and your comment was irrevleant to mine I was speaking about there indvidual skills.

No you're not. You're petronizing everyone.
You're full of clichés. And may I add, on the verge of being a troll.

You're talking about "end product", "Disney".
If that's what music is to you, fine. But don't try to impose your biased views
as if they were some ultimate and definitive statement on who is a genius and who is not.

As for "being objective" and "individual skills", it doesn't take Stevie Wonder
to see that Prince had way more skills than MJ, and therefore closer to the definition of "genius":

A genius is a person who displays exceptional intellectual ability, creative productivity, universality in genres or originality, typically to a degree that is associated with the achievement of new advances in a domain of knowledge.

bonatoc said:

heathilly said:

Nothing wrong with a personal perference Im just being objective and your comment was irrevleant to mine I was speaking about there indvidual skills.

No you're not. You're petronizing everyone.
You're full of clichés. And may I add, on the verge of being a troll.

You're talking about "end product", "Disney".
If that's what music is to you, fine. But don't try to impose your biased views
as if they were some ultimate and definitive statement on who is a genius and who is not.

As for "being objective" and "individual skills", it doesn't take Stevie Wonder
to see that Prince had way more skills than MJ, and therefore closer to the definition of "genius":

A genius is a person who displays exceptional intellectual ability, creative productivity, universality in genres or originality, typically to a degree that is associated with the achievement of new advances in a domain of knowledge.

Bonatoc... I think your confused let me clear some things up for you. And Ill add bullet points to make my point clearer.

1. (end product) Im referring to the art the fans interact with the music thats offically released. Whats wrong with that?

2. (Disney) I was speaking about a process in which walt disney created where he pitted two groups against another to foster competition to create the best art thats a method Mj emulated to create his art his music. you know with rod vs mj and such

3.(Objective) I fail to see how I am not being objective.

4.(individual skills) This was from a comment that was just a mere mention I didnt even go in depth on this. I was just sayin there are somethings prince does much better than mj musicanship songwriting and vice versa mj vocals and dance. Now this you can call an opinion but I beileve most people would agree with this. Even you maybe?

5. This is my opinion you stated yours prince and mj are geniuses prince more musical mj more vocally and performance wise.

I hope this cleared some of this terrible confusion up for you bonatoc. This convo really went off the rails when I said prince spot on this rollingstone list is fine but mj needs to be top 10. I guess the fandom in some people went crazy. All I did was respond.

[Edited 10/27/16 15:11pm]

NorthC said:

I just sooooooo wish people would... Shut! The! Fuck! Up! About! Michael! Jackson! On! A! Forum! That's! Called PRINCE: MUSIC AND MORE! For! A! Change!!!! For crying out loud! I'd rather go through a hundred pages of Prince In The Bedroom than seeing this shit over and over again!

ditto

NorthC said:

I just sooooooo wish people would... Shut! The! Fuck! Up! About! Michael! Jackson! On! A! Forum! That's! Called PRINCE: MUSIC AND MORE! For! A! Change!!!! For crying out loud! I'd rather go through a hundred pages of Prince In The Bedroom than seeing this shit over and over again!

Don't know what some think coming to a PRINCE fan board and say things like "he's overrated", "not that deep", "screams when he sings", "Prince fans are so sensitive, can't have a mature convo and are just biased towards him", etc. and expect everyone to agree with them especially when they constantly to try to compare him to MJ. Just sayin'.

[Edited 10/27/16 16:32pm]

NorthC said:

heathilly said:

Songwriting has the added dimensions of music and enunciation that's adds so much to just a written work. Its a whole different artform together just because two things have something in common don't make them the samething. Squares shouldn't be forced into round holes just because there both shapes. [Edited 10/27/16 11:51am]

Novels and poetry and theatre are different art forms. Shakespeare and Moliere are considered literature and their works were meant for the theatre. Poetry can be read before an audience. So if literature can acted, read out loud, then it can be put to music as well. The medieval troubadours who wrote and sang about King Arthur did just that.

Lyrics are definitely poetry.

Once you hear those lyrics set to music, it's often difficult to separate the two. To judge it purely as literature. It's sort of like awarding a prize to a book... but because you liked the movie.

Dylan did/does a lot for music. He should be recognized. But equally there are people who have done far more for literiture than Dylan.

^ Thanks for the clarification. You have some valid points, but still... When I hear the "Thriller" or the "Bad" outtakes, it's clear to me that, for all MJ's talents, the material, both in terms of quality and quantity, is really not up to Prince's 1986 production.

"Dream Factory", "Camille" and "Crystal Ball" are all made of strong artistic statements.
MJ and Quincy were kind of prisoners of the "Off The Wall" (the album) structure, and even if they pushed the envelope further with the albums that followed, the blockbuster aiming is blatant.
Under this aspect, MJ's albums are more entertainment "products" than art.

As for the singing skills, it's really open to debate. His vocal style is derivative of Diana Ross's.
MJ perfectioned the MJ style to death. But it was still MJ singing. Prince was willing to go further. The Camille voice isn't just a byproduct of speeding the tape, the interpretation is different.
Prince created many vocal personas. MJ had way less. It's obvious that Prince could not sing "Man In The Mirror". But it works both ways: MJ could not sing "A Place In Heaven", or "I Could Not Take The Place Of Your Man", or "The Most Beautiful Girl In The World" and its multi-octave jump near the end.

Prince tried more stuff, and most of its trials were successful. In terms of balls and courage, there is no doubt in my mind that Prince was the most adventurous and willing to experiment.
If Temperton/Jackson/Jones are Disney, then Prince is Miyazaki.

Now who's the real artist (genius)? The one who found a genius formula then sticked to it all of his life, or the one who boldly reinvented himself with each passing year, without perverting its work to be more digestible by the masses?

I think MJ dance skills are incredible, but again, they don't compare to what Prince was capable of if we're speaking of entertainer's craft.
Prince was doing splits, swooshes across the stage, jumps and twirls, and his voice remained impeccable during two hours.
MJ's voice live leaved a lot to be desired. So much that at one point, he had to use playback tapes on stage.
MJ was never able to ad lib on stage. When he tried, it was not that convincing. On the other hand, Prince could reinvent the main melody of a song on the spot. And it would come up with a new approach for it almost every night.

Prince gave tons of concerts. MJ stage career almost pales in comparison.

As for the dance, MJ had the Motown anniversary epiphany, but I'm sorry to say that, after that, he just repeated the same moves again and again during the rest of his career.
Everyone thought he had invented a style, but that only shows the public ignorance.

To be fair, MJ expanded Bob Fosse's vocabulary, but still, he didn't broke as much ground as it is commonly believed. MJ was just properly marketed to appear like the inventor of these moves.
In reality, MJ studied Bob Fosse, Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly to death. He certainly had a raw talent, but he mainly mixed and matched existing dance gimmicks. His energy was impressive, but one could argue that it was one of a sexual repressed person: MJ moves have never been sensual.
OK, he introduced the crotch grabbing, but that's more of a gimmick than dance. He didn't invent Moonwalk. He didn't invent pointe either. Heck, judging by this video it may look like he didn't invent shit, just borrowed.

Let's not mistake the world success MJ got by properly marketing his talents, as undeniable as they are.
MJ was a sampler. Prince was a creator.

[Edited 10/27/16 16:28pm]

2olskool4u said:

You two MJ freaks need to fuck off back to fairy land and talk about your 'karaoke' singer somewhere else!

Or you can get the fuck off out of this thread if it bothers you so much.
That will work too.

bonatoc said:

And it always comes down to P vs. MJ.

heathilly said:

LBrent said:

Um. lol. After nearly 40 years being a P fan, before and during which I also heard and saw MJ perform live (although those concerts weren't my idea), I can only say that I was bored during MJ's live performances, but seeing P perform live never disappointed me so...M'kay.

Nothing wrong with a personal perference Im just being objective and your comment was irrevleant to mine I was speaking about there indvidual skills.

[Edited 10/27/16 14:16pm]

I was being objective, darlin. You're so pretty, but the fact remains that MJ, Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson, Justin Beiber and that ilk were marketted to be mainstream successes. P simply was only mainstream in select periods. He's clearly an acquired taste for a mature palate. No shame in that. I maintain that MJ was for the masses, like McDs...P was more like a gourmet meal prepared by a world class chef. You can get a hamburger with piping hot "bell fries" straight from the fryer so the salt sticks at McDs and eat it and enjoy it, but a hamburger prepared by Wolfgang Puck won't be everyone's cup of tea...some may even turn up their noses at the truffle fries...S'ok.

Honestly, I categorize P as a "luxury brand and " sorta mysterious and inaccessible to some, whether by $ or simply modest taste and musical intellect"...not for everyone.

I'm happy with that.

[Edited 10/27/16 16:54pm]

Noodled24 said:

NorthC said:

heathilly said: Novels and poetry and theatre are different art forms. Shakespeare and Moliere are considered literature and their works were meant for the theatre. Poetry can be read before an audience. So if literature can acted, read out loud, then it can be put to music as well. The medieval troubadours who wrote and sang about King Arthur did just that.

Lyrics are definitely poetry.

Once you hear those lyrics set to music, it's often difficult to separate the two. To judge it purely as literature. It's sort of like awarding a prize to a book... but because you liked the movie.

Dylan did/does a lot for music. He should be recognized. But equally there are people who have done far more for literiture than Dylan.

Lyrics can be poetry but once again two different art forms do books win grammys because of musical writing styles? No. Two different things. He couldve got a nobel for art but not literature. thats just my opinion.

heathilly said:

Noodled24 said:

Lyrics are definitely poetry.

Once you hear those lyrics set to music, it's often difficult to separate the two. To judge it purely as literature. It's sort of like awarding a prize to a book... but because you liked the movie.

Dylan did/does a lot for music. He should be recognized. But equally there are people who have done far more for literiture than Dylan.

Lyrics can be poetry but once again two different art forms do books win grammys because of musical writing styles? No. Two different things. He couldve got a nobel for art but not literature. thats just my opinion.

You're absolutely right.

Um. But now that I think about it...P did win an OSCAR...So, you're right. P and MJ were in the same league.

Wait...MJ never won an Oscar...Nevermind.

Hmmm...

morningsong said:

bonatoc said:

^ Thanks for the clarification. You have some valid points, but still... When I hear the "Thriller" or the "Bad" outtakes, it's clear to me that, for all MJ's talents, the material, both in terms of quality and quantity, is really not up to Prince's 1986 production.

"Dream Factory", "Camille" and "Crystal Ball" are all made of strong artistic statements.
MJ and Quincy were kind of prisoners of the "Off The Wall" (the album) structure, and even if they pushed the envelope further with the albums that followed, the blockbuster aiming is blatant.
Under this aspect, MJ's albums are more entertainment "products" than art.

As for the singing skills, it's really open to debate. His vocal style is derivative of Diana Ross's.
MJ perfectioned the MJ style to death. But it was still MJ singing. Prince was willing to go further. The Camille voice isn't just a byproduct of speeding the tape, the interpretation is different.
Prince created many vocal personas. MJ had way less. It's obvious that Prince could not sing "Man In The Mirror". But it works both ways: MJ could not sing "A Place In Heaven", or "I Could Not Take The Place Of Your Man", or "The Most Beautiful Girl In The World" and its multi-octave jump near the end.

Prince tried more stuff, and most of its trials were successful. In terms of balls and courage, there is no doubt in my mind that Prince was the most adventurous and willing to experiment.
If Temperton/Jackson/Jones are Disney, then Prince is Miyazaki.

Now who's the real artist (genius)? The one who found a genius formula then sticked to it all of his life, or the one who boldly reinvented himself with each passing year, without perverting its work to be more digestible by the masses?

I think MJ dance skills are incredible, but again, they don't compare to what Prince was capable of if we're speaking of entertainer's craft.
Prince was doing splits, swooshes across the stage, jumps and twirls, and his voice remained impeccable during two hours.
MJ's voice live leaved a lot to be desired. So much that at one point, he had to use playback tapes on stage.
MJ was never able to ad lib on stage. When he tried, it was not that convincing. On the other hand, Prince could reinvent the main melody of a song on the spot. And it would come up with a new approach for it almost every night.

Prince gave tons of concerts. MJ stage career almost pales in comparison.

As for the dance, MJ had the Motown anniversary epiphany, but I'm sorry to say that, after that, he just repeated the same moves again and again during the rest of his career.
Everyone thought he had invented a style, but that only shows the public ignorance.

To be fair, MJ expanded Bob Fosse's vocabulary, but still, he didn't broke as much ground as it is commonly believed. MJ was just properly marketed to appear like the inventor of these moves.
In reality, MJ studied Bob Fosse, Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly to death. He certainly had a raw talent, but he mainly mixed and matched existing dance gimmicks. His energy was impressive, but one could argue that it was one of a sexual repressed person: MJ moves have never been sensual.
OK, he introduced the crotch grabbing, but that's more of a gimmick than dance. He didn't invent Moonwalk. He didn't invent pointe either. Heck, judging by this video it may look like he didn't invent shit, just borrowed.

Let's not mistake the world success MJ got by properly marketing his talents, as undeniable as they are.
MJ was a sampler. Prince was a creator.

[Edited 10/27/16 16:28pm]

1. I would say yes these are some valid critcism of mj but where I just cant meet you is where you say mjs work is an entertaining product and prince art. Thats a condecending statement they both produced art that was entertaining. Its not a either or thing. But thats your opinion and you have your right to it. I can see you dont consider mj to be genius just a talented person but I see his genius.

2.I wouldnt call prince a creator at all hes much more of a remixer of sly stone james brown santana jimi etc. Essenstially taking the horns out of james brown song in place of sythesizers and add drum machines you have a prince song. His influences are worn on his sleeve where as I think mj created something more unique performance wise and musically the songs he wrote are very orginal and uniquely him yes theres some bob fosse in his dance but mj style is uniquely him. I would say prince is like a tossed salad of influences very easy to pick apart where as mj is like a smoothie much harder to decipher his influences besides the obvious james brown.

3.Also when it comes to prince improv I think you to thank mj for that it all started with that time when they both were a james brown show and mj went up killed it than prince went up and made a fool of himself. There were reports he was super embarrassed and mad at mj and wanted to run over him with his car. Crazy I know but from than on prince was always on if you know what I mean ready for anything.

4. Mj could improv and did it very well that james brown show for example or the little refrain he did at the end of earth song at brunei. He just didnt do it very often because yes he had an obsseion with perfection. And as far as his dancing and him expanding the vocab he came up with his own style of dance that unquely his. Someone can imatate mj moves and people would know there doing mj. Hes the only person in the popular music realm inducted in the dance hall of fame. And he insirped so millions of dancers the way you might say prince inspired musicans. Thats gotta count for something. Prince wasnt a dancer he danced thats the difference between the two the gap is like mjs musicanship compareed to prince is cavernous mjs abilty to dance compared to prince is cavrernous. Even prince said mj got the dance I got the music.

5.But really it boils down to what were these artist goals as individuals? Prince wanted to follow his muse and do whatever he wanted and he did that. Mj wanted to be the biggest star and make music that would appeal to everyone and he did that. And thats where you really cant compare them because they had different perceptions of what success was for them. So being experimental to point of being esoteric would be a failure for MJ but a success for prince. See when you judge them you cant really use the same scale of mesaurement.

LBrent said:

heathilly said:

Nothing wrong with a personal perference Im just being objective and your comment was irrevleant to mine I was speaking about there indvidual skills.

[Edited 10/27/16 14:16pm]

I was being objective, darlin. You're so pretty, but the fact remains that MJ, Britney Spears, Jessica Simpson, Justin Beiber and that ilk were marketted to be mainstream successes. P simply was only mainstream in select periods. He's clearly an acquired taste for a mature palate. No shame in that. I maintain that MJ was for the masses, like McDs...P was more like a gourmet meal prepared by a world class chef. You can get a hamburger with piping hot "bell fries" straight from the fryer so the salt sticks at McDs and eat it and enjoy it, but a hamburger prepared by Wolfgang Puck won't be everyone's cup of tea...some may even turn up their noses at the truffle fries...S'ok.

Honestly, I categorize P as a "luxury brand and " sorta mysterious and inaccessible to some, whether by $ or simply modest taste and musical intellect"...not for everyone.

I'm happy with that.

[Edited 10/27/16 16:54pm]

It funny when people call an artist who sold 100 million records not for the mainstream. If that makes you feel like hes all yours and you discovered a great secret believe what you want. And of course mj brittany spears justin beiber are marketed to hell there pop stars. As are any other artist you consider luxuary artist who has made an impact cuturally and musically. lol And you fall right into the stereotype of the worst type of prince fan pseudo-intellectual and to dumb to know it. But do you boo