VoicesCarry said:

VoicesCarry is BACK!!!!!

Wooo hoooo!!!!!

WE MISSED YOU VERY MUCH!!

I think they are all ( maybe with the exception of Michael ) aware that their prime is over.

But that can't be a reason for them to stop making music, let them do their thing, if you don't like it don't listen if you do like it then great.

avasdad said:

those sound like fighting words...

put up your dukes

Well let's flip the coin here.

Just think about what the music industry would have been like without these artists.

Hard to imagine, right?

To this day, I can honestly say I can do without whats playing now on the radio, because none of those song has had any impact in my life musicially. I cannot begin to tell you how much Prince's music has been "there" when I most needed it. Most of these artists today, I just don't see it, or feel it. Yeah, it may be catchy for the moment but after a few months, its easily forgotten.

So MJ, Prince, Madonna, Janet, may not be relevant today, but their songs have longetivity, even transcending generations. They are still relevant, not in terms of charts and sales, but relevant in that special place they still hold for their fans.

TonyVanDam said:

Yeah! At least Milli Vanilli could lip sync at their shows. And they would have got away with it had it not been for their producer pulling the plug. Now think about this. If a record producer today admitted that Rhianna didn't sing a note on her CD, not only would anyone NOT be shocked, no one would care nor make an issue. It would be business as usual! That's how low the music industry as a whole has became over the years.
[Edited 11/25/06 19:35pm]

How in the world are Madonna & Prince past their primes when they can sell out any arena? Madonna just went out on tour again and she killed! Prince is going to tour in 2007 and he will kill again.

mrexperiance said:

im a kid (16 turning 17 on dec 24) and 2 out of the 4 are in my top 5 favorite artists of all time. Them and a couple others are all i listen to. Well mainly the purple one but i listned to everyone else inbetween

MICHAEL JACKSON will be forever....
i dont know about janet, and madonna will do okay tours... and prince will always do great with his tours...

TotalAlisa said:

That is the shortest and most honest way to put it IMO. Nicely said.

Yeah Michael will always be relevant. Thriller just entered the top 100 on Itunes during Halloween & I hear his songs get play on the weekends sometimes.

VoicesCarry said:

Prince is in the worst shape them all of them.

No one, I mean No one bumps Prince, at least not in New York City. I meet young ppl who didn't experience these guys in their prime and they never mention Prince or have him in their Ipod. I started a new job with a large staff 2 months ago. I've had one conversation with a girl about Madonna, One person was humming So Excited, another had it playing on their phone. One guy hums MJ songs all day, a young girl, no more than 21, had the song Dangerous playing in her Ipod the pther day. I turned around and looked at her like and she was rocking that shit like it was 91/92.

Amongst the pedestrian/casual music fan, Prince is not on their radar, even after musicology. Many young Prince fans are sophisticated or got into Prince through other artists. As much as I berated Prince for his commercial endeavors, he really needs to stay in the public eye to remain relevant amongst casual music listeners.

No matter what casual music fans think of the other 3, they certainly think about them more.
[Edited 11/26/06 6:06am]

lilgish said:

728huey said:

Bizkit, I could understand, but Korn? They had two smash hits between last year and this year and still maintain a huge fanbase and packed concerts worldwide.

IMHO, I could also MAYBE see My Chemical Romance holding their momentum since they have an interesting sense of drama of melody in their material and a flair for visuals, but we'll see.
[Edited 11/26/06 8:05am]
[Edited 11/26/06 8:06am]

Zzzzzz.....oh yes I was typing. Anyone who has been around 4 a significant amount of time will PASS their prime. It is a part of the human cycle. I guess my ONLY response is, so what?

lilgish said:

Your post was AMAZING. Let me add some stories to your post to validate it further. Cus it was good stuff. You summed it up quite nicely. However, here is MORE.

When INVINCIBLE came out, as a die-hard MJ fan, I wasn't really into it, cus I expected more, but people were REALLY pumping INVINCIBLE, around my high school. I was a sophmore around that time, and remember, people would play "Butterflies" like no tomorrow. One girl in one of my classes would carry INVINCIBLE around like she was on Michael Jackson's Street Team. That album also brought out the masses who call Michael "Jacko" and laugh at him, to fess up, they bought HIStory and LOVED it. 2001 was the year I heard so many people I never thought were into Michael giving nothing but love to his music. Part of me was thrilled, but to be honest, the other part of me was like (cus I am a die-hard MJ fan) "You don't deserve to enjoy his great music with the terrible things you say to him." Yeah I was kind of on a personal trip with that one, but oh well. Point being: Michael's music was still being heard, current (at that time) and back catalog.

As for Madonna, I remember reading Taraborrelli's book about her, and I got this feeling from reading it that she had a big gay fanbase. Beyond that my brother is gay, and he really gets into her new stuff. (Not the old.) Everything from "Beautiful Stranger" on - he digs. I think she has a gay audience these days - which is okay. Cus that means her music is still being heard. So to sum it up: I think Madonna has a BIG gay fanbase. (Or so it might seem...?)

And Prince, well I'm just saying to say the imfamous "Co-Sign" with what you said, and add on, I personally discovered Prince through Michael Jackson. (I heard the song "Trust" in the Batman film, and I thought it was Michael Jackson. And I remember thinking "Michael did the Batman soundtrack. And I didn't hear about it! NOOOO WAY!!!" I think my Mom also even thought it was MJ. She picked me up the tape, and sure enough, the mark was there, PRINCE. "Who is this Prince fellow? Why does he sound so close to Michael? I need to hear more." And the rest as us MJ fans say is...HIStory.
[Edited 11/26/06 8:35am]

JasonStar said:

No.....really? Neverwouldathunkit.

VoicesCarry said:

It's soo good to see you again VC. Keep speaking the truth!

lilgish said:

I love Prince to death but I have to agree with this, especially since being back here in NYC for almost a year now. That's the thing I've hated where Prince is concerned. Out of all the 4, Prince is the one who NEEDS to be on TV the most because for some reason, he will be forgotten like it's cool. It sucks seeing all these lame asses get all this recognition for making shitty music but the one who can wipe them out with one stroke of his guitar either doesn't get ALL the props he should get or won't do all that is necessary to remind people that there is more to him than just his 80's work. It also proves why he needs to do the Super Bowl this year, which I think he will do, and then capitalize on it, which he won't . BUT with that said, I heard "Kiss" on the radio more times last week than I have in years. Hell someone was bumping Kiss in their car IN THE BRONX! . Ice was starting to form in hell that day.
[Edited 11/26/06 9:20am]

In Madonna's case,her "prime" might be over,but I think it's remarkable that she is still experiencing great success at her age.Her recent CD 'Confessions On A Dancefloor' sold over 8 million copies worldwide and her recent tour grossed nearly $200 million,making it the most successful tour by a female artist.Yes,she had greater success in the 80s,but her recent accomplishments are nothing to sneeze at.Just look at all the artists who were on the charts with her in the 80s...Cyndi Lauper,Hall and Oates,Lionel Richie,Pat Benatar,etc.I like all those folks,but you don't really see them doing as well as Madonna.

ElectricBlue said:

Exactly.To me,you're not "over" if you can still sell out arenas and have hugely successful tours.

skyecute said:

The problem for Michael is that,he has largely destroyed his own career and his legacy.We can't really blame the media,either.He has been through not one,but two child molestation trials...he has had excessive plastic surgery,and has probably bleached his skin.It's kinda difficult to over-look these things and concentrate solely on the music.I consider him,Madonna and Prince to be the biggest superstars of the 80s.I was hoping that all three of them would age gracefully,and leave behind an incredible legacy,showing all these young "wannabees" how it's done.Unfortunately,MJ has self-destructed.

VoicesCarry said:

We all have ways of measuring success,but in my opinion,an artist is not "over" if:

***They can still sellout arenas all over the world (when they tour,Prince and Madonna routinely do better business than the so-called "hot" artists of today).

***They can still have a Number One album (Madonna and Prince's latest CDs both reached Number One on the Billboard charts).

***They can still make alot of money (I don't know about Michael,but Prince and Madonna are doing good,financially).

VoicesCarry said:

Yes, yes, yes.

Yes it's true, their prime is long over. But isn't it funny that 20 plus years after each of these artists sold their best albums, They're still making music, touring etc. How many flash in the pans have come and gone in that time period? Will Fergie or NE-YO or any of these young pop stars still be making music 20 years from now? NOT!!!!

at least Prince can always put out a new (relatively) interesting CD and do a club show that can wet your pants.

all those others can ONLY relive their pasts, which werent that great to begin with.

luvsexy4all said:

So you're saying that Prince's stage act can make one wet his/her pants, as opposed to Fergie, whose stage act makes her wet her pants.

728huey said:

fergie gross

lilgish said:

I couldn't agree more with what you said about MJ. Despite the non-stop negativity thrown at him, HE is STILL the most relevant and influential among all of the four artists mentioned. When you hear little kids, who can't be more than 8 years old, saying>"He is dancing like Michael Jackson or he has moves like Michael Jackson, then you know that this man is still influencing music. It is obvious that these little kids haven't seen much RECENT MJ music or videos; therefore, it is only plausible that they are hearing about Michael through their parents, big sisters and big brothers, etc. My daughter says that when she goes to clubs, it is Michael's music who gets EVERYONE moving on the dancefloor. She also says that it is MJ's music that is the most requested. No matter what the media claims, Michael is NOT over and will never be over. His music is the only one out of the four that transcends EVERY generation on a major scale. He appeals as much to 80 year olds as the does the little 6 and 7 year old kids. He also has that built-in appeal to teenagers because of his obvious influence on young artists such as Chris Brown, Usher, Neyo, Beyonce, Ciara and every other rap, hip-hop, R&B and pop artist out there. Detractors can say what they want about Michael, but the aforementioned artists ALL give MJ his props. DJ's are axiously awaiting new Micheal Jackson music and if it is anything like Invincible, they will play the hell out of it. Another example of just how much Michael is still loved is the fact that they had a MJ vs. Prince marathon in my city. The DJ's would play MJ songs and then play Prince songs. The callers would have to call in and vote for their favorite song. Michael WON hands down. Finally, when Michael was acquitted, R&B radio showed him MAJOR love by having MARATHONS of his music. A radio station in my city played a TWO-HOUR block of MJ songs. I have read that the same thing from fans who said that the exact same thing happened in their cities all across the US and around the world. Again, Michael is still very relevant and influential, despite the media's propaganda that he is not. People have to be smart enough not to fall for the media's hype.