Who do you think has most importance in music history among Michael Jackson, Madonna and Prince and why?

I say Madonna because she's more than a simple singer, she's an icon and a real living legend.

I love the three of them, but I say Madonna.

Michael Jackson has made albums in years that I'm not sure to like.
Is Off the wall a great album? Is Thriller a great album? I mean, it's the best selling album of all time, but Wanna be startin' somethin'? Baby be mine? The girl is mine? PYT?
I think Thriller is the most overextimated album ever.
Maybe Bad is a great album, Dangerous surely is, and so History, but what about Blood on the dance floor, Invincible and Number ones?

Prince is great, but his production is too much disorganized (or varyed according to your possible point of view )

Madonna's the greatest... great albums, some great films, great tours, great image...
I mean, She's the Music.

Anyway, the three of them are dying...

Jacko = Blood on the dance floor+Invincible+Number ones+Child molestation (he's innocent!) mess= artistical death

Prince= I don't know... but he's no so great as in the past...

Madonna =Music+American life+Esthewr bullshit and such= death death death


What do you think?

I don't think either of these are very important, but then I don't have a very high regard for pop music.

I love all three of them for different things Mike being the most important.

Mike: I love everysingle album he released except Invinvcible. He's got what it takes. Amazing singer, songwriter, performer,dancer,video artist.A genius at them all . And also one of the most succesful artists in history of music. I think it'll be alright to say he's the most famous man alive(and maybe dead)

Prince: He's great too but I personally think of him as a great instrumentalist, great producer, good singer, good songwriter,good performer. His singing and songwriting skills(sometimes) dont give me the chills. I love all his 80s albums with 1999,pr,lovesexy topping my list.

Madonna: Great performer! Does great albums. Not a great singer, but I love most of her albums RayOfLight topping the list. And she's one of the most famous woman.She changed the video era, and used sex to sell her records which is still being done buy today's acts.

My vote goes to MJ, but love all 3 of them. Although MJ arrived to the music scene in late 60s and Prince in late 70s they were all huge in 80s.

They're all shit.

I assumed when I read the thread title that "The Queen" was referring to Aretha.

Since when is Madonna the queen of anything?

ADRIANORRU said:

This thread makes my head spin.

LightOfArt said:

Supernova said:

that was its aim i guess

VoicesCarry said:

Oh, and I choose them all. I love pretty much everything by these 3, except for a few Prince records and MJ's Invincible.

Most important? I don't know.....Prince took pop music with 1999 into a whole new, sexier direction that people like Lional Ritchie was not! So i'd say prince!


But Michael did turn music vids on their head with "Can u feel it" and then of course "Billy jean" "Beat it" etc.....


Madonna, well.....icon? Good role model perhaps but who cares about that? With all the music she has released. u gotta like a few of her songs!

I'm telling u that if Michael released albums he did after "Thriller" every 1-2 years like Madonna and prince.....he woulda been 5x bigger then what he became..a waste in a sense really and yet dispite only 1 album every 4 bloody years, he still has had an amazing career!


ost important? Prince then michael 4 "Thriller" which at the time was perhaps the most perfect pop album, then madonna as she took females to another level!

Supernova said:

Let's try and create a "null" effect by reversing directions and turning counter-clockwise.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...rmusic.htm

I commend Prince and Madonna for the sex and the controversy. Two strong figures. Michael is the weak one, hanging out with kids and playing with toys. Madonna, on the other hand, had a few toys of her own but that was another story.

As for the music, I like Prince's and Michael's better because it is more funky. Madonna can kick both of their asses with some good house music though. Prince's and Michael's attempts at house were both horrible.

Prince is more the musical artist though. Michael and Madonna place far too much emphasis on making music videos and choreographed dancers in their concerts. It should be all about the music. When I go to a concert, I want to see somebody jam.....not put on a broadway show.

I gotta pull a Mplsgenius here...

@ this entire thread




.
[This message was edited Mon Aug 23 22:46:39 2004 by JANFAN4L]

each have their own respective place in the pop music books. does one HAVE to be more influential or important than the other? how would this even be possible considering how obvious it is that each had an affect on the others' work.

my favorite out of the three is prince but that doesn't make him more important than the others. i suppose "importance" is determined by the general public although every individual has their own idea of importance. if public opinion decides who is most important, i guess madonna would have it.

to me, janet is more important than madonna but i know i'm in the minority there. does that make her less important? only if you go buy public opinion.

if you can define the limits and requirements of "importance" maybe i could give you a better answer.

I'm getting kinda tired of all these stupid labels...King of this...king of that....Queen of this....queen of that....blah blah blah.All three of these artists (Prince,Madonna,and MJ) can sit back and be proud of what they've accomplished in their long careers.Labels are ultimately useless.

JANFAN4L said:

Prince: The best musician and genius out of all three. The most musically gifted and released the most albums

Michael: He shocked the world with amazing dancing and performances. He sold the most albums out of all 3. He relaesed 3 killer Quincy produced records. And then Dangerous which was more artsy. Then due to his obsessions with children and controversey for supposedly molesting a child went downhill. And the rest is "HIStory." He is now pasty white, has peter pan fantasies, and is once again in trouble. Wasted talent and potential is what MJ is.

Madonna: The most successful out of the 3 over the whole. Best longevity, never left the spotlight for 20 years. Was the ultimate template for women in music in the future and the fashion sense. The smartest and best business person out of the 3. All her albums went over platinum (except AL) The most hits out of the 3. Not really a musician but an awesome performer and dancer nonetheless. Ageless in the sense she puts performers half her age to shame in the way she can move. She was the first one to use sex for sales and the rest followed with not good results as her. Had crappy movies xcept for Evita where she demonstarted vocal talent people didn't think she had. The most original and most worshipped amongst her peers.

I don't really like to compare them as they're all different in there own sense but for best musician i give to our Prince and the most successful overall is Madonna.

jayaredee said:

If Michael Jackson sold more albums than the 3, I don't understand why u states Madonna is the most successful one.
Madonna lasted 20 years? Good, but as far as I can remember, Michael was there since 1968, at a time when the Ciccone was learning the art of shoelace.
Smartest in business? Who bought the ATV catalogue in 1985 for 47.5 million $, now worth over 1 billion $.
The most hits of the 3? MJ charted 18 #1s hits on the Hot 100 since 1969, Madonna 12.
Even Diana Ross had more #1 hits than Madonna.
The most original is certainly Prince and the most worshipped is certainly MJ.

FunkMistress said:

Really, No shit huh?


well in this order.....

Prince always # 1.....he may not be the popular icon(was that the word ,taht is so heavily overused) but he still is and always will be the shit....


Madonna comes in second for me I have a love/hate relationship with her music,however I never was all fanatic like most other Gay men over the woman.....somebody mentioned she can act and had the best movies....LOL


Michael for me comes in 3rd never cared much to see him moonwalk and grab is crotch....however he did have a few songs I liked.....

speeddemon said:

1. He isn't talking about success purely in terms of album/single sales.

2. Madonna has indeed had "more hits" than MJ (forty-something Top 10's on the hot 100), purely by virtue of the fact that she's released way more material. Jayardee never specified #1 hits, you just adopted that qualifier so you could prove Michael was the "winner" (Madonna has 32 dance/club play #1's, so I could use that requirement to prove she "wins", since that's basically double her closest competitor). And we are talking solo careers here - I have no idea why you're counting his work with the Jackson 5. That is a pretty specious way to up Michael's hit count, but do it if you feel you must. We don't talk about Justin Timberlake's solo career in the context of his "hitmaking years with 'NSync", do we? Madonna did not have the (dis)advantage of being forced by her parents into show business when she was just out of diapers.

3. Diana Ross has had 5 solo #1's, 12 with The Supremes. However, if you were to combine them (and no chart reference book I've ever seen does), she'd be in a two-way tie for second place with Elvis Presley. There's a reason that they aren't combined - her work with The Supremes does not count towards her solo career. And so she has 5 #1's, 7 fewer than Madonna. For the same reason, Michael Jackson has 13 #1's.
[This message was edited Tue Aug 24 15:02:31 2004 by VoicesCarry]

VoicesCarry said:

Well, contrary to Madonna or Elvis Presley, MJ and Diana Ross had a multi-faceted career, which includes solo and group thing. You can't compare Madonna's solo tally to those 2 solo tallies just for the purpose of proportionality.
Their group efforts ( which they fronted and took leadership) are part of their careers.Michael fronted the Jackson 5 and Jacksons for over 15 years before Madonna did anything.

So , MJ's and Diana Ross had, indeed, 18 #1s singles on the Hot 100.
By the way, Elvis only had 7 #1s on the Hot 100. His pre-Hot 100 hits are taken from various charts which weren't prospected under the same methodology of the Hot 100.

As far as this logic goes, It applies also to Justin, Paul Mc Cartney, George Michael, etc...

Furthermore, MJ had 41 Top 10 singles (solo+group) on the Hot 100, Madonna's had 35 and Elvis (counting his pre-Hot 100 singles) had 33.

speeddemon said:

Sorry, you're wrong about Elvis. All his seventeen No. 1's came after July 9, 1955, which is when Billboard adopted its methodology and actually began to call the chart the Hot 100. The methodology of calculating chart positions has actually changed several times since then. Otherwise, "Vogue" would have been number 1 for a hell of a lot more than 3 weeks!

P.S. You Rock My World was his 28th Top 10 solo hit, 40th if you want to be silly and include The Jackson 5 (Billboard still refuses to double-up like that, but whatever). Where'd the 41st come from?

I think this is your list:

1. I Want You Back
2. ABC
3. The Love You Save
4. I'll Be There
5. Mama's Pearl
6. Never Can Say Goodbye
7. Got To Be There
8. Sugar Daddy
9. Rockin Robin
10. Ben
11. Dancing Machine
12. Enjoy Yourself
13. Shake Your Body Down To The Ground
14. Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough
15. Rock With You
16. Off The Wall
17. She's Out Of My Life
18. The Girl Is Mine
19. Billie Jean
20. Beat It
21. Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'
22. Human Nature
23. Say, Say, Say
24. P.Y.T.
25. Thriller
26. State Of Shock
27. We Are The World (this does NOT count towards the totals of any of the artists involved, according to Billboard, so I'm following their lead)
28. I Just Can't Stop Loving You
29. Bad
30. The Way You Make Me Feel
31. Man In The Mirror
32. Dirty Diana
33. Smooth Criminal
34. Black Or White
35. Remember The Time
36. In The Closet
37. Will You Be There
38. Scream
39. Childhood
40. You Are Not Alone
41. You Rock My World

If you say We Are The World actually counts, I'm gonna have to laugh. What's next? Making number 42 Diana Ross' "Muscles" simply because he did background vocals on it?
[This message was edited Tue Aug 24 15:11:24 2004 by VoicesCarry]

jayaredee said:

Gawd, that would be extremely unfortunate.

Supernova said:

Lovely, huh?
[This message was edited Tue Aug 24 15:51:41 2004 by minneapolisgenius]

We have so much to look forward to from women in music.

Supernova said:

No wonder why I stopped listening long ago.

VoicesCarry said:

Joel Whitburn has done a lot of good to Elvis` chart stats over the past decades. The old folks may remember that Elvis only had 14 No. 1 Hits in the first edition of Whitburn`s "Top Pop Singles" book (published 1969). That`s because in the two legitimate charts, the Top 100 (1955-58) and since 1958 the Hot 100, Elvis indeed only has 14 No. 1 Hits.

Yet in 1977, Whitburn began to compile a completely new chart for the years 1955-1958. Billboard used to compile four different pop charts from 1955 to 1958, not just one. These four charts were the Disk Jockeys chart, the Sales Chart, the Juke Boxes Chart as well as the Top 100 (which put all 3 charts together). Apart from the Top 100, the other charts only ranged from 20-50 positions. Thus Whitburn - when he compiled his first book - legitimately used the Top 100 for the 1955-58 period. However Elvis only had 9 No. 1 Hits in the Top 100. This was due to airplay factor reducing the power of his big hits. In the sales chart, a variety of songs hit no. 1, but failed to do so in the disk jockeys chart (airplay). That meant the sales power was limited in the Top 100 chart, which also used airplay and juke boxes.

In 1977, Whitburn created a new "amalgation" chart, using the peak position for one chart, the # of weeks spent at that peak and in the chart from another chart, and so on. Thus he created a chart that didn`t exist historically. This also meant that Elvis` # of no. 1 hits was increased from 14 to 17 because now the sales chart peaks were used.

One may argue that it is okay to use the sales chart instead of the Top 100, and I would agree here, BUT, the Hot 100 has always been a combination of sales and airplay, thus I see no reason why for the pre-1958 years, a pure sales chart should be used, especially since a Hot 100 precursor like the Top 100 existed that could have easily been uitilised. See, from 1958 onwards, all acts had to struggle if their songs didn`t get enough airplay, thus nothing is taken away from Elvis if the Top 100 is used for the 1955-58 period.

And I seriously think Joel Whitburn - who is known to be a major Elvis fan - wouldn`t have created this artificial "amalgation" chart in 1977, if he hadn`t had at least one eye at the benefit this change in chart-use from Top 100 to "new chart" would have had for his boy Elvis.

AWWW SHIT, shut the fuck up

THE KING, THE QUEEN OR THE PRINCE?!?

Shit. I thought this thread was going to be about Elvis and Freddie Mercury.