MJMThriller
Proud Member
I'll say the Jacksons are the greatest, purely because, other than the Bee Gees, I don't know any of the acts that Troubleman84 has posted :lol:
I'll say the Jacksons are the greatest, purely because, other than the Bee Gees, I don't know any of the acts that Troubleman84 has posted :lol:
I'd have to go back and look at the various family acts, but the Jacksons seem to have longevity while most other family acts were only popular for a few years. The Jacksons are easier to remember than the others.
They haven't really even been in it that long. The group basically disbanded once Michael left. They put out 2300 Jackson Street, but beyond that, they haven't done anything without Michael, as a group, and they haven't seen success without Michael. Michael's the one whose had success for 40 years, about, and been in the business for 44 years.
Yeah, the Jackson 5's tenure was from 1966 (roughly) to 1989, which is 23 years. And the other Jackson brothers' careers basically ended in the early 1990s but Michael's the only one of the brothers to have had a consistent career. In that sense, they haven't lasted as the Gibb or Isley Brothers, both of those groups need props for hanging in there even when trends died down since the brothers were equal of each other. Michael Jackson was a man who was bigger than his brothers.
Well technically Mike hasn't done much since 1991 when Dangerous came out, which is the same year as Jermaine's last album Word To The Badd. Mike's only released 2 albums (of new material) since then. I'd say Janet has been more consistant.
MJ is not just an entertainer. He has always had other jobs. His catalogue is far more valuable and earns more money than making records. Maybe other celebs need to be more consistant because that is their main job.
MJ's main job is Sony/atv and Mjj production. They yield more money than any recordings ever yield and alswo much more difficult to sabbotage by media lies and public opnions..
Well technically Mike hasn't done much since 1991 when Dangerous came out, which is the same year as Jermaine's last album Word To The Badd. Mike's only released 2 albums (of new material) since then. I'd say Janet has been more consistant.
They've been in it for 40 years, the Gibbs was in it for around 45 before Maurice's death in 2003, the Isleys beat them with 50 years.
I didn't think of the Isley Brothers. I only remember a few of their songs, but I did think of the Bee Gees. The Jacksons though they haven't had a hit in decades are still quite visible. I don't think the Isley Brothers have been as visible in the news. You'd have to be looking for them.
I didn't think of the Isley Brothers. I only remember a few of their songs, but I did think of the Bee Gees. The Jacksons though they haven't had a hit in decades are still quite visible. I don't think the Isley Brothers have been as visible in the news. You'd have to be looking for them.
Well technically Mike hasn't done much since 1991 when Dangerous came out, which is the same year as Jermaine's last album Word To The Badd. Mike's only released 2 albums (of new material) since then. I'd say Janet has been more consistant.
Well technically Mike hasn't done much since 1991 when Dangerous came out, which is the same year as Jermaine's last album Word To The Badd. Mike's only released 2 albums (of new material) since then. I'd say Janet has been more consistant.
You've never heard of Mr. Biggs, lol?
No, I don't agree with this. Michael has released two full length solo albums since "Dangerous", both of which were incredibly successful, most particularly "History", which sold 18 million copies or so and had along with it a tour more successful then either "Victory", "Bad" or "Dangerous", and as a double disc set, the album becoming the largest selling double disc set in history, and "Invincible", despite the lack of promotion and lambasting by the critics, still sold around 10 million copies, which most artists only dream of doing. And if you count "Blood On The Dance Floor", which did have 5 unreleased tracks, great tracks at that, that became the largest selling remix album ever, at the time.
I said nothing about the Jackson brothers, are you referring to me?Also, Michael may have been the driving force behind The Jackson 5/The Jacksons, but I don't think it's quite fair to count out all the brothers either. They're still a great group act. The group is better than the sum of it's parts, is all.
You're right about The Isley Bros. though, ever since "Contagious" they've captured a youthful audience. It's pretty much down to Ronald and Ernie now though, and obviously Ronald is the focal point of things now. Pretty amazing considering he's in his 60's. His last album didn't do too well, but "Contagious" and "Busted" were big hits for him.
Hits or sales wasn't the point - only that he released 2 albums of new material. You must have not read the comment correctly. If you want to get that technical about it, perhaps you can make up a 3rd album with the unreleased material from BOTDF and the box set and soundtrack/b-sides. Still that's very little in a 17 year period. Janet still has more releases than he has during the same time period, so what's to disagree?
I said nothing about the Jackson brothers, are you referring to me?
The point is about success and longevity. He may not have put out as many albums as Janet, but he's seen greater success with what he has put out then her, or most other acts, for that matter. The point is, he still has a succssful career by any stadards. I'm not sure what the quantity of his releases has to do with it.
Well, if you're going by that criteria, then Jermaine, Tito, & Marlon has been doing things. That still isn't what the thread is about.I said that, and I said it as a point that the Jacksons as a group haven't actually been together as a group since 1989. Michael, however, has had an active solo career, whether he was actually releasing albums during every year or not, he still had a contract, still was expected to put albums out, still was touring, still was making videos and promoting, doing interviews, having a career. Active careers aren't defined by how often you put albums out. He was still a solo star doing things, putting on concerts, making videos, signing deals, etc...