SUPRMAN said:

mancabdriver said:

Still on the list my friend.

And at 256. Do your homework before trying to be a smartass.

[Edited 7/15/11 7:06am]

Obviously I didn't care where they ranked it.

I'm surprised it made the list.

But in the end, I don't buy music or rate it based on Rolling Stone so . . . . .

I'm pretty sure if History was ranked on the list and was higher than TVR MJ stans would be drumming it into their posts - RS would also magically regain its credibility.

You know how they love their figures.

How much did Thriller sell again?

mancabdriver said:

SUPRMAN said:

Obviously I didn't care where they ranked it.

I'm surprised it made the list.

But in the end, I don't buy music or rate it based on Rolling Stone so . . . . .

I'm pretty sure if History was ranked on the list and was higher than TVR MJ stans would be drumming it into their posts - RS would also magically regain its credibility.

You know how they love their figures.

How much did Thriller sell again?

No. Any thinking person knows that Rolling Stone doesn't matter.

mancabdriver said:

I'm pretty sure if History was ranked on the list and was higher than TVR MJ stans would be drumming it into their posts - RS would also magically regain its credibility.

You know how they love their figures.

How much did Thriller sell again?

How can you generalize an entire fandom like that?

Also, it just seems funny too, because the biggest Janet Jackson stan on the internets is on here bragging about the fact that the album made it to the list when no one else mentioned anything about it BUT them. If Janet Jackson was more popular than her brother and sold more than he did, I don't doubt for a second that someone would be shoving that shit own everyone's throats.

There's no way to objectively tell what's better or best. It's just opinions at the end of the day really. I mean...if we're really going to go by critic ratings then this album is waaaay better than HIStory could ever dream of being:

[Edited 7/15/11 9:10am]

I think I just threw up

Unholyalliance said:

mancabdriver said:

I'm pretty sure if History was ranked on the list and was higher than TVR MJ stans would be drumming it into their posts - RS would also magically regain its credibility.

You know how they love their figures.

How much did Thriller sell again?

How can you generalize an entire fandom like that?

Also, it just seems funny too, because the biggest Janet Jackson stan on the internets is on here bragging about the fact that the album made it to the list when no one else mentioned anything about it BUT them. If Janet Jackson was more popular than her brother and sold more than he did, I don't doubt for a second that someone would be shoving that shit own everyone's throats.

There's no way to objectively tell what's better or best. It's just opinions at the end of the day really. I mean...if we're really going to go by critic ratings then this album is waaaay better than HIStory could ever dream of being:

[Edited 7/15/11 9:10am]

I mentioned that TVR was featured in RS top 500 albums list to support my argument that the album was better received by critics – which was a reply to a MJ fan that insisted History was a more creative and well executed album.

I value everyone’s opinions but I don’t appreciate the arrogance of some people who seem to think there is no comparison between the two albums because in their eyes MJ could do no wrong. Whereas in fact like every musician had flaws and released some unworthy music -along with some excellent tracks.

I am a Janet fan but I’m also a Prince one and primarily come into this forum to discuss him as an artist. I don’t think I’ve ever started a topic about Janet but I would obviously share my two cents on an artist I really enjoy. So if you are suggesting that I’m a stan who comes into this forum with the sole intention of bragging about how great she is – then I think you are misinformed.

mancabdriver said:

I mentioned that TVR was featured in RS top 500 albums list to support my argument that the album was better received by critics – which was a reply to a MJ fan that insisted History was a more creative and well executed album.

But that doesn't make any sense and doesn't prove the prove the poster wrong by any means. All you are saying is that a set group of people who think a cetain way did not regard the album as important to them as the other. If the argument had been about which album was more critically acclaimed that's one thing, but that wasn't the point being debated. Something being 'critically acclaimed' doesn't make it better either. Especially music. It's all just someone's opinion. I shouldn't even have to type that. I can't believe that someone would even use this nonsense in an argument about art which is already subjective to begin with.

mancabdriver said:

I value everyone’s opinions but I don’t appreciate the arrogance of some people who seem to think there is no comparison between the two albums because in their eyes MJ could do no wrong. Whereas in fact like every musician had flaws and released some unworthy music -along with some excellent tracks.

I also don't appreciate the arrogance of someone who comes into an art debate and starts pulling up lists as if it's supposed to make a difference as if the opinions of critics are supposed to override my own. Fuck that! The only reason you're so butthurt about it it because you don't like one of the albums being praised over the other. So what? Whether they think that HIStory trounces all over every other album ever created or that MJ could do no wrong then that's their opinion as well. There are plenty of Janet Jackson stans here who thinks she shits gold. I never tell them that they are wrong for thinking like that either and I won't because that's their opinion.

mancabdriver said:

I am a Janet fan but I’m also a Prince one and primarily come into this forum to discuss him as an artist. I don’t think I’ve ever started a topic about Janet but I would obviously share my two cents on an artist I really enjoy. So if you are suggesting that I’m a stan who comes into this forum with the sole intention of bragging about how great she is – then I think you are misinformed.

If you think that you were the first one who mentioned anything about TVR being a critically acclaimed album over HIStory then I think you need to go back and reread this thread.

trueiopian said:

seeingvoices12 said:

Wait wait , your excuses to back up what you are saying are really weak and flawed , Rolling stones and critics ....fuck both of them , they know nothing about music , and by the way , the critics started to backpedel on what they said about the Invincible album once Mj died, they have never been objective about the man.....

what the critics say is not important really , how is the album is going to stand the test of time is the real deal , MJ albums will live forever!

Wait, wait, have a seat. It's not weak or flawed.

I'm backing it up with not just my opinion but with critics too. Fuck them? Why? Because they said Invincible is a mess?

It's weak ....

People have different tastes and they can judge from what they hear, what the critics say is just at the end AN OPINION , just because they labeled an MJ or Janet album a mess doesn't mean what they say is right , especially regarding MJ , they have never been objective about him in later years ....so what your saying is just A mess , drop your stan glasses and try to judge things objectively!

TVR is nowhere near the greatness , classical value, longevity of the album history , the songs on history are immortal, Memorable which makes it the greater album in every aspect , they are gonna live forever, Songs on TVR are already forgotten.

Everything you typed is an opinion, as well. You guys act like y'all don't care for music reviews by the critics but when it's convenient to you (basically, when they praise MJ) it matters, right? Hypocrites.

seeingvoices12 said:

trueiopian said:

Wait, wait, have a seat. It's not weak or flawed.

I'm backing it up with not just my opinion but with critics too. Fuck them? Why? Because they said Invincible is a mess?

It's weak ....

People have different tastes and they can judge from what they hear, what the critics say is just at the end AN OPINION , just because they labeled an MJ or Janet album a mess doesn't mean what they say is right , especially regarding MJ , they have never been objective about him in later years ....so what your saying is just A mess , drop your stan glasses and try to judge things objectively!

TVR is nowhere near the greatness , classical value, longevity of the album history , the songs on history are immortal, Memorable which makes it the greater album in every aspect , they are gonna live forever, Songs on TVR are already forgotten.

By whom? ONly by you in your opinion... Just because Janet is not dead does not mean anyone forgot these songs...matter of fact I went to the bar and heard Together Again being played on the box not too long ago....and I played Free Xone multiple times because of this thread.

I dunno why people are acting like Michael gets praised for EVERYTHING. The last decade of his life, you would never find him on a poll or list by Rolling Stones and if you did it was always negative.. Seriously

I also dont know why people for some reason feel to side with VR compared to History because Michael is more popular as if it is cool to side with the underdog REGARDLESS Michael had the better album. This is not about who is more famous or gets the most accolades which seems to be the driving force behind alot of these opinions.

I have no problem with being being objective or expressing constructive critcism to any artist or MY FAVS.. however if it is good then its good. While History is NOT my favorite MJ album COMPARED to VR it has better artistic quality, production and lyrics. Its way more innovative. That doesnt mean VR is not a good album, its a great album.

[Edited 7/15/11 11:51am]

L4OATheOriginal said:

Timmy84 said:

I never liked "My Need". It definitely was an energy downer. Maybe that's why HIStory least had more good songs, it did have a period where MOST of the songs were on an emotional high. Hmm, maybe I pre-judged the cohesion of the albums a little.

my need is my jam ..just love the drumming in that song! and the lyrics do speak 2 me about wanting someone so bad that u just need them now

but i do want 2 thank the OP for this thread cause i got both albums track by track going on right now

at the time of velvet rope coming out i was more janet than michael but history is not a bad album. i agree that the greatest hits disc was so unnecessary or should have been the 2nd disc than the first. one thing i will say about Velvet rope that gets overlooked is that hidden track after Special. it reminds me of the proud display janet has had about being a african american woman and reminded the whole community that we can rise up.

I love this song.

I would pick the Vevlet Rope...not because I think it's better than anything...but it's definately in the top 3 rankings of my favourite Janet albums and I never get tired listening to it after all these years.

Timmy84 said:

bboy87 said:

D.S., Come Together, and that long intro on the title track weighs HIStory down

VR, The interludes weigh it down just like I think the interludes on Janet. weigh that album down

OH MY GOD I AGREE ABOUT THE INTERLUDES ON JANET. Well least the ones that lasted a fucking millisecond! Interludes like "Back" or "Go On Miss Janet" was real unneccesary. The only interlude on that one I actually LOVED was "Morning".

Right the interludes were a whole lot on this album...didn't like that...but that's the beauty of listening on your ipod...you get to eliminate the songs you dont want from the CD and create the perfect album.

Timmy84 said:

When are these fucking Jackson flame wars gonna stop? I swear some of y'all just love the attention.

They are actually super entertaining and hilarious to read on days that I am super bored and have nothing better to do than sift through page after page of them. Just wow.

lavender1983 said:

Timmy84 said:

When are these fucking Jackson flame wars gonna stop? I swear some of y'all just love the attention.

They are actually super entertaining and hilarious to read on days that I am super bored and have nothing better to do than sift through page after page of them. Just wow.

Last year I'd agree with you.

lavender1983 said:

Timmy84 said:

OH MY GOD I AGREE ABOUT THE INTERLUDES ON JANET. Well least the ones that lasted a fucking millisecond! Interludes like "Back" or "Go On Miss Janet" was real unneccesary. The only interlude on that one I actually LOVED was "Morning".

Right the interludes were a whole lot on this album...didn't like that...but that's the beauty of listening on your ipod...you get to eliminate the songs you dont want from the CD and create the perfect album.

True. I wonder if Janet ever does another album will the interludes continue or will she finally stop putting them in there?

Timmy84 said:

lavender1983 said:

Right the interludes were a whole lot on this album...didn't like that...but that's the beauty of listening on your ipod...you get to eliminate the songs you dont want from the CD and create the perfect album.

True. I wonder if Janet ever does another album will the interludes continue or will she finally stop putting them in there?

Damita Jo was the last actual Janet album I bought. I haven't enjoyed a full album from her since the Velvet Rope tbh. And Damita Jo had two or three interludes if I'm not mistaken...I guess it will always be her thing...I dont mind them..I just dont need there to be 22 songs on an album..too long in the first place..and then a whole bunch of interludes in the mix. Give me 12 solid tracks that flow cohesively and I'm good.

lavender1983 said:

Timmy84 said:

True. I wonder if Janet ever does another album will the interludes continue or will she finally stop putting them in there?

Damita Jo was the last actual Janet album I bought. I haven't enjoyed a full album from her since the Velvet Rope tbh. And Damita Jo had two or three interludes if I'm not mistaken...I guess it will always be her thing...I dont mind them..I just dont need there to be 22 songs on an album..too long in the first place..and then a whole bunch of interludes in the mix. Give me 12 solid tracks that flow cohesively and I'm good.

A 12-track album for Janet in this day and age would be refreshing actually.

She went overboard with the interludes in the 00's.

Timmy84 said:

lavender1983 said:

Damita Jo was the last actual Janet album I bought. I haven't enjoyed a full album from her since the Velvet Rope tbh. And Damita Jo had two or three interludes if I'm not mistaken...I guess it will always be her thing...I dont mind them..I just dont need there to be 22 songs on an album..too long in the first place..and then a whole bunch of interludes in the mix. Give me 12 solid tracks that flow cohesively and I'm good.

A 12-track album for Janet in this day and age would be refreshing actually.

I would love that.

trueiopian said:

I can't say the same about your posts.

[img:$uid]http://i.imgur.com/0HdgL.jpg[/img:$uid]

The bolded doesn't make any sense to me. May I ask what does one have to do with the other?

In general, I think that TVR has been largely forgotten about or not really regarded outside of those who grew up on Janet and maybe some r&b fans, I think. Would you believe I, actually, introduce people to Janet Jackson?! Weird for me, but for them they have never heard of her music. Maybe by 2018 it will get a revival.

InsatiableCream said:

Cinnamon234 said:

I think I enjoy more songs on "Velvet Rope", but at the same time for as good as that album is, there isn't one song on "Velvet Rope" to me that is on the level of "Stranger In Moscow" imo. That song is a masterpiece and VR doesn't have any song that is on that level, not to me anyway, but overall I'd say I enjoy VR more. It's Janet's most personal and introspective album to date. I really liked the direction musically she took with it.

I agree with this.

with songs like Stranger In Moscow, Earth Song, They Don't Care About Us; HIStory definitely had more songs that stand out. However, it gets clumped together with other less than stellar songs. Velvet Rope flows much stronger for me.

Both albums are great though.

For ME, "The Velvet Rope." It's an ingenious concept, impeccably written, arranged, performed and produced and I'm not really a HUGE MJ fan. I like Janet better, but I like SOME of his stuff, just not ALL of it.

trueiopian said:

She went overboard with the interludes in the 00's.

Listening to janet it's like "Why did you need a 1 second interlude?"

HISTory. MJ actually wrote shitloads on it solo and he's truly pouring his heart out with some of those vocals, instead of Janet contributing pretty much lyrics only with the sample-ridden messes of, oh, every single track.

The Velvet Rope has some utter shit on it too like 'Empty' and 'My Need', plus overdoing the interludes. It's a great concept and has an amazing vibe, but most Janet albums always seem to start off with a bang and the drift off into nothingness for the final third for me. I do prefer the sex stuff on TVR compared to 'janet' at least as 'Rope Burn' outclasses the boring 'The Body That Loves You', and TVR most certainly outclasses everything she's done since tenfold with a few notable exceptions on 'Damita Jo'.

Stranger In Moscow remains my all time favourite MJ song. HIStory is only let down as a concept album by the inclusion of the fucking shite You Are Not Alone, and the odd shoving in of Come Together which I love his version for, but it doesn't fit the project.

[Edited 7/15/11 16:28pm]

Unholyalliance said:

mancabdriver said:

I mentioned that TVR was featured in RS top 500 albums list to support my argument that the album was better received by critics – which was a reply to a MJ fan that insisted History was a more creative and well executed album.

But that doesn't make any sense and doesn't prove the prove the poster wrong by any means. All you are saying is that a set group of people who think a cetain way did not regard the album as important to them as the other. If the argument had been about which album was more critically acclaimed that's one thing, but that wasn't the point being debated. Something being 'critically acclaimed' doesn't make it better either. Especially music. It's all just someone's opinion. I shouldn't even have to type that. I can't believe that someone would even use this nonsense in an argument about art which is already subjective to begin with.

I also don't appreciate the arrogance of someone who comes into an art debate and starts pulling up lists as if it's supposed to make a difference as if the opinions of critics are supposed to override my own. Fuck that! The only reason you're so butthurt about it it because you don't like one of the albums being praised over the other. So what? Whether they think that HIStory trounces all over every other album ever created or that MJ could do no wrong then that's their opinion as well. There are plenty of Janet Jackson stans here who thinks she shits gold. I never tell them that they are wrong for thinking like that either and I won't because that's their opinion.

mancabdriver said:

I am a Janet fan but I’m also a Prince one and primarily come into this forum to discuss him as an artist. I don’t think I’ve ever started a topic about Janet but I would obviously share my two cents on an artist I really enjoy. So if you are suggesting that I’m a stan who comes into this forum with the sole intention of bragging about how great she is – then I think you are misinformed.

If you think that you were the first one who mentioned anything about TVR being a critically acclaimed album over HIStory then I think you need to go back and reread this thread.

You wasted your time writing that because i've lost interest in this discussion that seems to be getting nowhere. So i haven't read it.

I made my point pretty clear and didn't think it required a response.

But I’m pretty chuffed you feel so strongly about my opinions that you took the time to analyse what I’ve wrote – I feel like Ted Hughes without the depression.

[Edited 7/15/11 16:39pm]

Unholyalliance said:

TotalAlisa said:

Overall History has more dated songs, then velvet rope.

Personally, I think it's a little too early to talk about what's dated and not since 20s years really haven't passed as of yet... That being said I don't really remember either album sounding much like what was released at the time though. At that the time of release I remember there was a lot of hip hop/r&b meshing going on at the time.

we dont have to wait 20 years to know that some of the songs on that album is dated. all I can say is some of the songs like lil susie, it something i don't listen to anymore and don't care to. I LOOOVE MJ with all my heart, but im not going to act like the History album is a masterpiece. Its NOT. It has some songs on the album that are Masterpieces. Outside the MJ fans, the filler songs on his album would not be understood by casual listeners.

Ellie said:

HISTory. MJ actually wrote shitloads on it solo and he's truly pouring his heart out with some of those vocals, instead of Janet contributing pretty much lyrics only with the sample-ridden messes of, oh, every single track.

The Velvet Rope has some utter shit on it too like 'Empty' and 'My Need', plus overdoing the interludes. It's a great concept and has an amazing vibe, but most Janet albums always seem to start off with a bang and the drift off into nothingness for the final third for me. I do prefer the sex stuff on TVR compared to 'janet' at least as 'Rope Burn' outclasses the boring 'The Body That Loves You', and TVR most certainly outclasses everything she's done since tenfold with a few notable exceptions on 'Damita Jo'.

Stranger In Moscow remains my all time favourite MJ song. HIStory is only let down as a concept album by the inclusion of the fucking shite You Are Not Alone, and the odd shoving in of Come Together which I love his version for, but it doesn't fit the project.

[Edited 7/15/11 16:28pm]

Wow, what an angry woman.

BTW, how in the world is YANA the worst song on HIStory? That song made HIStory very successful and it's one of MJ's best ballads.

Unholyalliance said:

The bolded doesn't make any sense to me. May I ask what does one have to do with the other?

paisleypark4 said:

By whom? ONly by you in your opinion... Just because Janet is not dead does not mean anyone forgot these songs...matter of fact I went to the bar and heard Together Again being played on the box not too long ago....and I played Free Xone multiple times because of this thread.

In general, I think that TVR has been largely forgotten about or not really regarded outside of those who grew up on Janet and maybe some r&b fans, I think. Would you believe I, actually, introduce people to Janet Jackson?! Weird for me, but for them they have never heard of her music. Maybe by 2018 it will get a revival.

Idk what to say to you then.

Yea, Janet may be a forgotten artist these days but I'm sure if she died like MJ did you wouldn't have to "remind" or "introduce" people to who she is.

TotalAlisa said:

Unholyalliance said:

Personally, I think it's a little too early to talk about what's dated and not since 20s years really haven't passed as of yet... That being said I don't really remember either album sounding much like what was released at the time though. At that the time of release I remember there was a lot of hip hop/r&b meshing going on at the time.

we dont have to wait 20 years to know that some of the songs on that album is dated. all I can say is some of the songs like lil susie, it something i don't listen to anymore and don't care to. I LOOOVE MJ with all my heart, but im not going to act like the History album is a masterpiece. Its NOT. It has some songs on the album that are Masterpieces. Outside the MJ fans, the filler songs on his album would not be understood by casual listeners.

Yea, there's a lot of filler on the album and songs like HIStory and Childhood are so dated. In fact, most of MJ's discography is dated. Particularly, the Dangerous album.

[Edited 7/15/11 17:28pm]

mancabdriver said:

So i haven't read it.

tl;dr? Here you go:

NOBODY GIVES A DAMN ABOUT SOME LIST ON ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE.

How will you know something is even dated unless sufficient time passes for new technology to come to fruition and new trends to develop?

trueiopian said:

BTW, how in the world is YANA the worst song on HIStory? That song made HIStory very successful and it's one of MJ's best ballads.

Popular =/= Good

Critically Acclaimed =/= good

Hitting #1 on Billboard =/= good

Selling a shitload of copies =/= good

Successful =/= good

Selling a small amount of copies =/= good

That being said, I find that song to be the one damning blemish on an perfectly good ass...

trueiopian said:

Yea, Janet may be a forgotten artist these days but I'm sure if she died like MJ did you wouldn't have to "remind" or "introduce" people to who she is.

Probably or probably not. I don't know. A lot of people's careers get a resurgence in death...depending on how they died and lived though. It seems the more tragic it is, the more of a chance you have people idolizing you as I think you get romanticized.

Please tell me what about this song is dated. What about this song screams "THIS WAS MADE IN THE 90S!" I just have to know. When I hear it, I don't remember hearing anything like it from that era. Is it the way it was produced? Recorded? The genre?! Were operatic pop disney like songs really big in the 90s?! Aren't songs like these still being used in Disney and musical productions? I really just have to know why you are saying it's dated. I don't understand why.