LightOfArt said:

I don't really see George Michael as someone who had a lot more to give. He certainly had the talent and the voice, so I guess at any time he could have surprised everyone, but the fact is he made two real albums in the last 26 years of his life. He hadn't released a new album for 12 years when he died. In retrospect, he peaked around 1987 to 1990. Still a big loss, of course, but I don't expect we would have got anything very essential from him.

Silvertongue7 said:

LightOfArt said:

Other than the ones mentioned; Amy Winehouse

She had so much more to give

Oh, Amy... Frank and Back To Black were such amazing albums, and then... The biggest tragedy though is that we saw her destroy her life in real time, but it was all just entertainment. So incredibly sad.

So true, and I was just as guilty as everyone consuming this "entertainment".

I think when you're watching someone on tv, you don't realise that there is a human being behind the personality portrayed on tv and in magazines.

I really recommend to any casual Amy fan the documentary that came out in 2012.

LittleBLUECorvette said:

How are the likes of Marvin Gaye, Elvis and Michael Jackson making list? Those guys were 50+ and or peaked years before their deaths. A huge is is someone (IMO) who passes away in the prime of their career or before they can even peak. Sam Cooke, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Tupac, Notorious BIG, Otis Redding, guys like that. I've yet to see Jesse Belvin, Johnny Ace, Chuck Willis, Little Willie John mentioned. Look those guys up if you've never heard of them. Tragic loses in the early days of the developments of Soul music

Definitely a fair point. Which is why I think Geroge Michael and Marvin are bordeline. Marvin was only 44 when he died and had a monster smash a few years prior. So it's hard to say he was "done" or had peaked.

That being said, he did have over 20 years in the biz to make his mark. Which is why he wouldn't be in the "greatest loss" category per se to me.

To you and Panther's point. George Michael is a really tough one. Like Marvin, he fits a tortured soul category, which probably hindered his output.

Also, JoeyC calling out Randy Rhoads is a great, great call. I loved all things hard rock/metal when I was a teenager. But the genre has pretty much left me now. All except those first two Ozzy albums with Randy captaining the ship. Almost all the Ozzy output past Randy's death is laugh out loud bad to me now. (Again, just my own musical tastes). But the Randy albums are completely timeless, master class works.

ThePanther said:

I don't really see George Michael as someone who had a lot more to give. He certainly had the talent and the voice, so I guess at any time he could have surprised everyone, but the fact is he made two real albums in the last 26 years of his life. He hadn't released a new album for 12 years when he died. In retrospect, he peaked around 1987 to 1990. Still a big loss, of course, but I don't expect we would have got anything very essential from him.

Hey Panther,

To echo this point further. Stevie Wonder and Smokey Robinson are my two favorite living artists. But they both appear content to live off their past catalogs at his point.


Totally within their prerogative. They've written the soundtracks to a lot of our lives. Across multiple generations. (Especially Stevie generationally speaking).


But it seems like they've pretty much said what they have to say. Make no mistake, I would love nothing more to be proven wrong.

LightOfArt said:

Silvertongue7 said:

LightOfArt said: Oh, Amy... Frank and Back To Black were such amazing albums, and then... The biggest tragedy though is that we saw her destroy her life in real time, but it was all just entertainment. So incredibly sad.

So true, and I was just as guilty as everyone consuming this "entertainment".

I think when you're watching someone on tv, you don't realise that there is a human being behind the personality portrayed on tv and in magazines.

I really recommend to any casual Amy fan the documentary that came out in 2012.

Hey Light

As a fellow music lover, I watched it even though I'm not really a fan. I love music documentaries like these. Especailly ones like Standing in the Shadows where it highlights the backing musicians more than the stars themselves.


But to the human aspect of it, it's so crazy to see someone self-deteriorate before your eyes and there's basically nothing you can do to prevent it. It was almost a foregone conclusion that her story would end this way.

So incredibly sad.

LittleBLUECorvette said:

How are the likes of Marvin Gaye, Those guys were 50+ and or peaked years before their deaths.

Fair point except for Marvin. He was 45 at the time he passed, and he wasn't a flamboyant song and dance guy. As evidenced by his massive hit less than 2 years before his death, he could have had a successful second (or third) act, like several acts in his generation had throughout the 80s and early 90s.

I get your overall point, though.

namepeace said:

LittleBLUECorvette said:

How are the likes of Marvin Gaye, Elvis and Michael Jackson making list? Those guys were 50+ and or peaked years before their deaths.

Elvis was 42. George Harrison & Tina Turner was older than that when they made a big comeback to the charts with Cloud Nine & Private Dancer and Tom Jones did too. Tony Bennett is another who suddenly became popular again at an older age, like in his 60s or 70s. If Tina had died before that, she likely would have been forgotten by most people today, because Ike & Tina don't get much airplay other than Proud Mary and they had nowhere near the same amount of mainstream success as Tina did after her comeback. That Angela Bassett movie wouldn't have been made either. After being mostly ignored by radio after the 1970s, Barry White had a big hit in the 1990s with Practice What You Preach and was nominated for a Grammy. Johnnie Taylor had later day R&B hits with Good Love & Last Two Dollars and the album they came from wound up being the biggest selling album in Malaco's history.

LittleBLUECorvette said:

namepeace said:

Fair point except for Marvin. He was 45 at the time he passed, and he wasn't a flamboyant song and dance guy. As evidenced by his massive hit less than 2 years before his death, he could have had a successful second (or third) act, like several acts in his generation had throughout the 80s and early 90s.

I get your overall point, though.

MG will always be known for his 70s output. Even tho he had a few in the 80s and arguably more in the 60s then he did in the 70s. Stevie Wonder had just about the same amount of number one hits in the 80s as he did in the 70s yet he's known for his 80s output because that's when he was at his creative peak. Same with Marvin.

You're kind of making my point. Like Stevie, Marvin might be best known for his 70's output but not only known for that. "Sexual Healing" was the first introduction that many 80s kids had to him.

He was already a legend when he died. But we were deprived of other meaningful and/or commercially successful music he could have made in the 80s and maybe beyond.

Plus we can't fully assume that Marvin would have essentially quit recording after the early 90s like Stevie did.

namepeace said:

LittleBLUECorvette said:

namepeace said:

You're kind of making my point. Like Stevie, Marvin might be best known for his 70's output but not only known for that. "Sexual Healing" was the first introduction that many 80s kids had to him.

He was already a legend when he died. But we were deprived of other meaningful and/or commercially successful music he could have made in the 80s and maybe beyond.

Plus we can't fully assume that Marvin would have essentially quit recording after the early 90s like Stevie did.

Darn it. I meant to say Stevie is known for his 70s output lol.

I hear you.

Marvin Gaye was one who was actually still making really great hits as he passed. One could argue if his heyday was the 70's like Stevie Wonder, who still had some great material into the 80's, but either way, had he lived, who knows how long he'd have kept giving what I would consider to be classics.

MJ never really sang much in his last 4 or 5 years that we have thus far been allowed to hear, but the parts that were live in This Is It sounded decent, and those were just rehearsals. But his voice to me sounded closer to his prime than Whitney did to hers when she passed... I certainly think a studio setting would have allowed him to create some more great music.

Phil Collins is in pretty rough shape these days... I think you'd have to be a big fan to sit through his shows for the nostalgia factor. His voice is much higher these days and he can't move onstage anymore. Pretty sad to see his 2004 Montreaux show and where he is now. Hell, even his 2007 Genesis shows weren't bad at all. Sad because he didn't start hitting the bottle until late in life. Haven't heard anything new from him since 2002 unless you count his album of Motown covers. He took a pretty big health hit in about a 5 year span or so.

And I'll mention Stevie because even though he tours and is on TV all the time, can we finally after all this time get some unreleased tracks or a new album or something besides a guest appearance? Just a fan speaking, the man's free to release stuff at his choosing, but come on Stevie....

I know we weren't supposed to mention Prince... BUT.... I have this horribly bud luck of getting having all of my favorite artists who either die, or never release anything new. Prince was the exception, and not only that, he was by far the most ageless of all of them. Looked the same, jammed the same, voice virtually unchanged, and by far the most versatile of my favorites. Looked a little frail the last couple years he was around, but certainly not that bad.

MickyDolenz said:

Sam Cooke
Minnie Riperton
Patsy Cline
Dinah Washington

Johnny Ace

Charlie Christian

Tammi Terrell
Selena
Aaliyah

Karen Carpenter
Marvin Gaye

Jim Croce

Good list, Mick!!!

I think the Bar-Kays would likely have been very different and probably wouldn't have caught on commercially with the original lineup, since they were basically an instrumental group.

Nick Scotti !!!

Jim is the only one i can think of. Died just after releasing one of their best albums...

JoeyC said:

Jimi Hendrix(#1 in my book), Jim Morrison, Tammi Terrell, Amy Winehouse, Michael Jackson, Tupac, Jeff Buckley, Freddie Mercury, Minnie Riperton, and Otis Redding.

On a personal level i would also include Cliff Burton(former bassist of Metallica) and Randy Rhoads.

[Edited 7/17/18 15:00pm]

Co-sign on Jimi. His sound was beginning to change and although he was still a psychadelic rock god, he was inching towards proto-funk rock. The First Rays of the New Rising Sun hinted at this musical direction to some degree (most notably with the song Izabella and some other tracks from the era.

The A&R rep.

Seems like so many mediocre (so-called) artists have been getting signed, and clogging up the industry with mediocrity.

MotorBootyAffair said:

The A&R rep.

Seems like so many mediocre (so-called) artists have been getting signed, and clogging up the industry with mediocrity.

Good call.

With music seemingly cheaper to make, and other factors, the industry apparently sees little need for professionals to find quality artists among the quantities of people making content.

namepeace said:

MotorBootyAffair said:

The A&R rep.

Seems like so many mediocre (so-called) artists have been getting signed, and clogging up the industry with mediocrity.

Good call.

With music seemingly cheaper to make, and other factors, the industry apparently sees little need for professionals to find quality artists among the quantities of people making content.

For real! Most of todays music is utter shite. It all sounds the same and most of these so-called artists can't sing, play an instrument or write anything more than a couple of boring lines. Sad indeed.

Empress said:

namepeace said:

Good call.

With music seemingly cheaper to make, and other factors, the industry apparently sees little need for professionals to find quality artists among the quantities of people making content.

For real! Most of todays music is utter shite. It all sounds the same and most of these so-called artists can't sing, play an instrument or write anything more than a couple of boring lines. Sad indeed.

Yeah; it's unfortunate. There was a time when all you had to do was turn on the radio or video channels to get quality music. We have to dig deeper these days.

I agree with you on Jimi Hendrix.... then also Janis Joplin or Jim Morrison. Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, Hank Williams, Gram Parsons, The Big Booper, Kurt Koban even Ronnie Van Zant and Daune Allman (more recently Amy Winehouse) all passed before their musical journeys seem to have reach their primes.

As far as historical, on the impact side, well Elvis certainly rocked the nation in sadness. It was 20 years later when Princess Diana died that there seem to be that kind of universal sadness.

As far as artists that passed and change the face of music...Bob Marley, John Lennon, Donna Summer.

MickyDolenz said:

I would say Prince, Rick James, Roger Troutman, Donna Summer, and Michael Jackson but I don't really consider them losses because they had long stopped making great music before they died so I really didn't lose anything. If I had known them personally, I would consider it a loss because I would no longer be seeing them anymore.

.

In Prince's case, I see him as the exception. He's the only one that was still making halfway decent music but it was nothing near as great as his stuff from the past. Since he has so much unreleased stuff in the vault dating all the way back to the 1980s, actually, from a music point of view, I see his passing as a gain....as selfish as that may sound.

LittleBLUECorvette said:

How are the likes of Marvin Gaye, Elvis and Michael Jackson making list? Those guys were 50+ and or peaked years before their deaths. A huge is is someone (IMO) who passes away in the prime of their career or before they can even peak. Sam Cooke, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Tupac, Notorious BIG, Otis Redding, guys like that. I've yet to see Jesse Belvin, Johnny Ace, Chuck Willis, Little Willie John mentioned. Look those guys up if you've never heard of them. Tragic loses in the early days of the developments of Soul music

^^ Facts

LittleBLUECorvette said:

How are the likes of Marvin Gaye, Elvis and Michael Jackson making list? Those guys were 50+ and or peaked years before their deaths. A huge is is someone (IMO) who passes away in the prime of their career or before they can even peak. Sam Cooke, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Tupac, Notorious BIG, Otis Redding, guys like that. I've yet to see Jesse Belvin, Johnny Ace, Chuck Willis, Little Willie John mentioned. Look those guys up if you've never heard of them. Tragic loses in the early days of the developments of Soul music

Because they are peoples' opinions? Your opinion is only valid to you. Same as mine is to me. Elvis was 42. Young in my opinion. Who is to say he couldn't have had another comeback special? Lennon murdered. Prince passed and was still making great music to the end, great performer to the end. MJ was still having a good go too when he got offed by Dr Death.

Times have changed, Same as in sports, older legends can still continue and beat the young guys. Hello Roger Federer in tennis, Coming back in Golf Tiger Woods, Keep on Serena Williams. Times change, older now isn't as old as it used to be. James Brown passed as an 'old' man. Aretha passed, great voice at 76 still. Did i want more? yes is the answer. Are they all big losses? Of course they fucking are.

Marrk said:

Well heck I'm going to throw Aaliyah in here, maybe she's already here but for me she's one who we don't know how far she could have gone. Myself, I had just started acknowledging her presences on the planet as someone with possible longevity.