avasdad said:

GANESH IS ROFL

Im a "kid" (18 turning 19 in 2 weeks) and these four are my favourite artists ever!!, i own pretty much all theyre albums! Im sure there are many others like me who get bored of todays music and discover other artists.

my deal is this, how can you pull Janet into the same group as MJ, Prince and Madonna? She doesn't even compare!!!

missfee said:

She's been around 25 years, so she does compare for the purposes of this topic. Whatever your personal opinions on her music, this is a topic about diminishing commercial success of aging superstars.

mrexperiance said:

I wish there were more "kids" like you who are open-minded enough to study their music history and see for themselves that there is more to great music beside beats alone.

VoicesCarry said:

In the 80's & half of the 90's, Janet was THE only real rival that Madonna ever had at the time. Therefore, the comparsions are fair game, IMO.

TonyVanDam said:

There aren't even BEATS today

VoicesCarry said:

It's C.R.A.P.!!!

VoicesCarry said:

okay but she still doesn't compare with the other three in my opinion...being the topic about diminishing commerical success or not.

TonyVanDam said:

Madonna vs Janet still doesn't ring a bell to me. they don't seem like they are on the same wavelength in my opinion. nothing anybody can say won't convince me otherwise.

missfee said:

I'm sure you've been on the org long enough for Madonna vs. Janet to ring a bell


[Edited 11/25/06 16:56pm]

VoicesCarry said:

Well sure i've seen the threads, but in my head i've always thought of it as the big 3...MJ, Madonna and Prince as the greatest, most famous, and most talented POP artists in history. Janet never entered my mind as being in that category is all i'm saying. that's why when i saw this thread i was :confused: "how does Janet fit in this equation?"

its just how i look at it.
[Edited 11/25/06 16:57pm]

missfee said:

I see a great many comparisons between Madonna & Janet, Michael & Prince. Madonna & Janet are not musicians, but they do find the right producers to work with. Madonna has perhaps done a better job of this over the past 10 years than Janet. But both have had enormous successn over the past twenty years, each racking up 30+ top ten pop hits and a slew of dance hits, and Janet also doing extremely well on the R&B charts. Both are fabulous performers. They have strength in songwriting, particularly lyrics and melody, but require collaboration to make things work.

Michael and Prince are both musicians who can write and produce independent of others and are both great vocalists to top things off. I see them as completely separate from artists like Madonna or Janet.

VoicesCarry said:

okay, i get what you are saying.

VoicesCarry said:

And please don't get me started about THAT janet. VS. Bedtime Stories thread!

missfee said:

It's all good . Most people prefer one and find the other devoid of talent I think they have unique attributes and I like each one for different reasons.

VoicesCarry said:

true.

I like MJ and Janet for their entertainment purposes, but I love Madonna for her creative use in her music and entertainment. She pushes the boundaries and does things that nobody would even think of and doesn't give a damn who cares. Prince I love for his musicianship and his ability to shock as well as not even giving a fuck about if someone likes it or not. He knows he can sing, dance, play, instruments, write, produce, entertain and some more and kicks ass while doing it.

missfee said:

I agree with you . Madonna I also like because she has a real flair for melody and writes very touching lyrics sometimes. However, I seem to have lost touch lyrically with her in recent years, because I do not connect with the songs about the perils of fame, which are uninvolving to me. I liked her best pre-Ray Of Light. American Life has grown on me. Confessions is actually the first Madonna album I didn't buy. I had a listen to it but I found myself trying to figure out where she had lifted a melody or hook from instead of enjoying it. So I made myself a compilation with the songs she used as templates just left it at that . I do not like Stuart Price very much as a producer, and I hope she decides to work with someone else next time out. I was also disappointed that with all these dance songs to work with, she didn't really spend the time to co-opt decent remixers. Most of the mixes this era were done by Stuart, which was unsurprising.
[Edited 11/25/06 17:31pm]

VoicesCarry said:

well Madonna's "Confessions" album definitely isn't her best, but I did enjoy it for a techno/dance feeling. I love playing that type of music when i'm going to do some shopping But you are right, her stuff before the Ray of Light era was great compared to the albums she has released in the 00's. My favorite era of hers was the "Vogue","Erotica" and "Bedtime Story" eras.

VoicesCarry said:

The only thing that I am worried about is will the media give Michael a FAIR chance. In recent years, they have not. The critics crucified Invincible and 99% of them reviewed Michael instead of the album. Their negativity was the most contrived that I have ever seen. There is no way in hell that Invincible was as bad as the critics claimed. In fact, Invincible was one of MJ's best albums. The passion and rawness that he revealed in that album was just wonderful.It is very rare, that I IMMEDIATELY like a song from the first few notes as I did with YRMW. I am not a dancer; yet, I actually started moving and grooving to the beat of that song when I first heard it. When I heard "Butterflies", I almost went out of my mind. That song is the sexiest song that I have heard ANYONE sing and the R&B DJ's loved it. The same with "Break of Dawn" and "Heaven Can Wait". DJ's loved those songs, also. That album sold over 2 million copies in US and around 10 million worldwide and the critics tore it to shreds. Just think how many more it would have sold if Sony had not sabotaged it and promoted it. That just goes to show you that despite the rampant negativity, Michael STILL sells. I truly hope that he releases an album of soulful R&B ballads and dance jams. R& B radio supported him the last time, and they will do it again, IF the "jams" are there. Of course, Michael's albums always contain an eclectic mix of pop,R&B, rock, dance tunes and it always appeals to the teenagers. He is one of the few artists over 40 that STILL appeals to kids, teenagers and adults. Strange, how young kids identify his dance steps, even if other artists are doing them. That's a good sign that he is still relevant with young people.

missfee said:

Totally!

skyecute said:

I used to think Invincible was crap, but then I realized I liked quite a few songs from it (let's hope Cloudbuster doesn't read this ). At any rate, YRMW was a great song and should have been a bigger hit, but BUTTERFLIES is probably the best thing he did since Dangerous IMHO. Damn that song is gorgeous.

I am convinced that whatever Michael releases will be a big seller because the man is huge globally and his hits collections alone still sell millions even though there are like 50 on the market

VoicesCarry said:

None of these artists who got their start in the 80's sell as much as they used to, but they are still making a huge impact through touring and through songwriting royalties. You could also throw in U2, R.E.M., Duran Duran, Bon Jovi, Metallica, Depeche Mode and LL Cool J as being past their prime yet still selling out stadiums and arenas when they tour. Only a handful of artists who got their start in the early to mid-90's can claim this type of success (Mariah, Green Day, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, Dave Matthews Band, Mary J. Blige, Snoop Dogg, Diddy, Jay-Z, Nas). Unfortunately, a large group of artists from the 90's who could have had long-term success either self-destructed and/or died (Nirvana/Kurt Cobain, Alice In Chains/Layne Staley, 2Pac, Biggie Smalls), broke up (Soundgarden, Smashing Pumpkins, Spice Girls, Hole), or faded into oblivion due to changing musical tastes (Boyz II Men, En Vogue, Master P).

Even so, you would be hard pressed to say which current popular artists have any longevity. Maybe Justin Timberlake, Usher, Beyonce, Christina Aguliera, Alicia Keys and Coldplay, but who else? Britney Spears and Jessica Simpson have been more popular as tabloid celebrities lately than as recording artists. Korn and Limp Bizkit are already has-beens, and Ashanti probably would be lucky to play a neighborhood festival. Which emo band has a good chance of being around in ten years? Simple Plan? Good Charlotte? My Chemical Romance? Fall Out Boy? Panic! At the Disco? And does anyone really believe that Lil' John is going to be on top of the rap world in five years? I doubt it. And then you have the Black Eyed Peas, who started out as a really creative hip-hop group but sold out big time when they added Fergie to their lineup. I doubt that anyone is going to remember them for the prolific lyricism of "My Humps." Plus you have the fact that very few of these artists can play live, let alone sell out an arena. And it's the live shows which can cement an artist's legacy. The Grateful Dead had only one hit album after their late 60's heyday, yet they are considered one of the greatest rock bands of all time due to their live shows. But you have artists like Ashanti, Rhianna, and Cassie who have top ten hits but would starve to death if they had to sing live for their supper.

728huey said:

728huey said:

I have decided that Cassie is actually the most talented comedienne of her generation. Her sublime performance of "Me & U" on BET really cemented this for me. The way she missed her cues, talk instead of sang, danced like Whitney Houston at a crack convention - pure genius. So Cassie, I bow to your talent. May you usurp George Carlin and continue to bless us with your humour.

VoicesCarry said:

damn can i get a clip of this performance!!!

avasdad said:

You may be right. But, I stll prefer them over the utter "rubbish" that passes off as today's "relevant" music. Don't forget, JT was involved in "nipplegate" as well. Of course when you have ten thousand producers, songwriters, DJs, and arrangers, you too may be able to pull it off. It was beautiful when Beyonce and Prince did that breath-taking performance at the '04 Grammys a week after that debacle! That showed that there was still hope for pop music. BTW, JT the pretender was in attendance (in the front row with his Mom, who was dancing her socks off!) Of course that later coincided with a fine CD, Musicology and his best tour since Purple Rain, and 2 Grammys, and musical acclaim. Not bad for someone that's "past his prime." The same goes for MJ, Madge, and Janet! Madge's latest CD sold almost ten million around the world. More on this later!

missfee said:

Damn, I can't find that shit on YouTube. But here is a thread about it on concreteloop

http://concreteloop.com/2...r-ass-down

The best part was when she did the Celine Dion pounding-your-chest-like-you-mean-it moves as if she was hitting notes or something. A scream!

I did find her less-funny performance of the track on TRL though:

http://www.youtube.com/wa...Cy1H5QTbCc
[Edited 11/25/06 18:21pm]

728huey said:

Forget live shows. Ashanti, Rhianna, and Cassie can't even lip-sync to their own songs!