mjscarousal said:

go2theMax said:

not in the concert I went and pay big money 2 watch the guy lip-syncing all the way through...he came here in october/1993. Madonna came right after with the Girlie Show, in november...she doesn't have a better voice than him 4 sure...but damned she sang at least half of the show.

Thats a FUCKING LIE. Michael sung 80 percent of Dangerous live. The day Madonna EVER sings live Pigs will start flying from the skies and grass will grow purple.

u better start 2 use an umbrella...u know how big pig's shits are

go2theMax said:

mjscarousal said:

Thats a FUCKING LIE. Michael sung 80 percent of Dangerous live. The day Madonna EVER sings live Pigs will start flying from the skies and grass will grow purple.

u better start 2 use an umbrella...u know how big pig's shits are

Dont get cute

purplethunder3121 said:

rialb said:

go2theMax said:

not in the concert I went and pay big money 2 watch the guy lip-syncing all the way through...he came here in october/1993. Madonna came right after with the Girlie Show, in november...she doesn't have a better voice than him 4 sure...but damned she sang at least half of the show.

It is sad that those are the standards that modern singers are judged by.

It depends on what U expected from an artit. I didn't go 2 the Madonna concert thinking she would sing her ass off. I went 4 the fun, I know she's not a great singer, but a great entertainer IMO. Now, if I go 2 MJ concert I expect him 2 sing...becuz I hope that he can. He has that wonderful voice on the records and I wanted 2 experience that live.

mjscarousal said:

go2theMax said:

u better start 2 use an umbrella...u know how big pig's shits are

Dont get cute

4 the record I love MJ, don't get me wrong...but that's the experience I had and how disappointed it got me ok

LOL..I posted this Martin Sloveig interview in one of the Madonnna threads weeks ago and nobody said a thing.And now that someone focuses on the MJ comment,y'all start a big war

Gotta love this site it's never boring!

smoothcriminal12 said:

Terrib3Towel said:

[img:$uid]http://i265.pho.../img:$uid]

What was it? It says bandwith exceeded.

It's a gif of MJ eating popcorn.

go2theMax said:

LiLi1992 said:

Do not exaggerate.

Dangerous tour was at least 60% livе.

Wanna Be Startin` Somethin
I Just Can`t Stop Loving You
Human Nature
She's Out Of My Life
J5 part
Billie Jean
Beat it

These songs were all live. Some of the other - in part

Surely they were NOT in the concert I attended! People left the stadium disappointed with the lip-syncing and the time long breaks between the sets..sometimes he finished a set and would come back like 15 minutes later to continue the...lip-syncing. I was disappointed. Dangerous was the first MJ album that I bought..I was 14 and became a fan right away...I atill am, but the fact is that I watched him lip-syncing an entire show!!

do you REALLY think it's lip-synching?? It is simply not true ....

To be fair, you could go over all of Madonna's 2000s material and cull it down to 1 single good album.

She fell from catastrophic heights releasing several shitty albums that were simply not up to snuff. Not even the pop princesses would've put out that corny shit.

go2theMax said:

mjscarousal said:

Dont get cute

4 the record I love MJ, don't get me wrong...but that's the experience I had and how disappointed it got me ok

OK see thats understandable because Michael CAN sing and I agree I wish he did sing live alot more on History but Dangerous Michael sung live more than half of the tour.

See argue and makeup

mjscarousal said:

go2theMax said:

4 the record I love MJ, don't get me wrong...but that's the experience I had and how disappointed it got me ok

OK see thats understandable because Michael CAN sing and I agree I wish he did sing live alot more on History but Dangerous Michael sung live more than half of the tour.

See argue and makeup

Spinlight said:

To be fair, you could go over all of Madonna's 2000s material and cull it down to 1 single good album.

She fell from catastrophic heights releasing several shitty albums that were simply not up to snuff. Not even the pop princesses would've put out that corny shit.

I think that the material would be enough for two full-length albums.

Music - good

AL - decent

Confessions - average and overrated

Hard candy - sucks

MDNA -????? but I think that is better than Hard Candy, but worse than the Confessions. I think the album will be mediocre.

[Edited 3/3/12 13:19pm]

shit, let Madonna get 2 child (15 year olds, her current boyfriends don't count) molestation accusations against her and her popularity will go down.

Michael is and always will be the king of pop, Madonna was just a hoe that fu cked her way to get where she is....

rdhull said:

She hasn't been relevant for over a decade. Concert sales and record sales dont mean an artist is relevant. I know that sounds ass backwards but its hard to explain.

The Stones and U2 always have the highest grossing cocnerts just like she does..but they are not relevant.

it all depends on how you define "relevent"

In my opinion,an irrelevent artist would not be able to sell out arenas and stadiums.Basically,if you can still make alot of money in the music business these days,you are relevant I hate to make it all about money because that sounds so shallow,but you get my point.

SoulAlive said:

rdhull said:

She hasn't been relevant for over a decade. Concert sales and record sales dont mean an artist is relevant. I know that sounds ass backwards but its hard to explain.

The Stones and U2 always have the highest grossing cocnerts just like she does..but they are not relevant.

it all depends on how you define "relevent"

In my opinion,an irrelevent artist would not be able to sell out arenas and stadiums.Basically,if you can still make alot of money in the music business these days,you are relevant I hate to make it all about money because that sounds so shallow,but you get my point.

As I stated in my post, selling out concerts does not mean you are relevant.

It just means you are possibly a must see oldies act etc etc.

You dont see Madonna, Stones, U2 etc effecting or influencing the culture or zeitgeist etc anymore just because they are in demand at concerts.

So I guess effecting/influencing the zeitgeist is how I am defining relevant.

All that other stuff is grand but I was speaking to the producers comments regarding relevancy.

[img:$uid]http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvjmu0MEdf1r5gb6jo1_250.gif[/img:$uid]

rdhull said:

SoulAlive said:

it all depends on how you define "relevent"

In my opinion,an irrelevent artist would not be able to sell out arenas and stadiums.Basically,if you can still make alot of money in the music business these days,you are relevant I hate to make it all about money because that sounds so shallow,but you get my point.

As I stated in my post, selling out concerts does not mean you are relevant.

It just means you are possibly a must see oldies act etc etc.

You dont see Madonna, Stones, U2 etc effecting or influencing the culture or zeitgeist etc anymore just because they are in demand at concerts.

So I guess effecting/influencing the zeitgeist is how I am defining relevant.

All that other stuff is grand but I was speaking to the producers comments regarding relevancy.

4 Minutes was a huge hit worldwide (Including the U.S where Hung Up was not) and yet she's not relevant? Speaking of Hung Up that song's her biggest selling song ever.

LiLi1992 said:

go2theMax said:

Surely they were NOT in the concert I attended! People left the stadium disappointed with the lip-syncing and the time long breaks between the sets..sometimes he finished a set and would come back like 15 minutes later to continue the...lip-syncing. I was disappointed. Dangerous was the first MJ album that I bought..I was 14 and became a fan right away...I atill am, but the fact is that I watched him lip-syncing an entire show!!

do you REALLY think it's lip-synching?? It is simply not true ....

This must be the show he did in Rio...and even so that Billie Jean performance was far from being a display of good vocals. Of course he sang some bits (really one or another line) on the concert I went in Sao Paulo...but it was really lip-synced overall. He seemed bored 2...I wasn't following the tabloid news on MJ but I think at the time he was already facing the molestation accusations, someone correct if i'm wrong...I left there thinking he was just a video artist. Then after that I started 2 listen 2 his previous works like "Off the Wall" and then I realized that he was more than that! I was there...were u? no? then u don't have much saying

Gunsnhalen said:

MJ must be brought into everything... and nowaday's so must Madonna. LAWD have mercy

Put Prince right in there too. EVERY single post about a new RB artist that sort-of does the "Prince" thing, we gotta hear the ENLESS BULLSHIT of "this is what Prince should be doing" mainly we get that everytime Van Hunt wipes his ass, we cant judge that cat without bringing Prince into the mix? I mean when we talked about the new Prince albums in the 80's who did we drag in? Did we say damn i wish "James Brown" could release something like this, or Rick James could get off the crack and do a good album again. Its NONSENSE. And with Madonna its all the same crap, personally i cant equate the two, its insanity to compare anyone that has had an actual career. MJ didnt "fail" and nor did Madonna, regardless of a new single not becoming a major hit, the fact that at 53 or whatever she is people actually give a rats ass to talk about you, or MJ or Prince and talk about madonna's or Prince's new work is testament to them standing the test of time. ITs stupid and Ignorant to honestly think these artists are going to impact this generation the way they imapacted a generation 30+ years ago, if U think for a second that JJ MJ Madonna or Prince, or Springsteen or Elton whomever, is gonna impact now the way they did when they were "the shit" than You need to be fit for a white coat....

alphastreet said:

mjscarousal said:

He is making a indirect jab at Michael when he implies he failed at being relevant. Like he tried to be relevant but Madonna was more successful with it. Michael took a break off from music to raise his 3 children.

I dont see how you can label someone as failing at something when they werent releasing music... I think Invincible is better than ANYTHING Madonna has released in the 00s. Not to mention he wrote and incorporated alot to it unlike Madonna who relied on gimmick producers who were current.

Mirwais and Stuart Price were virtually unknown to the US market. No one mainstream was working with them to the best of my knowledge at the time, and some of her best work did come out of their collaborations. She only worked with Pharell and Timbaland for one album.

[Edited 3/3/12 10:38am]

nice point here. cant believe they left out william orbit who did her most pivitol release ray of light. to me, he set the course for her work into the 2000s.

aardvark15 said:

rdhull said:

As I stated in my post, selling out concerts does not mean you are relevant.

It just means you are possibly a must see oldies act etc etc.

You dont see Madonna, Stones, U2 etc effecting or influencing the culture or zeitgeist etc anymore just because they are in demand at concerts.

So I guess effecting/influencing the zeitgeist is how I am defining relevant.

All that other stuff is grand but I was speaking to the producers comments regarding relevancy.

4 Minutes was a huge hit worldwide (Including the U.S where Hung Up was not) and yet she's not relevant? Speaking of Hung Up that song's her biggest selling song ever.

No. A one off hit record with ones base fans with the flavor of the month does not constitute relevancy. I already stated why and the what.

Why do yall want madonna to have to have it all regarding opinions etc? I already gave it up to her regarding her success in the past and currently, with people wanting to work with her still, and including some of my fav bands in the category of irrelevancy.

yall 'will ride and die for that bitch'

rdhull said:

aardvark15 said:

4 Minutes was a huge hit worldwide (Including the U.S where Hung Up was not) and yet she's not relevant? Speaking of Hung Up that song's her biggest selling song ever.

No. A one off hit record with ones base fans with the flavor of the month does not constitute relevancy. I already stated why and the what.

Why do yall want madonna to have to have it all regarding opinions etc? I already gave it up to her regarding her success in the past and currently, with people wanting to work with her still, and including some of my fav bands in the category of irrelevancy.

yall 'will ride and die for that bitch'

I'm not a Madonna stan by any means and you just have to face it that Madonna's still popular. Fans aside people still hear her music and buy it too. Madonna knows her way in the business and it clearly shows.

aardvark15 said:

rdhull said:

No. A one off hit record with ones base fans with the flavor of the month does not constitute relevancy. I already stated why and the what.

Why do yall want madonna to have to have it all regarding opinions etc? I already gave it up to her regarding her success in the past and currently, with people wanting to work with her still, and including some of my fav bands in the category of irrelevancy.

yall 'will ride and die for that bitch'

I'm not a Madonna stan by any means and you just have to face it that Madonna's still popular.

Yes, she is quite popular.

rdhull said:

aardvark15 said:

4 Minutes was a huge hit worldwide (Including the U.S where Hung Up was not) and yet she's not relevant? Speaking of Hung Up that song's her biggest selling song ever.

yall 'will ride and die for that bitch'

Ill ride or die for Mike

mjscarousal said:

rdhull said:

yall 'will ride and die for that bitch'

Ill ride or die for Mike

I kind of gathered that from your screen name and post hx.

LiLi1992 said:

Spinlight said:

To be fair, you could go over all of Madonna's 2000s material and cull it down to 1 single good album.

She fell from catastrophic heights releasing several shitty albums that were simply not up to snuff. Not even the pop princesses would've put out that corny shit.

I think that the material would be enough for two full-length albums.

Music - good

AL - decent

Confessions - average and overrated

Hard candy - sucks

MDNA -????? but I think that is better than Hard Candy, but worse than the Confessions. I think the album will be mediocre.

[Edited 3/3/12 13:19pm]

Cool, then 2 albums, but definitely not 4-5 albums. Personally, I think Music is the best album she put out in the 00s and I only like 1/3 of it. Can't stand AL, can't stand all but 2-3 tracks on Confessions, can't stand Hard Candy save for 2-3 tracks.

Definitely not "succeeding" where Mj "failed" imo... If she weren't such a bankable star that CEOs love to dump money into, she wouldn't be a success. Out of the 7 billion people in the world, it's not surprising you can convince 1.5 million of them to buy a Madge record with all the fucking hoopla that is attached to each record.

Hooplah, aka hype, doesn't have a direct correlation to someone staying relevant unless we are suggesting the CEOs are tastemakers.

lastdecember said:

Gunsnhalen said:

MJ must be brought into everything... and nowaday's so must Madonna. LAWD have mercy

Put Prince right in there too. EVERY single post about a new RB artist that sort-of does the "Prince" thing, we gotta hear the ENLESS BULLSHIT of "this is what Prince should be doing" mainly we get that everytime Van Hunt wipes his ass, we cant judge that cat without bringing Prince into the mix? I mean when we talked about the new Prince albums in the 80's who did we drag in? Did we say damn i wish "James Brown" could release something like this, or Rick James could get off the crack and do a good album again. Its NONSENSE. And with Madonna its all the same crap, personally i cant equate the two, its insanity to compare anyone that has had an actual career. MJ didnt "fail" and nor did Madonna, regardless of a new single not becoming a major hit, the fact that at 53 or whatever she is people actually give a rats ass to talk about you, or MJ or Prince and talk about madonna's or Prince's new work is testament to them standing the test of time. ITs stupid and Ignorant to honestly think these artists are going to impact this generation the way they imapacted a generation 30+ years ago, if U think for a second that JJ MJ Madonna or Prince, or Springsteen or Elton whomever, is gonna impact now the way they did when they were "the shit" than You need to be fit for a white coat....

But I look terrible in white.

Spinlight said:

LiLi1992 said:

I think that the material would be enough for two full-length albums.

Music - good

AL - decent

Confessions - average and overrated

Hard candy - sucks

MDNA -????? but I think that is better than Hard Candy, but worse than the Confessions. I think the album will be mediocre.

[Edited 3/3/12 13:19pm]

Cool, then 2 albums, but definitely not 4-5 albums. Personally, I think Music is the best album she put out in the 00s and I only like 1/3 of it. Can't stand AL, can't stand all but 2-3 tracks on Confessions, can't stand Hard Candy save for 2-3 tracks.

Definitely not "succeeding" where Mj "failed" imo... If she weren't such a bankable star that CEOs love to dump money into, she wouldn't be a success. Out of the 7 billion people in the world, it's not surprising you can convince 1.5 million of them to buy a Madge record with all the fucking hoopla that is attached to each record.

Hooplah, aka hype, doesn't have a direct correlation to someone staying relevant unless we are suggesting the CEOs are tastemakers.

Agree.

Madonna does sell out stadiums BUT she COULD NOT sell out 50 shows....