Does MJ's lack of respect from serious music critics/rock press/music snobs bother you?

[Soundmind]

I think playing 'who is the best dead celebrity' is ever so macarbe & distateful. Especially in only a week since David's passing.

No one is talking about the best dead celebrity here, the discussion is about who has been more influential, in life rather than in death, a discussion I did not start. Seven years after his death, MJ's profits are better than those of top selling alive artists. For this fact alone it is rather unfair to David to compare him with MJ. The man was a good artist thus he deserves his place in history period. One who does not want to be hit with the implausible truth should refrain from comparing him with MJ.

But some desperate people cannot contain themselves from trying to take advantage of every 'opportunity' to downplay MJ's achievements. In one year I am sure the same people will come back to talk about how X has been on the same level if not better than MJ and X won't be Bowie. That global outpouring of love when MJ died was not out of nowhere. The media played ZERO role in the hysterical reaction to his death. The Internet almost died MINUTES after the news broke. no one dictated on those people how should they react, no one but MJ pulled them to their phones and PCs that day, certainly no credit to music experts or journalists because all they did in the aftermath was trying desperately to downplay that global show of emotions whereas with Bowie and others it is the complete opposite.

 

[Kee]

But I'm sure that it's also attracted a large number of bandwagon jumpers who are only invested in an artist if they are current or in the news. That's all I'm saying

Yeah, you're right, that's what happened with our Michael too

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]

Get off your high horse. David is unknown in non Western countries. To even suggest he is as influential as MJ is laughable. Nothing to do with the man really.

The only one on a "high horse" is you, making ignorant statements (solely based on your experience, not FACTS) about a very gifted and influential artist that has recently died. It's petty and small-minded to compare him to anyone, Mike included. They're both legends and loved by many.

 

[D.S.]

Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I learned a long time ago not to give a crap about what others think of MJ. In any respect. This Nathan dude sounds like a real winner, why even bother with him? I find people like him just sad.

 

[DuranDuran]

influence

But how come one is more influential than another when his audience was much less than the other.

I'm not saying that it's the case with Mike & David. But bigger sales is not necessarily an indicator of more influence. That could mean that a lot of people bought a record, but not that they influenced a lot of musicians. Vanilla Ice's debut album sold way more than any James Brown album. James never had blockbuster sales. But I would say James had more influence on music today than Vanilla Ice. Bass player Larry Graham, who invented the slap bass technique, had more influence on music than New Kids On The Block. Without Larry, Off The Wall would have been different as Louis Johnson used slap bass. Garth Brooks is one of the biggest selling acts in history, but James still had more influence in many genres. Garth's influence is probably in how country music concerts go, but there's nothing really different about his music. But James Brown had influence in country too as there were funky grooves in some country records in the late 1960s & 1970s.

 

[innuendo141]

The only one on a "high horse" is you, making ignorant statements (solely based on your experience, not FACTS) about a very gifted and influential artist that has recently died. It's petty and small-minded to compare him to anyone, Mike included. They're both legends and loved by many.

Very well said Sheila.

 

[analogue]

How do you all feel about Michael being criticized for his singing? I've seen quite a few people say that he wasn't that great of a vocalist and that his voice lacked power. I never understood it, because Michael was a very versatile vocalist, and Earth Song shows that he clearly didn't lack power.

My guess is that his voice isn't masculine enough for some people. And people prefer make rock singers who sing like ''real'' men

 

[innuendo141]

How do you all feel about Michael being criticized for his singing? I've seen quite a few people say that he wasn't that great of a vocalist and that his voice lacked power. I never understood it, because Michael was a very versatile vocalist, and Earth Song shows that he clearly didn't lack power.

My guess is that his voice isn't masculine enough for some people. And people prefer make rock singers who sing like ''real'' men

I myself have never heard a bad word about his singing abilities. Even among my friends hes always highly placed among the best singers of all time.

For those who think his voice isn't masculine enough they just haven't heard She's Driving Me Wild, She Got It, Scream, Tabloid Junkie, Get It, Blood on the Dance Floor.

Earth Song proves that the man had ALL the power, like you said.

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]

How do you all feel about Michael being criticized for his singing? I've seen quite a few people say that he wasn't that great of a vocalist and that his voice lacked power. I never understood it, because Michael was a very versatile vocalist, and Earth Song shows that he clearly didn't lack power.

My guess is that his voice isn't masculine enough for some people. And people prefer make rock singers who sing like ''real'' men

I didn't care what critics (or otherwise) thought about his voice. They don't dictate who I like and/or listen to. Never did, never will.

 

[HIStory]

The guy in the OP was funny about this aspect as well. He says MJ peaked vocally at Ain't No Sunshine. Even if he prefers MJ's childhood vocals it's nonsense to say that Ain't No Sunshine were his best childhood vocals and he peaked there. Just another point where he showcased ignorance about MJ's career. (Then he proceeds to praise people like Madonna as superior to MJ. LOL, alright. And Bowie is a great artist who I am a fan of, but as a vocalist he is nowhere near to MJ, IMO, so why does Nathan even bring up vocals in this stupid comparation?)

I personally prefer MJ's late teen and adult vocals to his childhood vocals, although of course I love both. To me his adult vocals are richer, more versatile, he has a more unique use of his voice and his tone is smoother and to me and more pleasant.

I think some people think that to be a great vocalist you have to be a powerhouse vocalist. I consider that a very narrow-minded view about what great vocals are but I have seen a lot of times that the more a singer "shouts" and "screams" people tend to rate it the more (for example at talent shows). Some also mistake lound screaming for conveying emotions IMO. Michael wasn't a powerhouse vocalist like Whitney or Freddie Mercury, although of course he could deliver very powerful vocal performances (eg. Earth Song). But the way he used his vocals were very creative - eg. his tendency of using it as an instrument, particularly percussion - and unique. He was a very versatile vocalist which is why he sounded good in almost any genre. Most singers only sound good within their own genre, but MJ could do a just as convincing rock delivery as he did soul. He had very flexible vocals, he was very soulful, he conveyed emotions in his vocals very well. One may not like the tone of his voice or prefer more masculine voices for male vocalists but, but to say he wasn't a great vocalist is idiotic IMO.

 

[innuendo141]

The guy in the OP was funny about this aspect as well. He says MJ peaked vocally at Ain't No Sunshine. Even if he prefers MJ's childhood vocals it's nonsense to say that Ain't No Sunshine were his best childhood vocals and he peaked there. Just another point where he showcased ignorance about MJ's career. (Then he proceeds to praise people like Madonna as superior to MJ. LOL, alright. And Bowie is a great artist who I am a fan of, but as a vocalist he is nowhere near to MJ, IMO, so why does Nathan even bring up vocals in this stupid comparation?)

Even Bowie had said that himself several times throughout his career haha.

I personally prefer MJ's late teen and adult vocals to his childhood vocals, although of course I love both. To me his adult vocals are richer, more versatile, he has a more unique use of his voice and his tone is smoother and to me and more pleasant.

Snap, his vocals in the mid to late J5 and solo stuff in motown is sensational. Anyone who listens to Forever Came Today cannot deny that Michael jacksonw as the only person in the world who could take a Diana lead and power the sh1t out of it and blast her away. Good lawd what a tune!

 

[Andymachine]

Poor vocalist ? Hmm has this person ever heard some of the Dangerous tour performances of She's Out of My Life? They were very strong vocally. It is why I do wish MJ did sing more of his stuff live like this , that and ad libs during I cant Stop Loving You on Bad Tour . His vocal peak however was surely around Destiny Tour but that is understandable.

 

[innuendo141]

Poor vocalist ? Hmm has this person ever heard some of the Dangerous tour performances of She's Out of My Life? They were very strong vocally. It is why I do wish MJ did sing more of his stuff live like this , that and ad libs during I cant Stop Loving You on Bad Tour . His vocal peak however was surely around Destiny Tour but that is understandable.

I''d say Victory Tour myself. He modulated his voice to suit songs live and they just sounded better to me eg. Heartbreak Hotel, Lovely One, Motown Medley, Rock With You etc.

 

[barbee0715]

^^Even the nastiest reviews I ever read still could not deny his greatest gift: his Voice. I love the ways they describe it and the emotions it envokes.

 

[somewhereinthedark]

How do you all feel about Michael being criticized for his singing? I've seen quite a few people say that he wasn't that great of a vocalist and that his voice lacked power. I never understood it, because Michael was a very versatile vocalist, and Earth Song shows that he clearly didn't lack power.

My guess is that his voice isn't masculine enough for some people. And people prefer make rock singers who sing like ''real'' men

I have never cared or worried about what people say. In fact, it only increases my love, respect and devotion for Michael.

 

[MJJA]

^^Even the nastiest reviews I ever read still could not deny his greatest gift: his Voice. I love the ways they describe it and the emotions it envokes.

He was an incredibly versatile singer and a world-class songwriter and producer but I still think his greatest gift was dancing.
I think to often people treat dancing as entertainment and not as an art form which it truly is.
The ability to use ones body to convey emotion and to tell a story is as powerful as any acting performance or singing performance or piece of lyricism.
MJ was one of the great masters. A true artist as a dancer. His artistry was as much about the physical as it was about the sound or the words.

 

[analogue]

Michael's dancing and singing was just as good as each other. To say which one he was more talented at is impossible for me

 

[Psychoniff]

His songwriter was is weakest skill, but it wasn't weak (it was phenomenal), it was just weak compared to his other skills (dancing, singing).

 

[analogue]

His songwriter was is weakest skill, but it wasn't weak (it was phenomenal), it was just weak compared to his other skills (dancing, singing).

Michael didn't have a weakest skill. All of his skills were just as good as each other. The man was a multi-talented genius

 

[ChrisC]

His songwriter was is weakest skill, but it wasn't weak (it was phenomenal), it was just weak compared to his other skills (dancing, singing).

I think he was a better songwriter than he was a singer, frankly.

Perhaps he was a better singer than he was a lyricist, however.

 

[analogue]

Comparing his skills is a waste of time.

 

[Gatesy2006]

To me his production values on later tours overshadowed the music, like on the Bad tour, there was essentially Michael, backup singers, a mic and a stage and he was good to go. It was stripped back, it was genius.

Had he done a unplugged session, no big production, that would have earned him more appreciation to the music 'snobs' and it would have been something great for the fans to see also. Something different and fresh.

The whole 'he had the best producers and best engineers' criticism is ludicrous, yes he did have very good producers and engineers but at the end of the day someone had to write the music and sing the songs and MJ was as good as they came.

I understand the criticism for Madonna because she was a talentless hack who couldn't hold a note to save her life, but the bias against MJ is unjust and is frankly bullshit. There is no merit in it even if people weren't biased against him.

 

[MJJA]

I think he was a better songwriter than he was a singer, frankly.

Perhaps he was a better singer than he was a lyricist, however.

He wrote some pretty damn great lyrics, particularly in the 90's.
It was everything. The music, the lyrics, the production, the singing, the dancing, the short films, the live performances, the look. Everything. He was the most complete performer/artist that ever lived.

 

[KOPV]

The fact we can compare them and they are both impeccable showcases that he was THAT great!!!

I've always said:

It's not the fact he was "arguably" the best dancer
It's not the fact he was "arguably" the best singer
It's no t the fact he was "arguably" the best live performer
It's not the fact he "arguably" made the best videos

It' the fact he is "Arguably" the best at so many things that make him the BEST!


He was the pinnacle of music entertainment

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Michael was one of the best musicians over the last 40 years, and I think its really sad how many only think of him as a joke nowadays. I do hold him partly responsible for trusting the wrong people, but the paparazzi's cruel treatment of him was more than anyone should have to bear. I breathed a huge sigh of relief when he was found not guilty in 2005, but I still hesitate sometimes in telling new people I'm a fan. I was raised by people who believed allegations equaled truth, and that ideology has been very difficult for me to ditch at times.

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

Michael Jackson had the ultimate respect up until the making of We Are The World in 1985, he was the nation's most celebrated artist, so much respect, every major readio station on the country played We Arte The World simultaneously on the airwaves

 

[PoP]

Now Bowie is a bigger influence than MJ?!! lol

Now that you mentioned it, MUCH has been shown more David Bowes videos a lot lately since he's gone for a whole week and I thought to myself "How come they gave Bowie such tribute in the channel for a whole and gave Michael a little less since he's gone?" It's they care about Bowie a lot more than Michael and that sorta pissed me off.

But yeah critics and press does always piss me off when they gave Michael no amount of respect. And as for critics, don't listen to any critics at all, they're bunch of dead beat losers who think they know, but they don't.

 

[MJJA]

I honestly don't believe that anyone in the last twenty years has produced better work in terms of the sonic sound, scope, complexity and depth of his music then MJ in the 90's.

 

[HIStory]

Now that you mentioned it, MUCH has been shown more David Bowes videos a lot lately since he's gone for a whole week and I thought to myself "How come they gave Bowie such tribute in the channel for a whole and gave Michael a little less since he's gone?" It's they care about Bowie a lot more than Michael and that sorta pissed me off.

I guess it depends where you live. Where I live music channels did give MJ his due tribute just like they do to Bowie now. In fact, the music channel in my country regularly plays a big variety of MJ's videos still. Actually that channel has an online stream so maybe you are able to watch it: http://myhit.tv/

 

[mj_frenzy]

And as for critics, don't listen to any critics at all, they're bunch of dead beat losers who think they know, but they don't.

I think the problem goes deeper than their so-called knowledge when it comes to music.

Music critics are linked, indirectly or not, to the music industry. They make a living by writing their reviews so as to support (or not) certain artists, rather than to express their honest opinion.

In other words, it is not uncommon for them to become a part of a carefully orchestrated strategy in order to boost (or destroy) certain artists/albums.

For me, critics are not known for their trustworthiness, & as a result, I honestly see no reason for people paying any serious attention to them.