purplerabbithole said:

Belting range isn't everything. Belting can be dull, unoriginal, and just plain annoying. What does "soul" have to do with how loud you are. "Soul" is deep, almost spiritual singing that feels instinctive. Its not loud, its not soft. It's not white, its not black. Its not American. Its not European. I know its a genre of music (basically spiritual sounding slow R and B) But, singing in a controlled yet soft voice (without sounding airy) is really really hard. Prince didn't have the loudest voice in the world (although his voice seemed stronger when he focused on it primarily and in his later years) but it could be quite pretty and textured..(especially as he got older).. Its soulfull even if it doesn't qualify as "soul" singing. Joni Mitchell wasn't a belter either but she had a beautiful voice. Belters aren't always great when they attempt to sing softly (or to 'croon").

Plus, acting as if you can objectively say Michael is the better singer is kind of ridiculous. Phrasing and other aspects of singing come into play when making these decisions...and besides my issue is less with his ranking at 5 above Prince but more with the description of their singing and the comparision RS made between the two of them..

In all honesty, I find Micheal to be corny at times and I have since i was a kid. I grew up in the 1980's. Some of his choices as a singer even then irritated me. And, I am not saying this because of child molestation rumors or the way he speaks. "Bad" came out in 1987 when I was 12 years old, and I wasn't big on it then. I wasn't convinced that he was "Bad" at all (his singing voice was the reason, just as "the way you make me feel" didn't strike me as sexy either). I am sure you have some more obscure music of his that you could mention in order to try to convince me of his many singing talents. And I might agree that I have been a bit too hard, but I am not going to change my mind about how sometimes I genuinely found him unconvincing.)

Plus, one's reaction to singing is never objective. Prince's singing has genuinely moved me. "I love you but I don't trust you anymore", "There is lonely" his version of "Case of You", "Breakdown", "Sometimes it Snows in April", "Come Back" all were very moving to me. And many of the live performances I have heard from the Piano and A Microphone tour were touching. And keep in mind, I am a recent (but rather obsessive) convert to Prince, so I don't have any sentimentality about that particular concert..all his concerts are "new" to me anyhow. I thought his singing in those P&M tour clips I heard (the crisper-sounding ones) was gorgeous and not just a bunch of shifts into falsetto. Falsetto is singing, but Prince's singing as he got older sounded less like the whispery falsetto of most singers and more like that of a counter-tenor's soprano range. Plus, I love Prince's lower range. I don't really remember Michael singing much in that range.

By the way, my favorite Michael Jackson songs are Human Nature (okay, that is some pretty singing), man in the Mirror, Billie Jean, Rock With you, PYT, Wanna be Starting Something, Don't Stop til you get enough. A lot of his later music doesn't appeal to me (and not because of Michael himself but because the lyrics and the singing 'hiccups' annoyed me). .. Musically speaking, I like Michael but I adore Prince.

Speaking of subjectivity, ..I used to be a huge Frank Sinatra fan...and I am still a huge fan of his singing on his 1950's torch song albums. Objectively one could say that crooners like Vic Damone,

Dean martin, Tony Bennett were better singers technically, but Frank IMO was much more convincing and moving as a singer because his combination of world-weary touchness and vulnerable tenderness as a singer. (and he rarely belted--though his breath control as a younger man was outstanding) Its all subjective. Nat King Cole was not a great singer in any traditional sense but he was ten times more convincing than Johnny Mathis (who had more of a 'beautiful' voice). And don't get me started on the heart-breaking Billie Holiday.

heathilly said:

"Never tweaked or experimented with his voice"

MJ did this all the time his harmonies could be lush and out of this world Liberian girl for example

It could could be soft quiet gentle so delicate it seemed it would break if you touched it human nature scared of the moon.

It could be gritting and razor sharp almost like axel rose with morphine.

And he frequently added his beatboxing into his songs using his voce as an insturment itself.

But what really makes him such a great singer is he just has natural instincts and can imbue any lyric with spine tingling emotion. I personally have never felt that way about prince although he's great and I know he means what hes singing.

I think prince position is fine 30 is pretty high already. Prince a great singer with many different facets to his voice but what seperates him from mj marvin gaye stevie wonder aretha etc. Any great soul singer is his belting range is limited and cant really emote all that much singing from his chest voice. He has huge range but a small belting range. So when prince wants to go for a really emotional thing when hes singing he screams or goes into falsetto which is also great but its a different thing.

And if prince was singing with mj marvin stevie aretha otis sam cooke the great soul singers he would noticaly be a weaker link because of his lack of a belting range. A falsetto sounds great on its own but when your hitting the same notes in chest voice theres no comparison.

[Edited 10/26/16 18:17pm]

[Edited 10/26/16 18:27pm]

"Belting can be dull, unoriginal, and just plain annoying. What does "soul" have to do with how loud you are. "Soul" is deep, almost spiritual singing that feels instinctive. Its not loud, its not soft. It's not white, its not black. Its not American. Its not European."

I have no idea why you wrote this but its irrelevant in this particular discussion. As far belting sounding boring yes and a ferrari can loose in a drag race to a honda civic. Point is anything can be bad if you dont know what your doing but were talking about the best singers to exist in popular music.

Belting range is not everything true but its alot. As far your leaning towards prince singing that is fine thats your pesonal experince and opinion. I was just stating facts. If you have someone singing in falssetto and someone belting it out, side by side theres a huge difference in power impact emotion everything really being able to belt it out is one of the most important type of singing in popular music hence why people like Mj and other great soul singers and some rock singer are lauded for there vocal prowess.

Also do you know what belting means? Because joni mitchell was belter and a heck of a singer as well.

Just speaking vocally. Prince is ussally lauded for his high falsetto and large range. Mj is lauded for his singing or how the baptist church would say sanging cuz he can blow.

I know this is prince.org and prince is number 1 for nearly everyone here you have years of attachment to him as a person and his music so no one compares in the fans mind. I just speaking objectively and from a broad public view. I appreciate prince as a singer hes great but not in a stevie wonder aretha mj type of way hes not a belter like that. Hes great in his high energy screams and high falsettos.

And just example of this and taking mj out of the equation listen to prince sing whole lotta love by led zepplin than watch robert plant sing it thats the difference between a falsetto and being able to belt it out. Having the belting range allows you to add so much to the vocal performance power emotion everything.

[Edited 10/26/16 20:35pm]

NorthC said:

heathilly said:

purplerabbithole said:

Belting range isn't everything. Belting can be dull, unoriginal, and just plain annoying. What does "soul" have to do with how loud you are. "Soul" is deep, almost spiritual singing that feels instinctive. Its not loud, its not soft. It's not white, its not black. Its not American. Its not European. I know its a genre of music (basically spiritual sounding slow R and B) But, singing in a controlled yet soft voice (without sounding airy) is really really hard. Prince didn't have the loudest voice in the world (although his voice seemed stronger when he focused on it primarily and in his later years) but it could be quite pretty and textured..(especially as he got older).. Its soulfull even if it doesn't qualify as "soul" singing. Joni Mitchell wasn't a belter either but she had a beautiful voice. Belters aren't always great when they attempt to sing softly (or to 'croon").

Plus, acting as if you can objectively say Michael is the better singer is kind of ridiculous. Phrasing and other aspects of singing come into play when making these decisions...and besides my issue is less with his ranking at 5 above Prince but more with the description of their singing and the comparision RS made between the two of them..

In all honesty, I find Micheal to be corny at times and I have since i was a kid. I grew up in the 1980's. Some of his choices as a singer even then irritated me. And, I am not saying this because of child molestation rumors or the way he speaks. "Bad" came out in 1987 when I was 12 years old, and I wasn't big on it then. I wasn't convinced that he was "Bad" at all (his singing voice was the reason, just as "the way you make me feel" didn't strike me as sexy either). I am sure you have some more obscure music of his that you could mention in order to try to convince me of his many singing talents. And I might agree that I have been a bit too hard, but I am not going to change my mind about how sometimes I genuinely found him unconvincing.)

Plus, one's reaction to singing is never objective. Prince's singing has genuinely moved me. "I love you but I don't trust you anymore", "There is lonely" his version of "Case of You", "Breakdown", "Sometimes it Snows in April", "Come Back" all were very moving to me. And many of the live performances I have heard from the Piano and A Microphone tour were touching. And keep in mind, I am a recent (but rather obsessive) convert to Prince, so I don't have any sentimentality about that particular concert..all his concerts are "new" to me anyhow. I thought his singing in those P&M tour clips I heard (the crisper-sounding ones) was gorgeous and not just a bunch of shifts into falsetto. Falsetto is singing, but Prince's singing as he got older sounded less like the whispery falsetto of most singers and more like that of a counter-tenor's soprano range. Plus, I love Prince's lower range. I don't really remember Michael singing much in that range.

By the way, my favorite Michael Jackson songs are Human Nature (okay, that is some pretty singing), man in the Mirror, Billie Jean, Rock With you, PYT, Wanna be Starting Something, Don't Stop til you get enough. A lot of his later music doesn't appeal to me (and not because of Michael himself but because the lyrics and the singing 'hiccups' annoyed me). .. Musically speaking, I like Michael but I adore Prince.

Speaking of subjectivity, ..I used to be a huge Frank Sinatra fan...and I am still a huge fan of his singing on his 1950's torch song albums. Objectively one could say that crooners like Vic Damone,

Dean martin, Tony Bennett were better singers technically, but Frank IMO was much more convincing and moving as a singer because his combination of world-weary touchness and vulnerable tenderness as a singer. (and he rarely belted--though his breath control as a younger man was outstanding) Its all subjective. Nat King Cole was not a great singer in any traditional sense but he was ten times more convincing than Johnny Mathis (who had more of a 'beautiful' voice). And don't get me started on the heart-breaking Billie Holiday.

[Edited 10/26/16 18:17pm]

[Edited 10/26/16 18:27pm]

"Belting can be dull, unoriginal, and just plain annoying. What does "soul" have to do with how loud you are. "Soul" is deep, almost spiritual singing that feels instinctive. Its not loud, its not soft. It's not white, its not black. Its not American. Its not European."

I have no idea why you wrote this but its irrelevant in this particular discussion. As far belting sounding boring yes and a ferrari can loose in a drag race to a honda civic. Point is anything can be bad if you dont know what your doing but were talking about the best singers to exist in popular music.

Also do you know what belting means? Because joni mitchell was belter and a heck of a singer as well.

Belting range is not everything true but its alot. As far your leaning towards prince singing that is fine thats your pesonal experince and opinion. I was just stating facts. If you have someone singing in falssetto and someone belting it out, side by side theres a huge difference in power impact emotion everything really being able to belt it out is one of the most important type of singing in popular music hence why people like Mj and other great soul singers and some rock singer are lauded for there vocal prowess.

Just speaking vocally. Prince is ussally lauded for his high falsetto and large range. Mj is lauded for his singing or how the baptist church would say sanging cuz he can blow.

I know this is prince.org and prince is number 1 for nearly everyone here you have years of attachment to him as a person and his music so no one compares in the fans mind. I just speaking objectively and from a broad public view. I appreciate prince as a singer hes great but not in a stevie wonder aretha mj type of way hes not a belter like that. Hes great in his high energy screams and high falsettos.

And just example of this and taking mj out of the equation listen to prince sing whole lotta love by led zepplin than watch robert plant sing it thats the difference between a falsetto and being able to belt it out. Having the belting range allows you to add so much to the vocal performance power emotion everything.

jcurley said:

NorthC said:

Oh and rogi, there's PLENTY of Prince fans who are not Michael Jackson fans. In fact, when I was a record/bootleg collector and a concert goer back in the 90s, I never knew a die hard Prince fan who liked MJ. When I started visiting this site, I was really surprised at all the Jackson talk going on here.. [Edited 10/26/16 10:33am] [Edited 10/26/16 10:36am] [Edited 10/26/16 10:39am]

Yeh me too. I don't get it. I never think of MJ. It's other people that make you compare n it's laughable. MJ is fun pop but when you see MJ obsessives I genuinely think there's something wrong with them. They have very low musical requirements. I wish I could be satisfied that easily

Also, I've never seen a P fan go out of their way to compare him to MJ. In my experience it's always been MJ fans who find out that I'm into P and they immediately start comparing. Even MJ fans who claim to also be P fans can't seem to simply appreciate P without justifying it by "loving P but he's not as good as P".

Erm. Ok. Whatever. I never asked. Lol

LBrent said:

jcurley said:

Noodled24 said:

rogifan said:

Just shows Rolling Stone's bias to certain musical eras. Just like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I'm not arguing that Prince should be #1 or even top 5 but 30? That's just BS.

I think in fairness, there are 70 people who rank lower than Prince some of whom have better singing voices. His falsetto however, is one of the greatest of all time.

MJ comes in at #25 despite being an easy contender for best singing voice of all time. I mean going purely of the voices; James Brown, Lennon & Elvis objectively speaking, do not have better singing voices than Michael Jackson. If they all participated on X-factor Jackson would win.

[Edited 10/26/16 7:00am]

Maybe they took innovation into account.

MJ is astounding, but a substantial part of his gimmicks (the "hee hee"s and the "whooo"s) were introduced by Stevie Wonder on "Innervisions" and other masterpieces.

We owe TBO screams to James Brown.

MJ and Prince pushed the envelope further, definetely created their own style, but if we consider that artists form the 50's and the 60's were singing without the studio technical advances MJ and Prince had, one could argue it's more impressive. They call it "old school" for a reason.

heathilly said:

jcurley said:

Exactly and here we are doing it again. I've had to do this for over 30 yrs nut i get sucked in everytime. Ti be fair I disproportionately dismiss MJ coz it always takes me aback that people that people compare. Its nothing against MJ but I get defensive that they categorise Prince in such "lightweight" company. MJ is all well n good but so what. To me is like someone saying " so you like Beethoven, do you think they're as good as Abba"

The problem with prince fans is they vastly overrated prince and underate other people. Mj is not that deep for the most part and neither is prince for the most part who was an artist that followed the traditions of whatever genres he worked in and showed his superficial knowledge of it. Most of his music is about doing it over a funky track let's not act like prince is intellectually challenging in a Joni Mitchell type way musically or lyrically. Nothing he's done reached the complexity of a record like hissing on summer lawns. His best being if I was your girlfriend for it's introspectiness dulls in comparison. He was good at writing a lot of sexy clever metaphors over dance music that doesn't make you Einstein. But if does In your mind it shows a certain feeble mindlessness. What he was a genius at totally was his ability to play many instruments at a high level of proficiency. [Edited 10/27/16 4:04am]

Nonsense. That's diminishing.
He was a great pop composer. He was an exceptional arranger.
He was an astounding producer, he almost invented the DIY philosophy that all artists nowadays are pursuing.

Comparing him to Joni is fallacious.
Prince's work has always been mostly about extroversion, but who's to say it is better or worse than introspection? "Hissing"'s arrangements are fantastic, but so are the ones on "Condition Of The Heart", "Alexa de Paris" and "Adore", just to give you some examples.
Joni never put out sonic revolutions and stark, minimalistic arrangements like "When Doves Cry" or "Sign O' The Times".
She just had the best West Coast session musicians on "Hissing".

As for funk being an easier genre, as you seem to imply, shows YOUR little knowledge of the genre.
There are countless wanna-be-funky performers/composers who pale in comparison.

[Edited 10/27/16 5:35am]

bonatoc said:

bonatoc said:

rogifan said:

bonatoc said:

Maybe they took innovation into account.

MJ is astounding, but a substantial part of his gimmicks (the "hee hee"s and the "whooo"s) were introduced by Stevie Wonder on "Innervisions" and other masterpieces.

We owe TBO screams to James Brown.

MJ and Prince pushed the envelope further, definetely created their own style, but if we consider that artists form the 50's and the 60's were singing without the studio technical advances MJ and Prince had, one could argue it's more impressive. They call it "old school" for a reason.

So then a greatest list like this is kind of silly isn't it? It's like saying who's the greatest tennis player of all time which includes comparing amateurs to pros and players who used wood rackets vs. players of today who have all the modern technology at their fingertips.

Well, yes and no. You probably have amongst them the inventor, or rather the perfectionist of the passing-shot.
Time matters. When someone introduces something that changes the rule of the game, (s)he makes history.

That said, RS is full of shit. They capitalize on their 60's aura, but Spin, Mojo and Q are way more serious magazines about music. Even allmusic.com kicks RS in da nutz, in terms of credibility.
RS praises all of U2's recent albums. That says something.

bonatoc said:

Noodled24 said:

I think in fairness, there are 70 people who rank lower than Prince some of whom have better singing voices. His falsetto however, is one of the greatest of all time.

MJ comes in at #25 despite being an easy contender for best singing voice of all time. I mean going purely of the voices; James Brown, Lennon & Elvis objectively speaking, do not have better singing voices than Michael Jackson. If they all participated on X-factor Jackson would win.

[Edited 10/26/16 7:00am]

Maybe they took innovation into account.

MJ is astounding, but a substantial part of his gimmicks (the "hee hee"s and the "whooo"s) were introduced by Stevie Wonder on "Innervisions" and other masterpieces.

We owe TBO screams to James Brown.

MJ and Prince pushed the envelope further, definetely created their own style, but if we consider that artists form the 50's and the 60's were singing without the studio technical advances MJ and Prince had, one could argue it's more impressive. They call it "old school" for a reason.

Perhaps, but then title the list "100 most innovative".

heathilly said:

Never called funk music simple and wasn't speaking specifically about introspection or extroversion I was saying as a lyricist he isn't all that deep it's not all that thought provoking and it's ussally one subject ad naseum over a funky dance track which is true and that's not a bad thing. As for as his compositional skill as an arranger he great. He does a lot with a little. You bringing up Joni using session players is what I'm talking about she told them what to play their tools nothing more nothing less that doesn't make her compositional skill or any other artist who has instrumentalist playing on their records any less of an artist than prince. [Edited 10/27/16 6:27am] [Edited 10/27/16 6:32am]

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about MNIP or Batdance, but "Sometimes it snows" "Old Friends" "Doves Cry"...

There is another active thread at the moment about Prince's references to scripture and bible passages, and he's tackled subject matter other artists wouldn't dream of.

In another thread it was mentioned that the Graffiti Bridge album contains countless uncredited samples taken from classical music, many of which I think, have yet to be identified...

There are many depths to Prince's music.

Noodled24 said:

heathilly said:

Never called funk music simple and wasn't speaking specifically about introspection or extroversion I was saying as a lyricist he isn't all that deep it's not all that thought provoking and it's ussally one subject ad naseum over a funky dance track which is true and that's not a bad thing. As for as his compositional skill as an arranger he great. He does a lot with a little. You bringing up Joni using session players is what I'm talking about she told them what to play their tools nothing more nothing less that doesn't make her compositional skill or any other artist who has instrumentalist playing on their records any less of an artist than prince. [Edited 10/27/16 6:27am] [Edited 10/27/16 6:32am]

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about MNIP or Batdance, but "Sometimes it snows" "Old Friends" "Doves Cry"...

There is another active thread at the moment about Prince's references to scripture and bible passages, and he's tackled subject matter other artists wouldn't dream of.

In another thread it was mentioned that the Graffiti Bridge album contains countless uncredited samples taken from classical music, many of which I think, have yet to be identified...

There are many depths to Prince's music.

I know blanket statements are dumb and false but I was just speaking to specfic members who feel like prince is charles dickens. Prince is not winning nobel prizes for his lyrics and never will I just saying in genreal his lyrics arnt as deep as you claim them to be. That being said prince like many artist with long careers say alot things in there songs some corny some profoud some smart some dumb etc.

Noodled24 said:

heathilly said:

Never called funk music simple and wasn't speaking specifically about introspection or extroversion I was saying as a lyricist he isn't all that deep it's not all that thought provoking and it's ussally one subject ad naseum over a funky dance track which is true and that's not a bad thing. As for as his compositional skill as an arranger he great. He does a lot with a little. You bringing up Joni using session players is what I'm talking about she told them what to play their tools nothing more nothing less that doesn't make her compositional skill or any other artist who has instrumentalist playing on their records any less of an artist than prince. [Edited 10/27/16 6:27am] [Edited 10/27/16 6:32am]

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about MNIP or Batdance, but "Sometimes it snows" "Old Friends" "Doves Cry"...

There is another active thread at the moment about Prince's references to scripture and bible passages, and he's tackled subject matter other artists wouldn't dream of.

In another thread it was mentioned that the Graffiti Bridge album contains countless uncredited samples taken from classical music, many of which I think, have yet to be identified...

There are many depths to Prince's music.

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

LBrent said:

Noodled24 said:

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about MNIP or Batdance, but "Sometimes it snows" "Old Friends" "Doves Cry"...

There is another active thread at the moment about Prince's references to scripture and bible passages, and he's tackled subject matter other artists wouldn't dream of.

In another thread it was mentioned that the Graffiti Bridge album contains countless uncredited samples taken from classical music, many of which I think, have yet to be identified...

There are many depths to Prince's music.

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]

Noodled24 said:

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about ... Batdance

.

OH...NO...YOU...DIDN'T!

.

heathilly said:

Noodled24 said:

It depends what you call deep. Nothing deep about MNIP or Batdance, but "Sometimes it snows" "Old Friends" "Doves Cry"...

There is another active thread at the moment about Prince's references to scripture and bible passages, and he's tackled subject matter other artists wouldn't dream of.

In another thread it was mentioned that the Graffiti Bridge album contains countless uncredited samples taken from classical music, many of which I think, have yet to be identified...

There are many depths to Prince's music.

I know blanket statements are dumb and false but I was just speaking to specfic members who feel like prince is charles dickens. Prince is not winning nobel prizes for his lyrics and never will I just saying in genreal his lyrics arnt as deep as you claim them to be. That being said prince like many artist with long careers say alot things in there songs some corny some profoud some smart some dumb etc.

Well first, nobody should win a nobel prize for song lyrics thats mental.

Depth is your perspective. Lyrically he often took a simplistic view (free urself), but at other times he didn't (Another Lonely Christmas).

His catalog is huge and varies widely. He certainly didn't become who he was by simply making funky dance tracks.

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

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

Noodled24 said:

He was strangely underrated as a singer. Go back and listen to The Beautiful Ones and try to imagine any other pop-era singer creating something so mezmerizing.

Noodled24 said:

heathilly said:

I know blanket statements are dumb and false but I was just speaking to specfic members who feel like prince is charles dickens. Prince is not winning nobel prizes for his lyrics and never will I just saying in genreal his lyrics arnt as deep as you claim them to be. That being said prince like many artist with long careers say alot things in there songs some corny some profoud some smart some dumb etc.

Well first, nobody should win a nobel prize for song lyrics thats mental.

Depth is your perspective. Lyrically he often took a simplistic view (free urself), but at other times he didn't (Another Lonely Christmas).

His catalog is huge and varies widely. He certainly didn't become who he was by simply making funky dance tracks.

Well I completly agree there songwriting is not literature if they wanted to give him an award it shouldve been for the arts. But really the whole thing stinks of baby boomer elitism and deification samething with rollingstone magazine.

[Edited 10/27/16 11:01am]

heathilly said:

NorthC said:

jcurley said:

farnorth said:

He was strangely underrated as a singer. Go back and listen to The Beautiful Ones and try to imagine any other pop-era singer creating something so mezmerizing.

Steven Tyler.
He could sing it.

A young Robert Plant too.
There are a lot of good yellers in Rock's history.

The thing with Prince, is that screaming at the top of one's lungs
was only one blade in a 85 blades Swiss knife.
Steve Tyler cannot do a Marvin Gaye falsetto.
Robert Plant cannot put out an axe solo that would leave Jimmy Page perplex.

jcurley said:

heathilly said:

To all the people saying there not a fan of mj quote "throw away pop" "creepy" singing aren't being objective and letting their personal feeling for mj cloud any clear judgement. Prince place on this list is fine mj however is a top 10 vocalist. He always had that prodigious unique ethereal voice that was drenched with emotion. Dance and singing were his core and greatest talents and he really shined above everyone else in those areas. But this is Rolling Stones and they are biased and have their own little agenda for deifying certain individuals.

Nope it simply is not biased. Why would I care. I'm not defensive about the MJ v Prince thing. I genuinely find it preposterous. I'm from thebUK n white. The only conceivable reason I can think people even mention these two in the same breath is a form of racism. I was eleven when Thriller came out and even then my taste was older than anything MJ could provide. I thought the song Thriller was some kind of gimmick going on about ghouls etc. Also u was confused coz a Thrilller is a something like a Humphrey Bogart movie, MJ is actually referring to a chiller. Purple Rain was targeted to a fifteen age upwards market n it shows. Please don't assume my objectivity. MJ to me is just another pop star..I couldn't care less about him. And thinking about him he doesn't sing with passion, the sings are too lyrically generic n anodyne to even require passion. He snaps out poppy vocals to the beat. Hisbrange is probably half prince's. Can you imagine MJ pulling off the pain and passion of the Beautiful ones or condition of the heart or sometimes it snows in April. You're making me compare when in my normal life I wouldn't do so. They occupy different universes. As Stevie wonder would testify. But whilst I am I'm going to be controversial prince even dances better. MJ had about five specific moves that every backing dancer could do. Prince's moves in the Sifn if the Times movie shits on MJ. He's balletic n funky. Seriously to me MJ is a frigging nobody. If I did pop id rather listen to Britney spears

MJ does not sing with passion, accroding to u? God have you ever heard Is It Scaray, Will You Be There, Bless His Soul,That's What You Get. Sorry you just don't like him, which it's ok but please don't come up with those arguments.

214 said:

jcurley said:

heathilly said: Nope it simply is not biased. Why would I care. I'm not defensive about the MJ v Prince thing. I genuinely find it preposterous. I'm from thebUK n white. The only conceivable reason I can think people even mention these two in the same breath is a form of racism. I was eleven when Thriller came out and even then my taste was older than anything MJ could provide. I thought the song Thriller was some kind of gimmick going on about ghouls etc. Also u was confused coz a Thrilller is a something like a Humphrey Bogart movie, MJ is actually referring to a chiller. Purple Rain was targeted to a fifteen age upwards market n it shows. Please don't assume my objectivity. MJ to me is just another pop star..I couldn't care less about him. And thinking about him he doesn't sing with passion, the sings are too lyrically generic n anodyne to even require passion. He snaps out poppy vocals to the beat. Hisbrange is probably half prince's. Can you imagine MJ pulling off the pain and passion of the Beautiful ones or condition of the heart or sometimes it snows in April. You're making me compare when in my normal life I wouldn't do so. They occupy different universes. As Stevie wonder would testify. But whilst I am I'm going to be controversial prince even dances better. MJ had about five specific moves that every backing dancer could do. Prince's moves in the Sifn if the Times movie shits on MJ. He's balletic n funky. Seriously to me MJ is a frigging nobody. If I did pop id rather listen to Britney spears

MJ does not sing with passion, accroding to u? God have you ever heard Is It Scaray, Will You Be There, Bless His Soul,That's What You Get. Sorry you just don't like him, which it's ok but please don't come up with those arguments.