Latest on MJJC

Can we talk about that ?

lougrizli

Guests
Michael is #25 on the Top 100 Greatest Singers of all time. (Rolling Stone)
Elvis is #3... Come on... Ray Charles #2... COME on.. Aretha Franklin #1... COME OOOOON... :mat::mat:
 
Yeahhhh Rolling Stone blows.

I don't know if Michael would be #1 (in terms of vocalist) but he should DEFINITELY be top 5, and way above Elvis.

Why the f is Freddie Mercury not 1, 2, or 3?!
 
reibish said:
Yeahhhh Rolling Stone blows.

I don't know if Michael would be #1 (in terms of vocalist) but he should DEFINITELY be top 5, and way above Elvis.

Why the f is Freddie Mercury not 1, 2, or 3?!
Click to expand...

Yes, Top #5 automatically but I think he deserves to be number 1 because I've never seen an artist who can have "multiple" voices like him. He can have a really deep voice like in 2000 watts and have his another voice that we all know.

I don't see in witch place Freddie Mercury is. I just saw Michael and the top #3, I don't care about the others artists lol.
 
reibish said:
Why the f is Freddie Mercury not 1, 2, or 3?!
Click to expand...
Why him? I can name some gospel singers that could be on the list. Besides, neither you or Rolling Stone has heard every singer that ever lived to determine an "all time" list. :rofl:
 
DuranDuran said:
Why him? I can name some gospel singers that could be on the list. Besides, neither you or Rolling Stone has heard every singer that ever lived to determine an "all time" list. :rofl:
Click to expand...

So by your logic, MJ is not the best singer because maybe there is someone in the ass of the earth who can have a better voice ? :ciao:
 
lougrizli said:
So by your logic, MJ is not the best singer because maybe there is someone in the ass of the earth who can have a better voice ? :ciao:
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as "best". It's an opinion of the listener. It can't be proven that one singer is better than another. Someone who only listened to opera probably would not have anyone on the Rolling Stone list. I know people who listen to metal and they would more likely to have Ronnie James Dio over Michael, Freddie, or Elvis.
 
DuranDuran said:
There is no such thing as "best". It's an opinion of the listener. It can't be proven that one singer is better than another. Someone who only listened to opera probably would not have anyone on the Rolling Stone list. I know people who listen to metal and they would more likely to have Ronnie James Dio over Michael, Freddie, or Elvis.
Click to expand...

Because they listen metal and we know their mentality. They are able to tell that Ronnie Dio is a better dancer than Michael. Why just focus on peoples who listen to only one style of music? Their opinion is not valid. It would be more instructive to heard the advice from someone who listen all kind of music.
 
To be fair, Rolling Stone focuses of course, on popular music - not necessarily just pop itself, but you're not going to find obscure names on there.

Freddie Mercury should absolutely be way, way way up there, because the man could do everything with this voice.

Or, for example, why is there no mention of Whitney, Mariah, or Celine?

Of course the list is subjective, and mayhaps it's best split by gender or genre, but there are amazing voices that can and do span many genres. Michael's is one of them, and I agree it's underrated, and much more versatile than people know. However, Freddie was known for his powerhouse pipes and everything he could do with them.

This is why RS sucks!
 
reibish said:
To be fair, Rolling Stone focuses of course, on popular music - not necessarily just pop itself, but you're not going to find obscure names on there.

Freddie Mercury should absolutely be way, way way up there, because the man could do everything with this voice.

Or, for example, why is there no mention of Whitney, Mariah, or Celine?

Of course the list is subjective, and mayhaps it's best split by gender or genre, but there are amazing voices that can and do span many genres. Michael's is one of them, and I agree it's underrated, and much more versatile than people know. However, Freddie was known for his powerhouse pipes and everything he could do with them.

This is why RS sucks!
Click to expand...

I saw Whitney and Mariah but don't remember witch # they are.
 
I think Michael definitely should be #1 but Are great female singers on the list? Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, Karen Carpenter or Linda Ronstadt?
I could name 100 more.
 
barbee0715 said:
I think Michael definitely should be #1 but Are great female singers on the list? Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, Karen Carpenter or Linda Ronstadt?
I could name 100 more.
Click to expand...

Kate Carpenter is #94, I don't see the other ones.
 
lougrizli said:
Because they listen metal and we know their mentality. They are able to tell that Ronnie Dio is a better dancer than Michael. Why just focus on peoples who listen to only one style of music? Their opinion is not valid. It would be more instructive to heard the advice from someone who listen all kind of music.
Click to expand...
Listening to different types of music does not make a person's opinion a fact. It's no more valid than anyone else's opinion. Dancing has nothing to do with singing, it's 2 different things. There's way more singers that don't dance than those who do. Dancing does not make someone sing better and vice versa.
 
DuranDuran said:
Listening to different types of music does not make a person's opinion a fact. It's no more valid than anyone else's opinion. Dancing has nothing to do with singing, it's 2 different things. There's way more singers that don't dance than those who do. Dancing does not make someone sing better and vice versa.
Click to expand...

You don't understand what I want to say. A metal fan can tell you that his artist is a better dancer than Michael even if he don't dance. If you prefer, a metal fan is a dick.
 
I remember seeing the full list. (Though I don't know if this is that old list or they made a new one now.) And Bob Dylan was Top 10 in it...

It's the usual predictable Rolling Stone bias. Anything Beatles or Dylan is predictably exaggerated but they never understood or appreciated Michael.

Bob Dylan is a great songwriter but a great singer he is not:


This is not against Dylan, because he has different strenghts as an artist and he IS a great artist (great songwriter). It just shows how ridiculous these Rolling Stones lists are.
 
Personally, I did not expect something different from a magazine that a few years ago (2003) gave the title “King of Pop” to Justin Timberlake…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top