rialb said:

SEANMAN said:

Bullshit. Janet is an established icon. Her mark on the pop music world is set, #1 hit or not.

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

Well, I like Rihanna's music, and I for one am not downplaying her achievements, but to compare her to Janet is downright disrespectful regardless of how many #1s she has. As I've said before, her #1 streak happened in an era where you can log on to your computer and download a single cheaply, as opposed to Janet's #1s. Janet's came over a long span of time, and mostly occurred when people had to physically go to the store and buy a cassette or CD single if they really wanted a song. Not only that, but Janet's sinlges come from highly-regarded, multi-platinum pop albums. Rihanna is a singles artist, who puts out more product than most pop stars today.

rialb said:

SEANMAN said:

Yet another cue she's taken from Janet, who worked with Nuno on a version of "Black Cat"

Sure, but Janet was hardly the first pop artist to hire a high profile rock guitarist. Michael did that in 1982 with Eddie Van Halen and again in 1987 with Steve Stevens.

I never said Janet was the first to do it, I simply said that Janet had Nuno first.

rialb said:

SEANMAN said:

Bullshit. Janet is an established icon. Her mark on the pop music world is set, #1 hit or not.

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

preach

Rihanna is the new Janet Jackson She's the Janet Jackson of this generation!!!!

I'm just being sarcastic Madonna fans always have to hear people insist that Lady Gaga is the "new Madonna",so I'm letting Janet fans see how it feels,lol.

...

[Edited 11/3/11 6:30am]

JoeTyler said:

rialb said:

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

preach

Oh brother

rialb said:

SEANMAN said:

Bullshit. Janet is an established icon. Her mark on the pop music world is set, #1 hit or not.

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

No its not bullshit... I dont know if its because Prince was never commercially successful the P fans here want to jump to anything that goes against the grain of any Jackson its quite pathetic..

This is a new world of music love. The industry where Janet EARNED those number ones were VERY different than how it is now. There was more competition, the material was better and the way in which number ones were achieved were much different. Today it is alot EASIER to achieve this very thing among alot of achivements in music that alot of entertainers had to sweat and work their ass off for. Now adays all you need is a package good looking product and they will throw awards at you call, give you a title and give you number ones.

If we count the number of acts on one hand that are out today with a machine drive behind them, there arent two many... lets see Beyonce, Rihanna, Usher, Bieber, Perry??? Look at the competition and the music. Nobody is making no Edgar Allan Poe masterpiece... there pretty much hit or misses and success can easily be gain.. not to mention there ISNT alot of competition.. so it would be easy for an artist like Rihanna to get a number one just at the snap of a finger regardless if her music is shit (which it is).

All of it is not good or worthy but this is the situation. The accomplishment earning is not the same as it was back in day whether Rihanna is being compared to Janet or not. I would never compare her so called achievements to likes of any of the past artists... And I will hope and pray you know this and just wanna be messy...

mjscarousal said:

No its not bullshit... I dont know if its because Prince was never commercially successful the P fans here want to jump to anything that goes against the grain of any Jackson its quite pathetic..

What? Prince was very commercially successful though.

mjscarousal said:

rialb said:

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

No its not bullshit... I dont know if its because Prince was never commercially successful the P fans here want to jump to anything that goes against the grain of any Jackson its quite pathetic..

You bring up Prince all the time when he has nothing to do with the conversation, perhaps you're just as insecure about him as Michael was.

Let's be realistic for a second: what's the difference between Janet and Rihanna in terms of talent? I fail to see why should Janet be highly regarded in the music industry.

The only difference between the two lays- or so I learned with this thread- in commercial success: Rihanna is more successful than Janet. Apart from that, they're equal. Where it really matters, they're zeros: talent.

RKJCNE said:

mjscarousal said:

No its not bullshit... I dont know if its because Prince was never commercially successful the P fans here want to jump to anything that goes against the grain of any Jackson its quite pathetic..

You bring up Prince all the time when he has nothing to do with the conversation, perhaps you're just as insecure about him as Michael was.

Bringing up Prince in a thread about talentless acts as are Janet and Rihanna is, indeed, a heresy.

ComputerBlueSpain said:

Let's be realistic for a second: what's the difference between Janet and Rihanna in terms of talent? I fail to see why should Janet be highly regarded in the music industry.

The only difference between the two lays- or so I learned with this thread- in commercial success: Rihanna is more successful than Janet. Apart from that, they're equal. Where it really matters, they're zeros: talent.

But apart from being a talented singles artist Janet has created truly classic albums. Rihanna has yet to make one, and it's unlikely that she will. Also Janet truly broke new ground where as Rihanna plays it safe.

Love it how you all failed to read the entire post missing the MAIN point... good job...

RKJCNE...looks to me your the one pressed if that was the only thing you were fixated on in the post when that wasnt the point at all... but I guess that doesnt even matter to you because your a Rihanna stan. Prince fans bring up Michael Jackson ALL the time in discussions non related to him and I dont bring prince up all the time in conversation if anything its his FANS directly not P himself.

If that didnt apply to you, why respond? I'm assuming it did..I wont entertain your kindergarden I hate Michael Jackson behavior. Carry on child..

RKJCNE said:

ComputerBlueSpain said:

Let's be realistic for a second: what's the difference between Janet and Rihanna in terms of talent? I fail to see why should Janet be highly regarded in the music industry.

The only difference between the two lays- or so I learned with this thread- in commercial success: Rihanna is more successful than Janet. Apart from that, they're equal. Where it really matters, they're zeros: talent.

But apart from being a talented singles artist Janet has created truly classic albums. Rihanna has yet to make one, and it's unlikely that she will. Also Janet truly broke new ground where as Rihanna plays it safe.

Isn't called Good Girl Gone Bad? It was critically acclaimed and everything.

ComputerBlueSpain said:

Let's be realistic for a second: what's the difference between Janet and Rihanna in terms of talent? I fail to see why should Janet be highly regarded in the music industry.

The only difference between the two lays- or so I learned with this thread- in commercial success: Rihanna is more successful than Janet. Apart from that, they're equal. Where it really matters, they're zeros: talent.

Janet is an accomplished songwriter and producer. An amazing dancer argubably the best female dancer of all time and considered one of the best live performers of her time. She has produced groundbreaking albums that have changed the r&b music industry as we know it

Rihanna is simply a hit maker - given a song and sings it - like a Whitney who can't sing as well.

She deserves a little more respect then you care to give her. But I assume you’re probably not too familiar with her music or influence on the industry so would suggest you don't make such ignorant comments in the future.

mjscarousal said:

Prince fans bring up Michael Jackson ALL the time in discussions non related to him and I dont bring prince up all the time in conversation if anything its his FANS directly not P himself.

I never understood why this is... It's as if there's some insecurity lurking in there somewhere...

On a seperate note, I want to contact that person in charge of stan wars and tell them to include stan info for other acts such as The Beatles, Prince, MJ, Bob Dylan, Elvis, and etc. because they have their fair share of stans and drama as well. In fact, I think that they are just ridiculous as Britney v. Lady Gaga debates.

Unholyalliance said:

RKJCNE said:

But apart from being a talented singles artist Janet has created truly classic albums. Rihanna has yet to make one, and it's unlikely that she will. Also Janet truly broke new ground where as Rihanna plays it safe.

Isn't called Good Girl Gone Bad? It was critically acclaimed and everything.

It's a good pop album, but it's not on the level of Control or Rhythm Nation. I also like how I'm the one being labelled a Rihanna stan when I'm saying she hasn't made a truly great album.

as for Mjscarousel the point I was making is that Prince and Michael have no relevance to this thread and you seem to just want to bring up a fight involving Michael where there is non.

RKJCNE said:

Unholyalliance said:

Isn't called Good Girl Gone Bad? It was critically acclaimed and everything.

It's a good pop album, but it's not on the level of Control or Rhythm Nation. I also like how I'm the one being labelled a Rihanna stan when I'm saying she hasn't made a truly great album.

Well, it just came out in 2007 right? How many years have passed since then? Like...4 years ago? It's really too early to be calling something like that legendary anyways, but if she has one album like that, it will probably be that, unless she comes out with a Greatest Hits album which will probably be like one of the best selling GH albums ever.

Also, you don't have to be a stan of an artist to appreciate a decent album.

Like jesus christ people...

'Rihanna now has more #1 singles than Janet Jackson.'..so what? she's not half the artist that Janet is..rihanna can twice as many #1's ...and still she can't touch janet

[Edited 11/3/11 8:45am]

Unholyalliance said:

RKJCNE said:

It's a good pop album, but it's not on the level of Control or Rhythm Nation. I also like how I'm the one being labelled a Rihanna stan when I'm saying she hasn't made a truly great album.

Well, it just came out in 2007 right? How many years have passed since then? Like...4 years ago? It's really too early to be calling something like that legendary anyways, but if she has one album like that, it will probably be that, unless she comes out with a Greatest Hits album which will probably be like one of the best selling GH albums ever.

Also, you don't have to be a stan of an artist to appreciate a decent album.

Like jesus christ people...

Completely agree, she could pull off an GH like no one else from the past decade.

Unholyalliance said:

You know what I would like? For Rhianna to surpass the Beatles record for #1s in the US? Why? Because it would be really funny for someone to bring it up when Beatles fanbois start going over stats about who has the most #1 songs.

I hope she does it. I'm totally behind you girl.

Sort of like what the Spice Girls did to their record in the UK.

can just you all Janet hardcore fans accept the FACTS??

Fact: RiRi has more Number 1's than Janet. Period

we're not talking about talent/relevance/quality/songwriting skills here, folks

Mariah Carey is richer than Prince. That's a fact. That's just one example

oh, you wanna go subjective nonetheless? Janet's 00s albums are just as bad (or good) as RiRi's...

someone had to say it...

JoeTyler said:

can just you all Janet hardcore fans accept the FACTS??

Fact: RiRi has more Number 1's than Janet. Period

we're not talking about talent/relevance/quality/songwriting skills here, folks

Mariah Carey is richer than Prince. That's a fact. That's just one example

oh, you wanna go subjective nonetheless? Janet's 00s albums are just as bad (or good) as RiRi's...

someone had to say it...

after damita jo they're actually they're worst than Rihanna last 3-4 albums..but still it's worth 2 point that Janet is much more an artist than Rihanna ever wished 2 be. I'm not a hardcore J fan nor a Rihanna hater...it's just how I see..

She was on a roll during Good Girl Gone Bad and I'll give her that, but most of her #1's were other peoples and she has absolutely no charisma onstage based on the few minutes I caught on tv(which is why she is NOT like another janet, if she was, then I see your point) , just a good wardrobe designer and catchy hook writers with a somewhat okay voice. And the only reason they are being compared is because they are both black females. I don't agree they both have no talent, that is an insult to Janet, who, whether you like it or not, paved the way for many artists with her groundbreaking albums. You don't have to like her songs, but to discredit her place in the industry.... *smh* If she were good onstage like Janelle Monae or even Fefe Dobson who she admits she's inspired by, then I would completely cheer her on. I'm not really bothered though either, it's not like Janet had the highest number, she was just one of the high ones. But if she beats Madonna and especially MJ, I might start feeling the sting :*(

mjscarousal said:

rialb said:

Of course Janet is an established icon but I just think there is a bit of hypocrisy going on. If Janet has number one hits it is a huge accomplishment but when Rihanna does it somehow it is meaningless? That is bullshit. I don't particularly like Rihanna but to have that many number ones in less than ten years is a tremendous accomplishment.

No its not bullshit... I dont know if its because Prince was never commercially successful the P fans here want to jump to anything that goes against the grain of any Jackson its quite pathetic..

This is a new world of music love. The industry where Janet EARNED those number ones were VERY different than how it is now. There was more competition, the material was better and the way in which number ones were achieved were much different. Today it is alot EASIER to achieve this very thing among alot of achivements in music that alot of entertainers had to sweat and work their ass off for. Now adays all you need is a package good looking product and they will throw awards at you call, give you a title and give you number ones.

If we count the number of acts on one hand that are out today with a machine drive behind them, there arent two many... lets see Beyonce, Rihanna, Usher, Bieber, Perry??? Look at the competition and the music. Nobody is making no Edgar Allan Poe masterpiece... there pretty much hit or misses and success can easily be gain.. not to mention there ISNT alot of competition.. so it would be easy for an artist like Rihanna to get a number one just at the snap of a finger regardless if her music is shit (which it is).

All of it is not good or worthy but this is the situation. The accomplishment earning is not the same as it was back in day whether Rihanna is being compared to Janet or not. I would never compare her so called achievements to likes of any of the past artists... And I will hope and pray you know this and just wanna be messy...

THAT.

Can you imagine if this was Britney? I would be even more upset if it was

I'd be impressed if rihanna, katy perry or all these 00's female singers released an album that's anywhere near one of the J's classic albums...they're having all these #1's just proves how music went down quality wise...their songs are as fun as forgetable.

ComputerBlueSpain said:

Let's be realistic for a second: what's the difference between Janet and Rihanna in terms of talent? I fail to see why should Janet be highly regarded in the music industry.

The only difference between the two lays- or so I learned with this thread- in commercial success: Rihanna is more successful than Janet. Apart from that, they're equal. Where it really matters, they're zeros: talent.

MORE BILLBOARD AWARDS THAN ANY ARTIST IN HISTORY

Winner of several MTV awards, including the coveted Video Vanguard Award

Recipient of several NAACP Image Awards for music and acting

Winner of many AMA awards, including their highest honor--the Award of Merit

Winner of 6 Grammys

an Emmy winner for her Velvet Rope MSG concert

*also nominated for an Academy Award and a Golden Globe

...and those just scratch the surface

That's a lot of industry acknowledgement for an "untalented" lady.

You mad?

[Edited 11/3/11 9:17am]

Janet's career was totally mad crazy good! I'll drink to THAT!

[Edited 11/3/11 9:28am]

Unholyalliance said:

mjscarousal said:

Prince fans bring up Michael Jackson ALL the time in discussions non related to him and I dont bring prince up all the time in conversation if anything its his FANS directly not P himself.

I never understood why this is... It's as if there's some insecurity lurking in there somewhere...

On a seperate note, I want to contact that person in charge of stan wars and tell them to include stan info for other acts such as The Beatles, Prince, MJ, Bob Dylan, Elvis, and etc. because they have their fair share of stans and drama as well. In fact, I think that they are just ridiculous as Britney v. Lady Gaga debates.

You of all people should not be saying this... I like you but just being honest lol I dont see the point you are making with this when you and I both know for a fact how the Prince fans carry on on this site when it comes to specific artists dont even have to be a Jackson. You even earlier made a sarcastic remark related to The Beatles to show it would be a different reaction if an artist like Rihanna had beated their record which was similiar to the point I was making.

I agree with your opinion on the other stan brawls and you are right. However, this is a prince board which is why I referenced it.

I just find it weird how some fans can bash Whitneys voice or music but throw a hissy fit when someone calls Rihannas music trash... I dont quite understand that logic especially when its backed up with maturely and intelligently unlike most of the criticism towards Whitney which is not even related to the womans music. Its just very biased and pointing that out doesnt show any signs of insecurity.. any artist fans could have been referenced it didnt have to be Prince.