Sorry but there's no comparison here. Janet is a legend and Taylor might be obsolete in a few years, only time will tell. I think there's only going to be one Janet and to compare her to Taylor Swift is laughable at best.

BlackCat1985 said:

What the entire fuck is up with people comparing everybody with the Jacksons. Now they are comparing RN1814 with 1989! One of the reasons I loved the whole RN era was because it was so empowering. It was all about the music. And it actually had a powerful message. 1989 has none of that. 1989 sells may be great but I doubt people will be talking about it 25 years later.

I feel the same way. I hate hearing people compare others to Janet and Michael, I wish they would just stop it already and accept the fact that those two will never be duplicated again.

MotownSubdivision said:

Another example of the media trying to make one of today's stars/ Taylor seem better than they really are by comparing them to someone big from the past. Pathetic. Based on what I heard from 1989, Taylor could've stood to use much more inspiration from the 80s because the album sounds no different from what's heard on the radio now.

I've heard two songs from the new album and it sounds like the typical suburban shopping mall soundtrack. Not really impressed. I don't get the hype about Taylor Swift at all. I guess her core audience is 12 year olds so that explains a lot of the hype.

I should also mention that I can't WAIT until Seanman sees this thread, LOL

this comparison dont even make sense, just because one is titled 1989 and one came out in the year 1989??? mtv must be bored

Graycap23 said:

I think that's the same face that I made when I was reading this stuff, LOL!

Taylor Swift isn't making music for the 40 to 60 old crowd. This generation cross referencing is stupid. Im sure back in the 80's parents thought Janet was a no talent hack compared to what they listened in the 60's.

lazycrockett said:

Taylor Swift isn't making music for the 40 to 60 old crowd. This generation cross referencing is stupid. Im sure back in the 80's parents thought Janet was a no talent hack compared to what they listened in the 60's.

There are plenty of people who are young who like older music and lots of older people who like new music so I have no idea why you're acting like this doesn't happen with music. There's crap music in every generation and all that some here are saying is that there's no comparison of Taylor Swift to Janet. That is all.

SeventeenDayze said:

BlackCat1985 said:

What the entire fuck is up with people comparing everybody with the Jacksons. Now they are comparing RN1814 with 1989! One of the reasons I loved the whole RN era was because it was so empowering. It was all about the music. And it actually had a powerful message. 1989 has none of that. 1989 sells may be great but I doubt people will be talking about it 25 years later.

I feel the same way. I hate hearing people compare others to Janet and Michael, I wish they would just stop it already and accept the fact that those two will never be duplicated again.

THIS

This is just desperate and silly. Taylor is cute but they're nothing alike, someone's on velvet dope...

Fuck outta here with these whack ass comparisons! Until Kanye West stepped onstage and stole her thunder at the MTV Awards several years ago, I didn't know who the hell Taylor Swift was! Okay, so her album went platinum. So freekin' what! Really... like what the hell else is out there to even compete with at this point? It says a lot when Taylor Swift sells a million copies of an album and you can swear it's the Second Coming! How does Taylor Swift stack up against Janet Jackson? She doesn't. Janet made classic albums. Taylor is just Taylor. That's it.

The irony is that Janet sent Taylor flowers the day after the Kanye MTV Awards incident. She says here that she was looking forward to seeing Janet's MJ tribute...

SEANMAN said:

Taylor Swift is words I can't use without upsetting people. Like I just said in the Overrated thread, to each their own. It's cool she's doing her thing, I guess, it just feels weirdly disingenuous to me.

Cerebus said:

Taylor Swift is words I can't use without upsetting people. Like I just said in the Overrated thread, to each their own. It's cool she's doing her thing, I guess, it just feels weirdly disingenuous to me.

Hey Cerebus.

Most of today's artist --from the major labels-- seen disingenuous to me. As they say in the acting biz, never let them catch you acting. At the same time people like what they like... so yes, to each their own.

MickyDolenz said:

-

I see you MickyDolenz and raise you one Mama Mix...

-

-

-

-

From 4:41 and throughout is one of the funkiest moments in her discography. Jimmy slays the keys with this mix. My all time favorite mix of "MYM" and one of my favorite remixes period from her.

-

-

Oh and the Mtv article doesn't even deserve a comment from those of us who know better

^^There's nothing wrong with Taylor, I just never considered her country music. Comparing her with Janet seems kinda random though, not even the same kinda music. Maybe they should have compared her with Tiffany, but Tiffany was not really as popular as Taylor is today. Debbie Gibson was bigger than Tiffany, but Debbie's music does not really relate to Taylor's either.

what even is this thread

thebongobaron said:

what even is this thread

It's like any other thread here. Not everyone is interested in D'Angelo.

Ask Janet to write an album all by herself and see what happens. Think Tiffany back in the day.

Frank Sinatra never wrote any songs. I've never understood what's so important about self writing.

[Edited 12/15/14 11:28am]

MickyDolenz said:

Frank Sinatra never wrote any songs. I've never understood what's so important about self writing.

[Edited 12/15/14 11:28am]

Because it ain't... It's cool if an artist / singer has that talent in his or hers arsenal but it never made or broke anyone who can singing their assess off. Do you really wan't to hear the Gershwin's, Cole Porter, Rogers and Hart, Hoagy Carmichael, Jerome Kern, Eden Ahbez, Paul Williams,

Holland-Dozier-Holland sing the music they wrote? I doubt it... Go ask Dolly Parton why she thinks Whitney Houston single "I'll Always Love You" sold upteem more millions more than the song she penned and recorded.

He or she is a songwriter... so this makes them a true arteest; this sounds just as prentious when some say an artist/musician has been "classically trained". Give me a break... yeah right.

==============

[Edited 12/15/14 18:18pm]

^^It was mainly the rock press like Rolling Stone & Creem in the late 1960s that made self writing a big thing, particularly when the Beatles came around and then the early 70s singer-songwriter thing. I think that is why rock is praised more than other genres where self writing is less or it might be more songwriter for hire or producer/writer driven. Pre-Beatles, not many people really cared if Bing Crosby or Bix Beiderbecke wrote or not. The average listener doesn't either. "It has a good beat and I can dance to it". My mom has a lot of records, but she doesn't read the credits. She only cares about who's singing.

MickyDolenz said:

^^It was mainly the rock press like Rolling Stone & Creem in the late 1960s that made self writing a big thing, particularly when the Beatles came around and then the early 70s singer-songwriter thing. I think that is why rock is praised more than other genres where self writing is less or it might be more songwriter for hire or producer/writer driven. Pre-Beatles, not many people really cared if Bing Crosby or Bix Beiderbecke wrote or not. The average listener doesn't either. "It has a good beat and I can dance to it". My mom has a lot of records, but she doesn't read the credits. She only cares about who's singing.

Oh, and some Gospel, Jazz and Blues artist weren't writing their own shit? Berry, Little Richard, Ike Tuner and others were writing songs before R.S., Cream and the Beatles were smacked on the ass at birth. I could go there about the underlying drivel of what this is all about but I'll reframe. Nobody cares now who wrote and produce what, except liner notes reading music geeks.

TD3 said:

Oh, and some Gospel, Jazz and Blues artist weren't writing their own shit? Berry, Little Richard, Ike Tuner and others were writing songs before R.S., Cream and the Beatles were smacked on the ass at birth. I could go there about the underlying drivel of what this is all about but I'll reframe. Nobody cares now who wrote and produce what, except liner notes reading music geeks.

I don't think there were magazines for gospel, blues, or rock n roll when they were around or at least not any mainstream ones or music magazines in general. There was Billboard and maybe some jazz mags like Downbeat. The general public did not read Billboard. Black performers might have been in Ebony/Jet but they did not write about songwriting, but lifestyle. It was the baby boom generation who started Rolling Stone & Creem.