R.Kelly is a Better Producer than Prince

all artists have had to settle out of court over songs at some time and point,but you didn't bother looking that up, you just want to pick on R.Kelly and I type how I damn well feel and if you don't like it then ignore it, turkey.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

First of all, did you bother looking up to see whether MJ or Prince settled out of court? No you didnt becuase then you'd know that MJ and Prince NEVER settled out of court but rather went to court to clear their name and prove they did write such songs however Mr. R (I need a young girl who doesnt know any better) Kelly did not write YANA therefore gives doubt to anything he has claimed he has written PLUS if he lied about writing YANA to MJ and the world then why wouldnt he lie about sleeping with under-age girls and filming it the sick f*ck!!! And your sick for defending that f*ck. You should be calling that future jail-bird names and not members on the board. Calling members names shows a lack of intelligence seems its the only way you seem to be able to defend yourself and that rock-spider!
 
In my opinion R. Kelly has great talent but he has not shown it for some time now..

What kind of dumb crap is 'Trapped In The Closet'.. Ya I admit I watched it.. lol! But he called it 'inovative and revolutionizing'.. He even mentioned MJ and how he revolutionized videos..

In my personal opinion, lately he's been a sell out.. Too many great producers and artists are trying to hard to FIT IN to todays music instead of CREATING what todays music SHOULD sound like..

He's one of them.

i definitely agree with this.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

First of all, did you bother looking up to see whether MJ or Prince settled out of court? No you didnt becuase then you'd know that MJ and Prince NEVER settled out of court but rather went to court to clear their name and prove they did write such songs however Mr. R (I need a young girl who doesnt know any better) Kelly did not write YANA therefore gives doubt to anything he has claimed he has written PLUS if he lied about writing YANA to MJ and the world then why wouldnt he lie about sleeping with under-age girls and filming it the sick f*ck!!! And your sick for defending that f*ck. You should be calling that future jail-bird names and not members on the board. Calling members names shows a lack of intelligence seems its the only way you seem to be able to defend yourself and that rock-spider!

This however...i think we should give Kelly the same benefit of the doubt that we've asked others of MJ when he was going on trial. Lets not be SO judgmental now. Lets wait until he's gone through due process before we start insulting him like that.
 
Last edited:
This however...i think we should give Kelly the same benefit of the doubt that we've asked others of MJ when he was going on trial. Lets not be SO judgmental now. Lets wait until he's gone through due process before we start insulting him like that.

Sorry but there is already evidence to show that R.Kelly is guilty whereas there was no evidence such as video tapes to show MJ was guilty. Also R. Kelly has been found guilty of plagiarism therefore if he lied about this, he is capable of lieing about a worse criminal act, being having sex with underage girls.
 
I still say, lets be fair. Lots of people feel that MJ's settlement was evidence enough, and the sleepovers, or whatever. People are just as passionate and sure about it. Im just saying, let Kelly have his day in court.
 
I still say, lets be fair. Lots of people feel that MJ's settlement was evidence enough, and the sleepovers, or whatever. People are just as passionate and sure about it. Im just saying, let Kelly have his day in court.

A settlement vs actual video evidence is 2 different things. One is hard evidence (Kelly), one is circumstantial evidence (MJ). He can have his day in court, cuz at the end of it, there is no way a jury is going to find that video tape innocent. Therefore I stand by my previous statement.
 
there is no way a jury --
1zbynok.jpg
 
lol Touche! And that pic says it all huh!

Of course we'll have to wait and see however but this is my opinion which Im entitled too and again the fact that R.Kelly has been already proven a liar says alot to me. THEN you get video evidence. If OJ had video evidence he killed Nicole, he'd end up in jail too.
 
If I say George Bush doesn't know how to dance, is that trashing him? If I say that Prince isn't 7 feet tall, is that trashing him? Or that Oprah isn't a man, is that trashing her? I said nothing to trash Michael. If you read the whole thing (instead of taking comments out of context like a journalist) you could see that. I didn't say anything to make someone else look better, if you read it correctly, but that Michael wasn't relevant to the statement about playing drums/ programming beats as he doesn't do that. It's not a putdown and it doesn't make anyone look better than him. If I say that Michael doesn't go out and murder people, it isn't a put down. I'm just commenting on something he doesn't do, which in this case is to play an instrument. This is what I mean by being sensitive and not objective.

I"m not being sensitive and you are hardly objective in 99 percent of your posts when it comes to Michael, sadly he seems to draw more "fans" who have issues to websites about him than actual fans of his talent.
 
Last edited:
give me time I will find one and if you sign in the Music business you are trying to sell records and not just signing up for your health. and I was just jiving about Bobby Mcferrin. I got a Jazz colab album he did with chic corea some years back.
It's just like the movie business, you have movies designed to make a lot of money like Indiana Jones. Then there's "art films" that play in few theaters, that do not make money. Then there's low budget straight to video movies. Some acts are designed for "cult" audiences. Like thrash, new age, or something. These acts get no radio play. Another is club music designed to dance to in a club, not really for radio play. Then there's records with lots of profanity that can't be played on the radio, so can't be "hits". Back in the early 1970s there was a group called The Last Poets, which was afro-centric protest music, not radio fodder. What about comedy records like Richard Pryor or Bill Cosby? You can't play that on the radio because it's just talking and no singles are released from them. Then there are groups like Led Zepplin, Pink Floyd, or Rush which didn't do much on the singles side, but sold lots of albums. An act like Sun Ra is definitely not designed for "hits". It's too out there. Or the average phychedelic music from the 1960s, which was designed to get stoned to, not for catchiness. Some music was too long for radio or 45 singles, like a lot of funk and early 70s rock. Back then, the bigger selling acts made enough money for the labels that they could put out non commercial music that doesn't sell much and use them as a tax writeoff. BB King has been performing since the 1940s without a lot of big hits because he has quality music and tours a lot. Just because something is a "hit" doesn't mean it has any quality to it or that the performer in question has any talent, just that it was pushed by the record company. Back in the old days, the DJs had more power over what was played and became hits. Now it's just conglomerate radio with generic playlists.
 
I"m not being sensitive and you are hardly objective in 99 percent of your posts when it comes to Michael, sadly he seems to draw more "fans" who have issues to websites about him than actual fans of his talent.
I still don't understand how stating facts is a putdown. I said in another thread that Michael only released 2 albums of new material since 1991, and everybody thinks that's a negative statement about Mike. I don't see in what way, that's a true statement. But yet a lot of people in here trash other people (Justin Timberlake, Madonna, even Janet), which is being a hypocrite. I've never said anything against Michael, that he doesn't have any talent, or said anyone was better than him. The idea of this thread is to trash Prince, and the comments from the OP were negative. How come you say nothing about that? I don't trash people, because I'm not a negative person. Show me the "99%" of posts that were negative. I've said totally innocent things, and people blow it out of proportion.
 
Last edited:
Well, what you actually said in that thread was that "Michael hasn't done much since 1991", which isn't true.
In respect to the moderator I'll just say this and not say anything else. But the word "technically" was in front of that and the whole time I was talking about his recording output.
 
Last edited:
It's just like the movie business, you have movies designed to make a lot of money like Indiana Jones. Then there's "art films" that play in few theaters, that do not make money. Then there's low budget straight to video movies. Some acts are designed for "cult" audiences. Like thrash, new age, or something. These acts get no radio play. Another is club music designed to dance to in a club, not really for radio play. Then there's records with lots of profanity that can't be played on the radio, so can't be "hits". Back in the early 1970s there was a group called The Last Poets, which was afro-centric protest music, not radio fodder. What about comedy records like Richard Pryor or Bill Cosby? You can't play that on the radio because it's just talking and no singles are released from them. Then there are groups like Led Zepplin, Pink Floyd, or Rush which didn't do much on the singles side, but sold lots of albums. An act like Sun Ra is definitely not designed for "hits". It's too out there. Or the average phychedelic music from the 1960s, which was designed to get stoned to, not for catchiness. Some music was too long for radio or 45 singles, like a lot of funk and early 70s rock. Back then, the bigger selling acts made enough money for the labels that they could put out non commercial music that doesn't sell much and use them as a tax writeoff. BB King has been performing since the 1940s without a lot of big hits because he has quality music and tours a lot. Just because something is a "hit" doesn't mean it has any quality to it or that the performer in question has any talent, just that it was pushed by the record company. Back in the old days, the DJs had more power over what was played and became hits. Now it's just conglomerate radio with generic playlists.
i can dig your take and respect it, though the eras are different. back then you could make 3-4 albums a year and then your. back then you wouldn't get dropped after your first 2-3 songs tanked or even your first 2-3 albums went wood.

I have a album by the lost Poets they are from the 60's. i love beat poet acts. and alot of Gil Scott heron.

Pryor and Cosby sold records each went Gold a few times and had mainstream connections. again with touring and playing clubs and tv shows, film,etc... the thing there is always a avenue to be seen and heard and all acts signed to a label no matter what there base is, have quotes to meet.

the DJ's had a say but then again Alan Freed who coined the phrase Payola came along in the 50's when ROck and ROll started and it has been going on for many many years. Payola is what got Clive Davis bounced out of Sony Music then columbia records back in the early 70's.


i have Sun Rai albums and he is a selective taste. he had a chance to sign John coltrane but Coltrane said there wasn't enough money there,but Sun had his base. him and Pharrell Saunders, Lonnie Listen Smith and others were doing there own alternative Jazz. fusion and a outer vibe there.

BB King was mainstream. the thrill is gone was a huge cut. grammys, selling alot of records. i mean He sold alot of records and has the BB King clubs around the country. now if you say Taj mahal, Robert Cray,etc... I mean BB King was/is Huge.

i agree with what you say about a hit,but a company still wants something out of you.

you can be a semi indy artist like a woody Allen and spike Lee but you still have to make a budget to keep getting your films green lighted,etc... even whereever you are in the game you still gotta bring it.

peace and I dig your feedback on this.
 
Maxx you know you my boy but you already we can't agree on Robert:rofl:
 
OK, so R.Kelly is a better producer, and Prince is a better guitar and keyboard/piano player.

Are they even now? :D
 
Bottom line is R.Kelly is a thief. Prince is not. R. Kelly didnt write You Are Not Alone yet claims he did. Well the courts say otherwise and the original demo I heard shows he didnt write it either which means he lied to MJ. He'll never work with MJ again!


thats what a court outside of America said. so until they come to America and sue Rob here in a court of law here and win, their judgment doesn't mean anything here in america. its just something else for people to run with and talk about. and Rob doesnt have to pay them one red cent till they come here and prove this in a court of law here and actually win a judgment...

and that is all....now carry on....
 
Last edited:
I prefer Prince.
His latest works haven't been that good, and some production of R.Kelly is much better than some works of prince but anyway I think Prince is so far the best producer between the 2, just my little opinion.
 
thats what a court outside of America said. so until they come to America and sue Rob here in a court of law here and win, their judgment doesn't mean anything here in america. its just something else for people to run with and talk about. and Rob doesnt have to pay them one red cent till they come here and prove this in a court of law here and actually win a judgment...

and that is all....now carry on....

From an artistic standpoint though, it was pretty rotten of him to claim that song.

That's provided all that mess over the song is true. Who knows.
 
By Mahita Gajanan June 1, 2018 Time
image

Spotify has ended its policy to stop promoting artists like R. Kelly who have been accused of “hateful conduct,” following backlash. The change, announced Friday, comes less than a month after the music streaming service implemented the policy.

“While we believe our intentions were good, the language was too vague, we created confusion and concern, and didn’t spend enough time getting input from our own team and key partners before sharing new guidelines,” Spotify said in a statement.

Spotify enacted the Hate Content and Hateful Conduct policy in May in an effort to remove anything that promotes or advocates for “hatred or violence against a group or individual based on characteristics, including, race, religion, gender identity, sex, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, veteran status, or disability.” Although Spotify will still remove any content on its platform that promotes hate speech or violence, it is pulling away from making judgments about artist conduct.

At a recent conference, the company’s CEO Daniel Ek said they made some mistakes in introducing the policy.
“We rolled this out wrong and could have done a much better job,” Ek said at the Code Conference on Wednesday, according to Variety. He added: “The whole goal with this was to make sure that we didn’t have hate speech. It was never about punishing one individual artist or even naming one individual artist.”

Under the policy, Spotify removed music by R. Kelly from its playlists and algorithmic recommendations and pledged to stop actively promoting his work. The R&B singer, who was acquitted on child pornography charges in 2008, currently faces several allegations of sexual abuse from women, including some who have accused him holding them in a “sex cult.” He denies wrongdoing.

Music by the rapper XXXTentacion, the only other artist immediately affected by the policy, was also removed from Spotify. XXXTentacion faces charges of aggravated battery against a pregnant woman.

Backlash from both artists was quick. R. Kelly said through a representative that he “has never been convicted of a crime, nor does he have any pending criminal charges against him.” A representative for XXXTentacion, who denies allegations against him, responded by listing 19 other artists who have been accused, although not all convicted, of serious offenses.

While behavior by both men has come under increasing scrutiny in recent months, as the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements have prompted women to speak out, Spotify’s policy raised complicated questions about how to judge which artists get to stay on the platform.

It’s unclear how Spotify’s policy would have affected artists accused of misconduct in the long run. For R. Kelly, streaming numbers jumped from 6,584,000 weekly streams to 6,676,000 in the week after Spotify said it would stop promoting his work on their playlists.

In a statement, the company owned up to sowing confusion. “We created concern that an allegation might affect artists’ chances of landing on a Spotify playlist and negatively impact their future,” Spotify said. “Some artists even worried that mistakes made in their youth would be used against them.”
 
Back
Top