This always buffles me...

I mean why do you think she can do R'n'B and then 4 years later come back with electronica music, in 2005 COADF now HC... They al have in common that they're good pop albnums.

But honestly, do you think Michael Jackson or George Michael could achieve this so easily?

I mean, Madonna does good pop songs. But I think MJ and GM wrote EXCELLENT songs in the 80s. Better ones than Madonna ever did.

But (look at S&S) she manages to reinvent her old songs everytime. But could you imagine a new mix of Billie Jean, Thriller or Wake Me Up Before You Go Go?

Both, MJ and GM sold more albums than Madonna until 1996. (okay, GM did sell less, but he had released only three solo albums. But if you compare that: Faith sold 16 mio, LAP 13 mio. LWP Vol.1 8 mio, Erotica 3 mio. Bedtime Stories 4 mio, older 8 mio).

So are Madonna's song more lightweight? Cheesy? Less souly and traditional?

And why do you think MJ could never reinvent himself as Madonna does. He couldn't have come up with an COADF... Either George Michael..

So please help me out...

maybe because madonna has always represented change?

people have always been anticipating what she's coming up with next.

okay, but is it THAT simple? To represent something? And do you think the Michaels could have done that too?

madonna's genius is her abilty to pick the perfect pop sound.

Because she wants to.

Timmy84 said:

And Michael doesn't?

graecophilos said:

Michael ain't got shit to do with Madonna.

ehuffnsd said:

so you think she doesn't have the soulfull roots Gm and MJ have and is able to switch styles without losing her integrity?

graecophilos said:

what do roots have to do with anything? she doesn't want to do the same thing twice.

Madonna is about business, not integrity. She understands that and understands her audience. When it is time for an album she goes out, hears what they are listening to and buys tracks from the tops in that genre.

She's good at her job.

Madonna's musical styles don't really change that much.

I mean, so what--she gets William orbit to produce and album, and all of a sudden you hear some sampling here, some beeps there, and voila--new sound?

At it's heart and core, it's still pretty much the same, relatively safe, poppy verse-chorus-verse-chorus pop song.

There's nothing that she does musically that's ever shocked me.

Madonna's gift is not her songs, though some of them are fun--it's her marketing. She's like Bill Gates. Sure, it doesn't matter that Novell's eDirectory (NDS) had all the features Microsoft's Active Directory had, and then some--Bill marketed the shit out of his product and it's winning the market.

Likewise, nevermind that Moby, The Prodigy, & 808 State where doing electronic with emotion way before Madonna---It's Madonna, and she's going to market it properly.

The notion that she "reinvents" herself to me is hilarious. She doesn't reinvent shit---she tweaks.


Hell, Sinead Oconner and Alanis Morrisette have shifted gears more radically than Madge ever did--and they were successful at it.

She doesn't do something different with EVERY SINGLE album

--Music and AL are the same exact style
--Madonna and Like A Virgin, though R&B influenced, are both straight up 80s POP
--Erotica and Bedtime Stories are more hip hop influenced


She gets too much credit for 'changing' - when you see/hear a new Madonna song or video, yes, it may have different 'influences' - but it's always POP. always danceable. It's never "omg, this is something she would never do" - it's predictably unpredictable. or unpredictably predictable. And not every album is a HIT - at least in the US. HC has barely outsold American Life, if at all. Erotica was deemed a 'flop' - Bedtime Stories a 'disappointment.'

Being versitile just works for her. It's her trademark

Madonna's "change" is, like a previous post said, more of a sound change than a musical shift. The ears of the masses tend to be drawn to the "production" of a song -- the hook of a evocative sample that gets stuck in your head, or a repetitive musical phrase or some cool "new" instrument sound. And she's a master obviously at capitalizing on that. And every once in a while you get a really solidly constructed song out of it all.

I'm not knocking her music, by the way. I actually love most of her stuff..

Because her fans expect it from her. Like Prince fans expect things from him, an NO im not comparing them on any musical level. Madonna just isnt smarter than alot of others, and always has been, she has the head for what to do. And before EVERYONE starts going nuts over things like "why cant MJ do the same, or why cant janet get away with it" just remember that everyone is their own person. Madonna is madonna, prince is prince, etc.etc..Everyone gets to different levels and does different things, this is why they are all unique in their own way, even going to some of todays artists. Britney is Britney and i think we can all agree that she can switch it up more and get away with it, more than say ..jessica simpson can, and its got nothing to do with talent, Jessica has a better voice, Britney dances better, Britney knows how to market herself better and she is who is she is and Jessica is fine with who she is. So chill out, everyone has their own path, if you like them, who the fuck cares what someone else thinks

At her core Madonna is always pop, just with slight variations. Always, I agree that I don't think she changes every albums. It's about every two albums. I wouldn't doubt if the next album also has strong R&B influences. Then again, I would sort of hope she does a 360 and "Hard Candy" was just a more urban verision of COADF.

VinnyM27 said:

yeah, didn't I say she makes great popmusic? That's what all of her albums have in common!
But what I want to know is: Could you imagine doing something like Hung Up with MJ or GM? I still think they are more bound on a certain style and the public would dismiss them if they'd change their style.

ALSO: may it be the fans? I mean, Madonna has mostly gay fans, whereas GM as mostly girls and MJ???

badujunkie said:

At her core,Madonna is a pop/dance artist so her music will always be tailored to the dance floor,but I wouldn't say that she makes the same album everytime.

'Like A Prayer' (1989),'I'm Breathless' (1990) and 'Erotica' (1992) all have a totally different sound and style.Likewise,'Bedtime Stories' (1994) and 'Ray Of Light' (1998) don't exactly sound alike.'COADF' (2005) doesn't sound anything like 'American Life' (2003).

No,she doesn't re-invent the wheel with each album,but she at least tries different sounds/beats and styles with each album.She's not afraid to work with new producers,including producers who are unknown before they work with her.The majority of her albums don't sound alike to me at all.

Ironically,Madonna herself dislikes the phrase "re-inventing herself".She doesn't see it that way.What she does is simply growing,evolving,trying new things.Many pop artists become very complacent and never feel the need to shake things up a little.

.
[Edited 12/11/08 0:12am]

graecophilos said:

Michael's problem is that,as an artist,he's become very complacent and artistically lazy.He doesn't push himself anymore.His recent albums are nothing more than big,glossy,commercial R&B albums with a hip-hop flavor.Could you imagine Michael working with a relatively unknown European producer and making an album that doesn't lean so heavily on American styles? Not gonna happen.

kevinpnb said:

I agree with this,for the most part.I wouldn't want Madonna to change things too much.Stick with dance/pop,but just keep it fresh and new.Work with different producers each time.Try a new approach on each album.

SoulAlive said:

I agree with that, too, And I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. I think she finds the happy medium between not doing the same thing over and over, but also not doing something that just isn't her and doesn't play to her strengths.
I think every artist not just Madonna has a certain genre of music that they excel at. Hers is pop/dance.
It's the same with rock based artists. It wouldn't work for them if they all of sudden tried to do electronic dance music. It would feel wrong.

SoulAlive said:

well could you imagine Michael coming up with Hung Up?

The thing is, aren't MJ and GM caught on that R'n'B thing?

graecophilos said:

I for one can't.

Well, the other thing is that Madonna is more prolific. She's toured 4 times since 2001 and released 5 albums in 10 years. Generally, if you don't like the direction she's going in with an album or a tour, you know that you can catch her on the next go-around. George Michael and MJ don't release music half as frequently, and as a result, people expect their releases to move mountains. That's why Invincible got such shitty responses.

Axchi696 said:

This is partially why I think at least in Michael's case if he just released albums consistently and without fanfare people wouldn't expect such a tour de force. The anticipation builds expectation to a fault. But Madonna is inspired, has a strong work ethic and enjoys what she does. I can't say the same for Michael at this point.

badujunkie said:

That's not exactly accurate.

AL & Music are definitely the only 2 albums that sound a bit alike, but that's because Mirwais produced both of them (half of Music). But while AL is more stripped down and acoustic, Music has some mindless dance songs and some ROL/Beautiful Stranger retread as well. I think the melodies of Music are more "usual" as well.

Madonna & Like A Virgin have a different sound, the former having those long dance mixes while the latter more prominently featuring real instruments. If I'm not wrong, that's exactly what Madonna wanted to achieve when she worked with Nile Rodgers and that makes it her first "change" in sound.

Erotica & Bedtime Stories sound NOTHING alike, Erotica was Shep Pettibone's HOUSE with some hip hop stuff thrown there ("Waiting") while Bedtime Stories was R&B/New Jill Swing for the most part with a bit of Björk ("Bedtime Story").

She's always pop and most of the time she does the verse-chorus formula, I give you that. She does have some exceptions but those are never the singles, because they are less commercial ("Mer Girl").

Far from "always danceable", the 90s was mainly about ballads for her, it's only the first 2 and last 2 albums that were straight dance-pop. Ray Of Light was downtempo for the most part, American Life had several songs with Madonna and the guitar only.

The sales comparison is pointless, HC sold in 7 months what AL sold in 5 years, and AL never had a double Platinum hit single. Erotica was a flop, even though it sold nearly 3 times as much as AL because it didn't yield a "classic" and her sales drop was huge (before 1992 she was at the top of her game). Bedtime Stories was an improvement in sales and "Take A Bow" is her longest running #1 hit in the US. Comparing the hard sales only is pointless, you gotta consider the circumstances.

Cause she is NOT known 4 anything....really.

because whatever she does, in the end it's pop and not particularly challenging for the listener.

I heard Mylie Cyrus singing a rock song recently, and I've seen her sing pop. But neither was exactly cutting edge. Just different genres of bland pop.

and what are you thinking? why are Madonna's song much more remixable than MJ#s or GM`s? I just wanna understand what makes teh difference. There IS a difference, that's for sure.