New topic
Printable
|
jbell said: TheBigBang said: That's a good point. You can imagine Prince doing something like "One More Try," but you could never picture George Michael doing "Endorphinmachine." And that's what separates the two. Prince can do ANYTHING musically. To even try and compare the two, especially with how somber George Michael has been for the last 15 years or more, [Mike Tyson]is just ludicrous.[/Mike Tyson] [Edited 7/24/05 7:35am] "...especially with how somber George Michael has been for the last 15 years or more, [Mike Tyson]is just ludicrous." Oh really, maybe you should check the charts in England: 1998 "Outside" #2 UK 1999 "As" (with Mary J. Blige) #4 UK from Greatest Hits (Whitney Houston album) 2000 "If I Told You That" (with Whitney Houston) #9 UK from Patience 2002 "Freeek!" #7 UK 2002 "Shoot the Dog" #12 UK 2004 "Amazing" #4 UK 2004 "Flawless (Go to the City)" #8 UK 2004 "Round Here" #32 UK [Edited 7/24/05 18:36pm] PRINCE: Come On" (as ) (1998) #65 UK "1999" (re-issue) (January 1999) #40 US; #10 UK; #47 Australia "1999" (re-issue) (December 1999) #40 UK "Musicology" (2004) #29 Australia "Call My Name" (2004) #75 US "Cinnamon Girl" (2004) #43 UK [Edited 7/24/05 18:41pm] http://en.wikipedia.org/w...8singer%29 [Edited 7/24/05 18:52pm] George Michael's ability to chart higher in the UK over the last 7 years doesn't have anything to do with comparing a greatest hits package from either artist. Based on the original question, I still choose Prince. More hits that cover a longer career, with just better sounding songs and more diversity. |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
I think Goerge's copy of 'Careless Whisper' is ok but Not as good as Prince.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Again, if comparing "greatest hits" collections you need to compare Prince "The Hits" instead of "The Very Best of Prince". That collection destroys poor George Michaels. 2ndly, what do charts matter? None at all. "New Power slide...." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: I would imagine that George Michael is pretty comfortable in his own skin. Why would he have to duplicate Prince to prove his worth? Michael is a very capable musician in his own right, and has covered quite a bit of musical ground. And let's, please, kill the idea that Prince has mastered all these different genres of music. We all know he pretty well butchered 'rap' for the better part of six years. What the hell are you talking about ? george Michael a capable musician ? When Madonna picks a guitar and plays four chords everybody goes "wow she is a great guitar player" ! It is really sad most people do not know anymore what a real musician is. George Michael imagines melodies in his mind and then goes to the studio and sings them to his musicians who reproduce the melody and the harmonies ! That's his way of working. He has an army (like Robbie Williams) of REAL musicians who make something out of what he has in mind. Whereas there are guys like Marcus miller or Prince who can reproduce the whole tune by themselves in the studio ? By playing real instruments (bass, drums, guitar, keyboards etc)... 30 years agao a good musician was Jimmy hendrix or Miles Davis, in 2005, George Michael is called a good musician. How sad ! It says a lot about how the level of music has kept decreasing for the last 20 years. Il n'y a pas de sentiment plus exaltant que celui d'appartenir à une nation si diverse, si libre et si douée pour le bonheur. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
BeautifulFrance said: violator said: I would imagine that George Michael is pretty comfortable in his own skin. Why would he have to duplicate Prince to prove his worth? Michael is a very capable musician in his own right, and has covered quite a bit of musical ground. And let's, please, kill the idea that Prince has mastered all these different genres of music. We all know he pretty well butchered 'rap' for the better part of six years. What the hell are you talking about ? george Michael a capable musician ? When Madonna picks a guitar and plays four chords everybody goes "wow she is a great guitar player" ! It is really sad most people do not know anymore what a real musician is. George Michael imagines melodies in his mind and then goes to the studio and sings them to his musicians who reproduce the melody and the harmonies ! That's his way of working. He has an army (like Robbie Williams) of REAL musicians who make something out of what he has in mind. Whereas there are guys like Marcus miller or Prince who can reproduce the whole tune by themselves in the studio ? By playing real instruments (bass, drums, guitar, keyboards etc)... 30 years agao a good musician was Jimmy hendrix or Miles Davis, in 2005, George Michael is called a good musician. How sad ! It says a lot about how the level of music has kept decreasing for the last 20 years. Well said. And this doesn't diminish George Michael's capacity as a vocalist. He's got a great voice. Also, in regards to VBOP, contracts have nothing to do with it, jbell. VBOP was a completely unnecessary release, as it contained nothing new or different from The Hits/The B-Sides. It was just Warner's attempt to make some quick money off of Prince's sure-fire hits. Like BeautifulFrance said, if you're comparing hits packages, you have to use The Hits/The B-Sides. So, putting that against "Ladies & Gentlemen..." would make Prince the winner. And, yeah, I can't believe I'm still talking about this, either. Somebody get me a life. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BeautifulFrance said: violator said: I would imagine that George Michael is pretty comfortable in his own skin. Why would he have to duplicate Prince to prove his worth? Michael is a very capable musician in his own right, and has covered quite a bit of musical ground. And let's, please, kill the idea that Prince has mastered all these different genres of music. We all know he pretty well butchered 'rap' for the better part of six years. What the hell are you talking about ? george Michael a capable musician ? When Madonna picks a guitar and plays four chords everybody goes "wow she is a great guitar player" ! It is really sad most people do not know anymore what a real musician is. George Michael imagines melodies in his mind and then goes to the studio and sings them to his musicians who reproduce the melody and the harmonies ! That's his way of working. He has an army (like Robbie Williams) of REAL musicians who make something out of what he has in mind. Whereas there are guys like Marcus miller or Prince who can reproduce the whole tune by themselves in the studio ? By playing real instruments (bass, drums, guitar, keyboards etc)... 30 years agao a good musician was Jimmy hendrix or Miles Davis, in 2005, George Michael is called a good musician. How sad ! It says a lot about how the level of music has kept decreasing for the last 20 years. You obviously don't know much about George Michael as he plays keyboards, bass and guitar. He writes almost all of his music and on many of the tracks plays the majority of the instruments. Again, he is a capable musician. He isn't a virtuoso and to my knowledge he doesn't play over 20 different instruments. But your statement above reveals an ignorance about what it is he actually does. I love great musicianship as much as the next person, but it begins and ends for me with the songs. Obviously I'm a Prince fan. I'm also a musician. So I can appreciate what Prince brings to the table in that regard. But all the musicianship in the world can't save vapid crap like 'New Power Soul' or 'Chaos and Disorder'. What George Michael does as a musician is more than adequate to represent his songs. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Comparing VBOP with L&G isn't fair,because U already know George
will win this one...and some here already said that U have 2 compare his Best of with The hits! But I do consider George 2 be a great performer and songwriter, his unplugged was a masterpiece!!! His last album was more consistend than Musicology..but Musicology had some songs that were better. But I also think it's much easier 2 build up a career with only 5 albums in almost 20 years(M.Jackson also does it this way) then 2 put out 15 or more,there will always be some that aren't that great!!! And sure Prince is an alround musician and performer,(who else can do what he does??)but that doesn't mean some other artists can't be great in what they do. Love4oneanother | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: BeautifulFrance said: What the hell are you talking about ? george Michael a capable musician ? When Madonna picks a guitar and plays four chords everybody goes "wow she is a great guitar player" ! It is really sad most people do not know anymore what a real musician is. George Michael imagines melodies in his mind and then goes to the studio and sings them to his musicians who reproduce the melody and the harmonies ! That's his way of working. He has an army (like Robbie Williams) of REAL musicians who make something out of what he has in mind. Whereas there are guys like Marcus miller or Prince who can reproduce the whole tune by themselves in the studio ? By playing real instruments (bass, drums, guitar, keyboards etc)... 30 years agao a good musician was Jimmy hendrix or Miles Davis, in 2005, George Michael is called a good musician. How sad ! It says a lot about how the level of music has kept decreasing for the last 20 years. You obviously don't know much about George Michael as he plays keyboards, bass and guitar. He writes almost all of his music and on many of the tracks plays the majority of the instruments. Again, he is a capable musician. He isn't a virtuoso and to my knowledge he doesn't play over 20 different instruments. But your statement above reveals an ignorance about what it is he actually does. I love great musicianship as much as the next person, but it begins and ends for me with the songs. Obviously I'm a Prince fan. I'm also a musician. So I can appreciate what Prince brings to the table in that regard. But all the musicianship in the world can't save vapid crap like 'New Power Soul' or 'Chaos and Disorder'. What George Michael does as a musician is more than adequate to represent his songs. Bullshit. George Michael has talked openly several times about his way of working in the studio. He sings a song then his musicians in the studio find the chords and the right harmonies. You were probably not aware of that. He said as well that it is a way for him to filter his melodies as he remembers only the best ones. And come on what he plays is very basic and often very repititive. I'm a musician as well by the way. You are not the only one here. [Edited 7/25/05 6:23am] Il n'y a pas de sentiment plus exaltant que celui d'appartenir à une nation si diverse, si libre et si douée pour le bonheur. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
violator said: BeautifulFrance said: What the hell are you talking about ? george Michael a capable musician ? When Madonna picks a guitar and plays four chords everybody goes "wow she is a great guitar player" ! It is really sad most people do not know anymore what a real musician is. George Michael imagines melodies in his mind and then goes to the studio and sings them to his musicians who reproduce the melody and the harmonies ! That's his way of working. He has an army (like Robbie Williams) of REAL musicians who make something out of what he has in mind. Whereas there are guys like Marcus miller or Prince who can reproduce the whole tune by themselves in the studio ? By playing real instruments (bass, drums, guitar, keyboards etc)... 30 years agao a good musician was Jimmy hendrix or Miles Davis, in 2005, George Michael is called a good musician. How sad ! It says a lot about how the level of music has kept decreasing for the last 20 years. You obviously don't know much about George Michael as he plays keyboards, bass and guitar. He writes almost all of his music and on many of the tracks plays the majority of the instruments. Again, he is a capable musician. He isn't a virtuoso and to my knowledge he doesn't play over 20 different instruments. But your statement above reveals an ignorance about what it is he actually does. I love great musicianship as much as the next person, but it begins and ends for me with the songs. Obviously I'm a Prince fan. I'm also a musician. So I can appreciate what Prince brings to the table in that regard. But all the musicianship in the world can't save vapid crap like 'New Power Soul' or 'Chaos and Disorder'. What George Michael does as a musician is more than adequate to represent his songs. The fact that Prince clearly needs some sort of crap filter doesn't make his genius work any less valid. To add also, there is nothing in George Michael's repertoire that anyone would listen to and consider genius. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
some of you all need to calm own.. 
this is just a fun lil discussion..if your passion for prince is *that* high maybe some of you all should just ignore these threads.....  Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BeautifulFrance said: Bullshit. George Michael has talked openly several times about his way of working in the studio. He sings a song then his musicians in the studio find the chords and the right harmonies. You were probably not aware of that. He said as well that it is a way for him to filter his melodies as he remembers only the best ones. And come on what he plays is very basic and often very repititive. I'm a musician as well by the way. You are not the only one here. [Edited 7/25/05 6:23am] George Michael plays the majority of the instruments on his albums. He is the primary songwriter, arranger and producer of his material. You either know this or you don't. Unless you would suggest that there are a host of studio musicians willing to forego credit and residuals for their hard work. Go to Michael's site and reference the forum area. There are articles supporting this. Or just reference the liner notes of his albums if you prefer. Or.....don't. As a musician you have to be aware that great musicianship is only one ingredient in the mix. If that was the primary requirement for great music, we'd have been robbed of 'Never Mind The Bollocks', 'The Velvet Underground with Nico', 'Play With Toys' and other great material. Prince was the same great musician he'd always been when he recorded 'Chaos' and 'NPS'. Both those albums sucked donkey balls. Wanna hear basic and repetitive? Play 'Dirty Mind'. Or 'Sexuality'. Or 'Something In The Water'. From a standpoint of pure musicianship, there's nothing special going on there. But they're all great songs. Not because they're bastians of outstanding musicianship but because they came from a great songwriter. George Michael fits that bill in spades. Conversely, you can't listen to stuff like 'You Have Been Loved', 'Move On' or 'To Be Forgiven' and claim it to be basic and repetitive. Those songs are intricately performed and most of the performance is provided by Michael. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: BeautifulFrance said: Bullshit. George Michael has talked openly several times about his way of working in the studio. He sings a song then his musicians in the studio find the chords and the right harmonies. You were probably not aware of that. He said as well that it is a way for him to filter his melodies as he remembers only the best ones. And come on what he plays is very basic and often very repititive. I'm a musician as well by the way. You are not the only one here. [Edited 7/25/05 6:23am] George Michael plays the majority of the instruments on his albums. He is the primary songwriter, arranger and producer of his material. You either know this or you don't. Unless you would suggest that there are a host of studio musicians willing to forego credit and residuals for their hard work. Go to Michael's site and reference the forum area. There are articles supporting this. Or just reference the liner notes of his albums if you prefer. Or.....don't. As a musician you have to be aware that great musicianship is only one ingredient in the mix. If that was the primary requirement for great music, we'd have been robbed of 'Never Mind The Bollocks', 'The Velvet Underground with Nico', 'Play With Toys' and other great material. Prince was the same great musician he'd always been when he recorded 'Chaos' and 'NPS'. Both those albums sucked donkey balls. Wanna hear basic and repetitive? Play 'Dirty Mind'. Or 'Sexuality'. Or 'Something In The Water'. From a standpoint of pure musicianship, there's nothing special going on there. But they're all great songs. Not because they're bastians of outstanding musicianship but because they came from a great songwriter. George Michael fits that bill in spades. Conversely, you can't listen to stuff like 'You Have Been Loved', 'Move On' or 'To Be Forgiven' and claim it to be basic and repetitive. Those songs are intricately performed and most of the performance is provided by Michael. His musicianship is like comparing some "pipi de chat" to Marcus Miller's musicianship. The truth is he is a very average musician. I remember Prince back in the 80s saying he would not qualify himself as a real great musician. So you know your George...pfff... Il n'y a pas de sentiment plus exaltant que celui d'appartenir à une nation si diverse, si libre et si douée pour le bonheur. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheBigBang said: The fact that Prince clearly needs some sort of crap filter doesn't make his genius work any less valid.
That's not the point. The point is great musicianship does not guarantee great music. TheBigBang said: To add also, there is nothing in George Michael's repertoire that anyone would listen to and consider genius.
No. There's nothing in his repertoire that you would consider genius. Thus the phrase, 'to each his own'. Hell, there's nothing Prince has done in the last 10 years that I've heard anyone outside this site call 'genius'. Doesn't stop some folks on here from raving about it nonetheless. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
violator said: TheBigBang said: The fact that Prince clearly needs some sort of crap filter doesn't make his genius work any less valid.
That's not the point. The point is great musicianship does not guarantee great music. TheBigBang said: To add also, there is nothing in George Michael's repertoire that anyone would listen to and consider genius.
No. There's nothing in his repertoire that you would consider genius. Thus the phrase, 'to each his own'. Hell, there's nothing Prince has done in the last 10 years that I've heard anyone outside this site call 'genius'. Doesn't stop some folks on here from raving about it nonetheless. YAAAAWWWNNN!!! *stretches* Oh, gosh...I'm sorry. Does that post somehow alleviate the fact that Prince's greatest hits package, The Hits/The B-Sides, is much better than Michael's Ladies and Gentlemen, The Best of George Michael? It doesn't? That's what I thought. Back to sleepy sleep now. 'Night. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
TheBigBang said: Oh, gosh...I'm sorry. Does that post somehow alleviate the fact that Prince's greatest hits package, The Hits/The B-Sides, is much better than Michael's Ladies and Gentlemen, The Best of George Michael? It's not intended to. You can make up your own mind. You just can't make up mine. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BeautifulFrance said: Bullshit. George Michael has talked openly several times about his way of working in the studio. He sings a song then his musicians in the studio find the chords and the right harmonies. You were probably not aware of that. He said as well that it is a way for him to filter his melodies as he remembers only the best ones. And come on what he plays is very basic and often very repititive. I'm a musician as well by the way. You are not the only one here. [Edited 7/25/05 6:23am] On Listen Without Prejudice, he pretty much wrote, produced arranged the whole album and played most of the instruments. Come on George Michael being a great artist does NOT make your dearly beloved Prince any less good  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
why not  [Edited 7/28/05 7:21am] The Beautiful Ones
always smash the picture always everytime | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
GM sucks, (pardon the pun)  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
. [Edited 7/28/05 8:05am] The Beautiful Ones
always smash the picture always everytime | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
George Michael is great - but he's "just" a pop-soul singer and not in the same league as the funk-rock-soul-pop singer Prince.
Compare George Michael to Ronan Keating, Darren Hayes, Robbie Williams etc., that's the kind of singers he should be compared to, imo. Prince should be compared to "heavier" stars like Stevie Wonder, Sly Stone, Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson....  Prince 4Ever.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
thedance said: George Michael is great - but he's "just" a pop-soul singer and not in the same league as the funk-rock-soul-pop singer Prince.
Compare George Michael to Ronan Keating, Darren Hayes, Robbie Williams etc., that's the kind of singers he should be compared to, imo. Prince should be compared to "heavier" stars like Stevie Wonder, Sly Stone, Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson.... Nobody was comparing them as artists. The question was asked in reference to two albums. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
BeautifulFrance said: jbell said: As far as what you said about "faith" having only 3 good tracks. You are right about the 3. There only 3 tracks on "faith" that are NOT hits. And your really reaching when you said "Computer Blue." imo maybe the worst track on the LP. Ok Fair enough. End of discussion. If Computer Blue is a weak track for you, then there is nothing we can do for you. It is your taste but what a great tune, what a fantastic and electric tune, what a great guitar work. You probably like Robbie Williams as well. Catchy stuff. Sorry but Diamonds and Pearls does not do it for me. I hate when Prince writes catchy tunes like George Michael. I love him when he makes TRC or Sign O the times or Around the world in a Day. Albums that George Michael could never dream of. Not that I have been ducking you, but I pretty much agree with what Violator has been saying. I just listened to some samples of the Robbie Williams guy. I found his music boring at best. To me he seems like some type of Beatles disciple. I don't care much for the Beatles. Although I think did good stuff as individuals. Any how, Williams's music is just bland. You have to dig to find any kind of bass line, drums that seem to only keep time and over used guitar input. To me that's pure Beatles. Dont care for it at all. [Edited 7/28/05 14:20pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: TheBigBang said: Oh, gosh...I'm sorry. Does that post somehow alleviate the fact that Prince's greatest hits package, The Hits/The B-Sides, is much better than Michael's Ladies and Gentlemen, The Best of George Michael? It's not intended to. You can make up your own mind. You just can't make up mine.  [Edited 7/29/05 5:37am] Space for sale... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
violator said: TheBigBang said: The fact that Prince clearly needs some sort of crap filter doesn't make his genius work any less valid.
That's not the point. The point is great musicianship does not guarantee great music. TheBigBang said: To add also, there is nothing in George Michael's repertoire that anyone would listen to and consider genius.
No. There's nothing in his repertoire that you would consider genius. Thus the phrase, 'to each his own'. Hell, there's nothing Prince has done in the last 10 years that I've heard anyone outside this site call 'genius'. Doesn't stop some folks on here from raving about it nonetheless. The Rainbow Children. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
thedance said: George Michael is great - but he's "just" a pop-soul singer and not in the same league as the funk-rock-soul-pop singer Prince.
Compare George Michael to Ronan Keating, Darren Hayes, Robbie Williams etc., that's the kind of singers he should be compared to, imo. Prince should be compared to "heavier" stars like Stevie Wonder, Sly Stone, Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson.... I'm glad you winked. You know good and well Michael Jackson belongs in that George Michael category-- they practically make their music the same way (except MJ will hire the hottest producer at the time to bring his ideas to fruition). In terms of industry impact nobody can touch Mike but in terms of the actual music he's not up there with Sly, Jimi, Stevie, and Prince. [Edited 8/20/05 8:57am] |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |