Michael is number 1 on the "Best Singers of All Time" list.

MJJ'slilgrl

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
205
Points
0
Location
Portsmouth, UK
As the title says, Michael is currently holding the number one position as the best singer of all time. You can vote and keep him and number one here:

http://www.thetoptens.com/singers/

Currently, Freddie Mercury is right behind him, with Elvis at number three. Let's keep Michael in at the top spot! :)
 
As an MJ fan I place very little weight on things like this because MJ very rarely tops any of these kinds of things or list, but it is nice to see MJ at the top where he should be if only for the fact that I know it'll tick off some Freddie Mercury stans/fans
I myself have no problem giving Queen or Freddie their props (I actually like a few Queen songs), but here lately I've noticed that a lot of (not all) Freddie Mercury stans/fans can be so damn petty and jealous when it comes to MJ LOL.
And I have no idea why because although Freddie obviously didn't reach MJ status it's not like he was a flop or anything, so some of his fans shouldn't be so insecure. :/
 
Seems like a silly list, tbh. No one can tell me Madonna has a better voice than Adele, Mariah Carey or Aretha Franklin. And Whitney is the only female singer in the top 10 -_-
 
Don't understand how Elvis is number 3. Never understood the hype with him.
 
I prefer Michael's voice but freddy was probably the better singer
Just my opinion.

But I just like a few Queen songs

Freddy Mercury really did have an exquisite voice, powerful and versatile. I can live with him 'beating' Michael in an online poll like this, there's no shame in that.

Don't understand how Elvis is number 3. Never understood the hype with him.

To be honest, Elvis' voice always sounded affected to me, like he was not singing in his natural voice. But a lot of people do enjoy his voice and his music so who am I to complain.

What I find more puzzling is John Lennon at #7. He's not known as a great singer, is he? A talented songwriter yes, but his voice is rather bland (imo). And Bob Dylan ahead of Marvin Gaye, lol (with comments saying it's an outrage BD isn't in the top 10). Who wants to bet the demopgraphic for this poll is mostly middle-aged white men? :p
 
Last edited:
Best singers ought to include Garland and Streisand, imo.


(Maybe Karen Carpenter, Linda Rondstadt-Stevie Nicks-hmmph.)
 
Don't understand how Elvis is number 3. Never understood the hype with him.

Elvis is a great singer. I think it's his best ability as a musician... but third best singer of all popular musicians? Probably not.

Freddy Mercury really did have an exquisite voice, powerful and versatile. I can live with him 'beating' Michael in an online poll like this, there's no shame in that.

Agreed. Goes without question that I prefer Michael over Freddie, but there's no shame in losing to Freddie frickin' Mercury for vocals! Dude was an utter powerhouse.

What I find more puzzling is John Lennon at #7. He's not known as a great singer, is he? A talented songwriter yes, but his voice is rather bland (imo). And Bob Dylan ahead of Marvin Gaye, lol (with comments saying it's an outrage BD isn't in the top 10).

John Lennon's a pretty good singer. Nowhere near as versatile as Freddie or Michael or even Paul McCartney, but he could definitely deliver when needed. I actually really like his voice, especially when it was unprocessed effects-wise. He knew how to use it well and was able to deliver such passion, such conviction through it... he's given some really great performances that grab me every time I hear them.

Don't think Bob Dylan should be there though, I can't admit I've given his music much of a go but I remember finding his voice quite a turnoff on the couple of snippets I played. Should give him another go sometime though.
 
Voted for MJ and also helped Prince get out of 132nd place, I mean really. Elvis in 3rd place and Sinatra in 5th, what a joke with shitty artists like Katie Perry and the great David Bowie at #59, are you kidding me. Must be full of 14 year old mouthbreeders voting.
 
I’m glad, that Michael was put in first place in this poll, but the Web site, O.T.O.H., I really don’t know if it has enough of a credibility to be taken seriously, as a legitimate site, in itself.

Polls like this one are extremely subjective and made up by fans of certain singers (rather than objective, by people who really do know more about music and the singing-voice than most of us). Prince should have been placed right up there at the very top, with Michael, in my view. What do any of you think of Prince’s voice?

I strongly feel that, though his voice-type was as totally 180-degrees different from what Michael’s sounded like as it ever was, he sounded equally just as good. Do you think that it’s just as good as Michael’s, or no? I would like each of your honest opinions and assessments of Prince’s overall singing-voice.


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
GGVVGGCC22331122;4170016 said:
I’m glad, that Michael was put in first place in this poll, but the Web site, O.T.O.H., I really don’t know if it has enough of a credibility to be taken seriously, as a legitimate site, in itself.

Polls like this one are extremely subjective and made up by fans of certain singers (rather than objective, by people who really do know more about music and the singing-voice than most of us). Prince should have been placed right up there at the very top, with Michael, in my view. What do any of you think of Prince’s voice?

I strongly feel that, though his voice-type was as totally 180-degrees different from what Michael’s sounded like as it ever was, he sounded equally just as good. Do you think that it’s just as good as Michael’s, or no? I would like each of your honest opinions and assessments of Prince’s overall singing-voice.


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

No, I do not in any way shape or form think Prince's voice was/is as good as Michael's.
That isn't to say his voice was bad, but it just wasn't as good as Michael's. :)
 
Freddy Mercury really did have an exquisite voice, powerful and versatile. I can live with him 'beating' Michael in an online poll like this, there's no shame in that.



What I find more puzzling is John Lennon at #7. He's not known as a great singer, is he? A talented songwriter yes, but his voice is rather bland (imo). And Bob Dylan ahead of Marvin Gaye, lol (with comments saying it's an outrage BD isn't in the top 10). Who wants to bet the demopgraphic for this poll is mostly middle-aged white men? :p

I agree all of above. Bowie should near top of that list too as he is great singer/vocalist. Bob D and Lennon can sing but they ain't vocalist the same way we consider MJ, Freddy, Bowie or Marvin. The same goes with Bruce S and Bono, they sing beautifully but their singing voice is not "nice":)
 
Mike # 1 and voted... I like seeing him at #1 where he belongs..
 
Pink Diamond Princess;4170022 said:
No, I do not in any way shape or form think Prince's voice was/is as good as Michael's.
That isn't to say his voice was bad, but it just wasn't as good as Michael's.
:)


If I may ask you, Pink Diamond Princess, “What aspects of Michael Jackson’s singing-voice do YOU think made it sound any better than Prince’s did, and why?” I really would like to know what your answers are, as I am only asking about, and mainly referring to, his “post-puberty” adult voice (which still sounded extremely “young” to me, even as he matured into the “fully-grown-up” phase of his life).

O.T.O.H., no one knows, or has ever heard, what Prince sounded like as a young child, or in his very early teens when he first started going through the beginning stages of his adolescence. By the time the public would have first heard from him, in general (around 1978 or ’79), he had already fully grown up into a young adult MAN - as Michael had, too, since they were both the same age - and, unlike the way Michael’s adult voice turned out to be, as a still quite “young”-sounding extremely High Tenor (from his late teens on, towards well into middle-age) who could pretty much sing high notes without the need for using his “Falsetto” or having to rely on it, exclusively, Prince’s voice was already fully developed into a deep Baritone with an extremely wide Vocal Range.

He could hit notes that Michael couldn’t hit at all. O.T.O.H., Michael could belt out notes and sustain them, very far up into his Chest and Head Voices, something that Prince never could do. Both of them could express their emotions and feelings very well, too. The only difference between them, as far as that’s concerned, was Michael’s ability to do it at such a young age, when he was still a child. This was WAY before he was old enough to have been through certain types of life experiences, or even fully understood the meaning what he was expressing, let alone that of the lyrics, themselves. People who remembered the earlier “Motown”-era of The Jackson 5’s career (and, according to many reports in the media, during that time) would often mention how “mature” - or, “beyond his years,” emotionally - Michael was, for his age, in spite of his youth. But, that emotional expression grew, as he grew up, and went through more experiences in his life. The albums he recorded (and, the songs he would later write), particularly, from “Dangerous” onwards, give solid evidence of this.

Though Prince wasn’t a “child star,” he used his voice to express himself as well, though he did it in a much different way. Listen to some of his songs, like “Purple Rain,” “Adore,” “Sign ‘O’ the Times” or the whole, entire complete full-length version (rather than the edited one) of “Scandalous.” How can you not say that Prince’s voice was as good as it was, when he sang those songs? I do respect your opinion, though.
 
Last edited:
the top 3 in this poll is the same as my personal top 3! how cool is that. I hope it stays like this
 
GGVVGGCC22331122;4170081 said:
If I may ask you, Pink Diamond Princess, “What aspects of Michael Jackson’s singing-voice do YOU think made it sound any better than Prince’s did, and why?” I really would like to know what your answers are, as I am only asking about, and mainly referring to, his “post-puberty” adult voice (which still sounded extremely “young” to me, even as he matured into the “fully-grown-up” phase of his life).
Overall, Michael's voice has more clarity then Prince's to me, and Prince's falsetto has always sounded rather forced in comparison to Michael's.

O.T.O.H., no one knows, or has ever heard, what Prince sounded like as a young child, or in his very early teens when he first started going through the beginning stages of his adolescence. By the time the public would have first heard from him, in general (around 1978 or ’79), he had already fully grown up into a young adult MAN - as Michael had, too, since they were both the same age - and, unlike the way Michael’s adult voice turned out to be, as a still quite “young”-sounding extremely High Tenor (from his late teens on, towards well into middle-age) who could pretty much sing high notes without the need for using his “Falsetto” or having to rely on it, exclusively, Prince’s voice was already fully developed into a deep Baritone with an extremely wide Vocal Range.

He could hit notes that Michael couldn’t hit at all. O.T.O.H., Michael could belt out notes and sustain them, very far up into his Chest and Head Voices, something that Prince never could do. Both of them could express their emotions and feelings very well, too. The only difference between them, as far as that’s concerned, was Michael’s ability to do it at such a young age, when he was still a child. This was WAY before he was old enough to have been through certain types of life experiences, or even fully understood the meaning what he was expressing, let alone that of the lyrics, themselves. People who remembered the earlier “Motown”-era of The Jackson 5’s career (and, according to many reports in the media, during that time) would often mention how “mature” - or, “beyond his years,” emotionally - Michael was, for his age, in spite of his youth. But, that emotional expression grew, as he grew up, and went through more experiences in his life. The albums he recorded (and, the songs he would later write), particularly, from “Dangerous” onwards, give solid evidence of this.
Not sure what Prince's vocal range is but Michael had a rare (especially for a male) 4 octave vocal range, and like I said, I don't think Prince's voice is bad, just that Michael's is better.:)
 
Last edited:
Prince's "range" comes from his extensive use of falsetto. Extensive falsetto is often used to mask weaknesses in the natural voice in the higher register as it is a LOT easier to hit high notes in falsetto than in natural voice. (Because of that often falsetto isn't really counted to vocal range. It's considered a bit of "cheating".) Prince's natural voice wasn't as versatile and as flexible as MJ's and IMO that's why he relied so much on his falsetto to go high and to express emotions. Michael simply didn't use falsetto as often, well, because he did not need to. He had an extremely versatile and expressive voice in the natural range as well, he didn't need to embellish it with falsetto all the time to express emotions. He had lots of other means to do that. Michael's use of falsetto was occasional, which is IMO should be in case of a strong singer, not all the time (Michael had only a couple of falsetto songs, while Prince uses falsetto virtually every time he goes high). Sure Prince's falsetto is great, but someone always using falsetto to hit high notes is not a sign of strength in terms of vocal range IMO.
 
Last edited:
respect77;4170114 said:
Prince's "range" comes from his extensive use of falsetto. Extensive falsetto is often used to mask weaknesses in the natural voice in the higher register as it is a LOT easier to hit high notes in falsetto than in natural voice. (Because of that often falsetto isn't really counted to vocal range. It's considered a bit of "cheating".) Prince's natural voice wasn't as versatile and as flexible as MJ's and IMO that's why he relied so much on his falsetto to go high and to express emotions. Michael simply didn't use falsetto as often, well, because he did not need to. He had an extremely versatile and expressive voice in the natural range as well, he didn't need to embellish it with falsetto all the time to express emotions. He had lots of other means to do that. Michael's use of falsetto was occasional, which is IMO should be in case of a strong singer, not all the time (Michael had only a couple of falsetto songs, while Prince uses falsetto virtually every time he goes high). Sure Prince's falsetto is great, but someone always using falsetto to hit high notes is not a sign of strength in terms of vocal range IMO.

Great points, Respect77. But, you have to understand that both Prince and Michael each had totally different types of adult voices; One was naturally an extremely High Tenor* (Michael - a former “child” Soprano*), who, as his Lower Register would eventually expand downwards [to as low as “Eb2”], without him ever completely “losing” that Soprano Upper Range entirely, yet, he still sounded very “young” for his age, even as he grew up into adulthood.

The other equally great vocalist - in my personal opinion - was a naturally deep- and rich-voiced, very obviously adult-sounding Baritone (Prince), whose voice could go way up into the “Falsetto” Register, and even beyond that (up into the “whistle”-pitch extension of his Vocal Range), as well as hit Bass Register low notes.

I honestly have never heard any notes Michael ever hit, much less sang - during ANY point in his career - that even came close to what notes Prince either hit or flat-out sang, on both ends of his range, in songs like “Temptation,” “The Most Beautiful Girl in the World” or “GOD” (from the “Purple Rain” soundtrack), to name but just a few examples. O.T.O.H., I have yet to have heard Prince belt out even one note fully in his Chest or Head Voice, anywhere nearly as high in pitch (or as powerfully) - let alone sustain, or hold, a note for more than a few brief seconds - as well as Michael could.

Listen to the recorded studio version of “Got to Be There” (from the original solo debut album of the same name, as far back as 1971), and the various LIVE versions of “Rock With You” that Michael had performed on stage during his “BAD,” ”Dangerous” and “HIStory” World Tours. That last high, sustained note, at the very end of the song, was just absolutely amazing!!! Also, if you had ever watched the 2001 televised final reunion of Michael with his brothers (as The Jackson 5/The Jacksons - part of the “30th Anniversary Celebration” Special, that continues to air each and every year, since then), the way he sang the lead vocals on “I'll Be There” - and, mind you, this was a man in his Early-40’s at the time, when people were already speculating about his health - he delivered one of THE greatest LIVE performances of that song, ever. Again, he not only merely hit a couple of beautiful high notes towards the end of the song, he sustained them. “Earth Song,” especially, during its “What about us?....” call-and-response segments, shows how powerfully Michael could still belt, in his Upper Range.

Prince also had become, in his later years, one of THE best LIVE performers, himself. His stage performances of songs he had first recorded in the studio during the 1980’s and Early- to Mid-’90’s sounded even better than their original versions. His Bass-to-“Falsetto” range remained intact, even as he aged, well into his 50’s. Both men had their strong points - vocally, and otherwise - so, to me, they were equals.


Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I honestly have never heard any notes Michael
ever hit, much less sang - during ANY point in his career - that even came close to what notes Prince either hit or flat-out sang, on both ends of his range, in songs like “Temptation,” “The Most Beautiful Girl in the World,” “GOD” (from the “Purple Rain” soundtrack), to name but just a few examples. O.T.O.H., I have yet to have heard Prince belt out even one note fully in his Chest or Head Voice, anywhere nearly as high in pitch (or as powerfully) - let alone sustain, or hold, a note for more than a few brief seconds - as well as Michael could.


Yeah, the thing with Prince is besides his freakishly wide range his voice was not as emotive or expressive as Michael, Freddy or whitney or stevie wonder. His tone was in nowhere near the quality of said singers. Just my opinion, but a measuring stick for vocies shouldn't just be range but also the quality of the tone and timbre. It all boils down to personal preferences.

Though I prefer Mike's voice I have to say that Freddie was the better overall singer. No shame in saying that. Freddie was a force.
 
Pink Diamond Princess;4170091 said:
Overall, Michael's voice has more clarity then Prince's to me, and Prince's falsetto has always sounded rather forced in comparison to Michael's.


Not sure what Prince's vocal range is but Michael had a rare (especially for a male) 4 octave vocal range, and like I said, I don't think Prince's voice is bad, just that Michael's is better.
:)

Hmm....That’s interesting. So, tell me what you and others think of these Videos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P24qKdKlgA
¹
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o_jBt2QUJI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iy37C1pHtDo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-qaXtFoUU0
 
Last edited:
Elvis is a great singer. I think it's his best ability as a musician... but third best singer of all popular musicians? Probably not.
.

I'm sorry but I think Elvis was a very average singer. I just don't feel it with him.
 
english only?

So according to this list and the comments in this thread, all the "best singers of all time" sing in English and mostly perform Top 40 music. I guess people who sing in other languages can't sing that well. :rofl:
 
Back
Top