better overall career Mary J.Bliege or Mariah Carey?

mistermaxxx

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,746
Points
0
Location
WestCoast
they each put out albums fairly recently both been out about the same time and both have had big time impact and influence so of the two who do you think has made the better albums, songs and live performances,etc....??? also who will History acknowledge the more in the bigger picture and why?
 
I think Mariah, but I'm a fan of her's, not of MJB. But in terms of over all success and popularity, Mariah wins. I'll tell you one thing though, Mariah can outsing that screaming mimi any day.
 
I rather find Mariah annoying sometimes (not often) with her heavy breathing,though she sure can sing!

I love MJB a lot, I think she is a great vocalist and would like her to do a duet with MJ.
 
Mariah...definately a song bird...
 
Last edited:
As much as Mariah annoys me, I don't understand the hype with Mary J. Sure, she's been around for a while and has a couple good songs, but she's not anything above the average singer. It definitely goes to Mariah.
 
Mariah Carey by a country mile. In terms of stats, Mariah wipes the floor with MJB. I enjoy them both, but I find Blige to be a tad overrated.
 
Mariah of course has been more successful, but I like Mary better. Technically, she may not be the best singer but the emotion in her voice more than makes up for whatever she lacks in that area and I also think she's a much better perfomer than Mariah. Mary always gives 110% when she performs. Love her.

Mary performing at the 2007 Grammy's, this is One of my fave Performances by her :wub:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khomyNsr_j8[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
Mary J gets my vote without a doubt. Mariah is extremely overrated. I find that Mariahs voice isnt that pleasant to listen to most of the time and she always looks awkward in upbeat performances mainly cause she cant dance.

Mary J just has that something else that connects with me personally and over the life of her career the songs are better than Mariahs, she defined 90s female R & B and really stood out on her own at that time. She has really worked hard for her success and position, not to say that Mariah hasnt but being married to a label exec obviously had its benefits for her.
 
Mariah's a singer, not a dancer. Why should she be expected to dance while she sings?

Anyway, Mariah gets no love on this site, lol. But I think she's amazing. Maybe you don't like her style, but she's definitly a more gifted voclist then MJB. MJB has a pretty good voice, but she's a classic example of someone with a voice who doesn't know how to sing.
 
Mary J gets my vote without a doubt. Mariah is extremely overrated. I find that Mariahs voice isnt that pleasant to listen to most of the time and she always looks awkward in upbeat performances mainly cause she cant dance.

Mary J just has that something else that connects with me personally and over the life of her career the songs are better than Mariahs, she defined 90s female R & B and really stood out on her own at that time. She has really worked hard for her success and position, not to say that Mariah hasnt but being married to a label exec obviously had its benefits for her.

That's how I feel too. Of course Mariah is the better singer but I connect and relate to Mary's music more than I do with Mariah's. I also feel that Mariah is kind of weak as a performer, though I did think she was incredible at the 2005 or 2006 (forget which year) Grammy's when she sang "We Belong Together" and "Fly Like A Bird". Some of her earlier performances are great too, but overall performing is not her strong suit. Mary is definitely the better performer and although Mary hasn't been nearly as successful as Mariah, she still has managed to be one of the very few R&b singers from the 90's who's managed to find longevity in this business and continue to be successful.
 
Mary never really crossed over as much because her songs aren't pop like Mariah's, so obviously Mariah had bigger success. At the same time just because someone is a better technical singer doesn't mean that they appeal to to people. That is why most people don't dig opera singers and why others enjoy Bob Dylan.
 
Depends on the genre...if we're talking pop/worldwide, Mariah hands down.
If we're talking R&B/soul US, Mary J without a question.
 
I much prefer Mary J Blige. Her vocal range may not be as impressive as Mariah's, but personally I feel that her music is more involved and intelligent. Mariah has some incredibly famous songs, but I don't think that makes her a better artiste. One of my favourite songs of all time is Mary J's 'No More Drama' - I find it really moving and when I'm feeling in a reflective mood I regularly listen to it. I'm very into songs with lyrics that I can sit and think about, and it is for this reason that I'm going to go with Mary J Blige as the better artist - her songs are arguably 'deeper' than Mariah Carey's.
 
Mariah has had more sales. that's how i define a career. making a living.
That doesn't mean anything. B.B. King has been performing since the 1940s, and very few of his albums has ever sold much, but still is a millionaire. TLC, Toni Braxton, & MC Hammer sold millions of records and were broke. Most jazz and blues acts never went platinum but still performed for decades. Most musicians make money from touring and performing, not from record sales, in which the record companies take all of the money and rip off the acts. Look at the Rolling Stones, who hasn't had a really big selling album since the 1970s, but is one of the more successful touring acts today. Managers have also known to rip off artists, like what happened with Sting and Billy Joel. Other than pop & rock acts, most genres of music don't sell lots of copies and don't get any mainstream recognition.
 
I don't know why anyone would bother to compare them, to be honest. Too different.
 
That doesn't mean anything. B.B. King has been performing since the 1940s, and very few of his albums has ever sold much, but still is a millionaire. TLC, Toni Braxton, & MC Hammer sold millions of records and were broke. Most jazz and blues acts never went platinum but still performed for decades. Most musicians make money from touring and performing, not from record sales, in which the record companies take all of the money and rip off the acts. Look at the Rolling Stones, who hasn't had a really big selling album since the 1970s, but is one of the more successful touring acts today. Managers have also known to rip off artists, like what happened with Sting and Billy Joel. Other than pop & rock acts, most genres of music don't sell lots of copies and don't get any mainstream recognition.

it means a lot. because like i said..the part that you didn't want to bold, is, that it means making a living.

Mariah is now in the position of power, where she can have brands advertise her. and she sold for all aspects of her career, not just one or some. the best career is the one where the person makes the best living. the most money. Mariah has done that, between the two artists, that are the subject of this thread.
 
^^^^The Rolling Stones make more money than Mariah and they don't have to sell a lot of records, so they are making a better living going by your criteria. The point is that record sales have nothing to do with making a living, especially if someone has a bad contract. Sales mostly benefit the record company. Anyway Mary has brands advertising her because I see her in commercials all the time.
 
^^^^The Rolling Stones make more money than Mariah and they don't have to sell a lot of records, so they are making a better living going by your criteria. The point is that record sales have nothing to do with making a living, especially if someone has a bad contract. Sales mostly benefit the record company. Anyway Mary has brands advertising her because I see her in commercials all the time.

well..i was talking about between Mariah and Mary, and Mariah did have better record sales. and the Stones sold enough records for it not to matter. i don't know why people love to downplay record sales. it really must be because it's a most poignant statement about one's talent. you are left with the music, alone. sales have a lot to do with making a living. why do it, if they have nothing to do with it. and for those who have bad contracts, if the music is powerful enough, that won't matter, unless the artist is making nothing at all. and in that case, the music is bad. and if the contract is not allowing the artist to make a blip, then, that aritist would get out of that contract. and none of this has anything to do with Mariah and Mary. they aren't in bad contracts.
 
well..i was talking about between Mariah and Mary, and Mariah did have better record sales. and the Stones sold enough records for it not to matter. i don't know why people love to downplay record sales. it really must be because it's a most poignant statement about one's talent. you are left with the music, alone. sales have a lot to do with making a living. why do it, if they have nothing to do with it. and for those who have bad contracts, if the music is powerful enough, that won't matter, unless the artist is making nothing at all. and in that case, the music is bad. and if the contract is not allowing the artist to make a blip, then, that aritist would get out of that contract. and none of this has anything to do with Mariah and Mary. they aren't in bad contracts.
Sales have nothing to do with quality, only the promotional department of a company. Invincible & HIStory didn't sell much in the US because Sony USA didn't spend any money to promote them. So I guess you're saying that since Miley Cyrus sell more records than Miles Davis or Dolly Parton (or even Mariah's & Mary J.'s newer albums), her music is superior to theirs and Miles & Dolly's music is bad. I recall Mariah was paid to leave a record company because her records stopped selling. Was her records bad? You just can't get out of a contract, that's why MJ & George Michael were fighting Sony and Prince was fighting Warner Brothers.
 
Sales have nothing to do with quality, only the promotional department of a company. Invincible & HIStory didn't sell much in the US because Sony USA didn't spend any money to promote them. So I guess you're saying that since Miley Cyrus sell more records than Miles Davis or Dolly Parton (or even Mariah's & Mary J.'s newer albums), her music is superior to theirs and Miles & Dolly's music is bad. I recall Mariah was paid to leave a record company because her records stopped selling. Was her records bad? You just can't get out of a contract, that's why MJ & George Michael were fighting Sony and Prince was fighting Warner Brothers.

Invincible did well. HIStory did well. i don't know what your definition of 'well' is, but i would love to sell what those albums sold. and there always is a way to get out of a contract. Prince sold his stuff online. and Michael found a clever way of getting out of a contract, without dishonoring it. he simply stopped writing music for them, after a certain time. and, even before that time, he used stuff he wrote lonng ago. record sales have a lot to do with a career. according to your logic, why even bother making a record? and are you saying that Invincible and History were of low quality? Michael, alone, proved, that, if anything..lack of promotion...trying to destroy someone, and just about anything else, doesn't stop good music from selling. MJ sold stuff, despite everything leveled against him. and he sold well. you are underestimating the intelligence of the consumer. in the end, they buy the music.

there was a song dedicated to 911, by Julio Iglesias. it went straight to number 1, on the radio. never sold a copy. so, in the end, promotion means nothing. but it should be done, anyway. what's wrong with that?
 
Last edited:
Prince sold his stuff online.
He only did that after he finished his contract with Warner Brothers. Prince gave Warners a bunch of already recorded material he had in his vault and they made some albums from them: "Come", "Old Friends 4 Sale", "The Gold Experience", & "Chaos and Disorder". Warners had also put out the unreleased album from 1988 called "The Black Album" in 1994. Prince still had to fufill his contract. This is why he changed his name to the symbol and started writing "Slave" on his face. A contract is a legally binding document. You can't just break it, the record company can sue you. Peter Tork of The Monkees and Terence Trent D'arby had to buy out their contracts, which left them broke. Tori Amos wanted to leave Atlantic Records, but they wouldn't let her out of her contract and wouldn't promote or refuse to release material she returned to them. The artist has no power, the company does. The artist is just an employee. Invincble & HIStory didn't sell much in the US, only overseas. If you notice Michael never toured the USA after the Bad tour. Why is that?
 
He only did that after he finished his contract with Warner Brothers. Prince gave Warners a bunch of already recorded material he had in his vault and they made some albums from them: "Come", "Old Friends 4 Sale", "The Gold Experience", & "Chaos and Disorder". Warners had also put out the unreleased album from 1988 called "The Black Album" in 1994. Prince still had to fufill his contract. This is why he changed his name to the symbol and started writing "Slave" on his face. A contract is a legally binding document. You can't just break it, the record company can sue you. Peter Tork of The Monkees and Terence Trent D'arby had to buy out their contracts, which left them broke. Tori Amos wanted to leave Atlantic Records, but they wouldn't let her out of her contract and wouldn't promote or refuse to release material she returned to them. The artist has no power, the company does. The artist is just an employee. Invincble & HIStory didn't sell much in the US, only overseas. If you notice Michael never toured the USA after the Bad tour. Why is that?

are you saying the usa is the only country in the world? and, still, are you saying that between four and ten million copies is a failure? Michael did well in the usa. but, again, Michael did well around the world. using the usa, alone, is convenient, but not relevant. having said that, even two million in the usa, alone, is very good. and Michael did more than that. but, in the beginning, he did that. and that is good.

Michael used ingenuity, and therefore, had power. like i said...you can break a contract, without breaking a contract. Sony had to rerelease MJ's old material countless times, because MJ made new material very very sparse. that's a cool way to break a contract, without leaving a contract. and nothing that Sony tried, made MJ broke. if an artist has enough ingenuity, they can find ways to get out of a contract. you have power, unless you believe you don't.

perhaps those other artists, such as D'Arby, should have gone into publishing, like Michael. again...ceasing to write songs, is a clever way to not work for someone, anymore. whatever Warner did, with Prince, if anything, it made them want to release stuff from him, that they probably, otherwise would not have released. and, he could just sit back and do nothing. and then start over, when he got out of the contract, officially.
 
Last edited:
MJ haters on board in disguise, attacking people they don't know.

(Not you, Duran)

2qiw6xs.jpg
 
Back
Top