Michael Jackson is #34 on Rolling Stone Magazine's 100 Greatest Songwriters........

[HIStory]

I know. This whole list is crazy if you ask me. You have the BeeGees and the Beach Boys ranked so low and James Brown that high? It has to be a very subjective list.

I think Rolling Stone is pretty predictable in its taste. A magazine that mainly mirrors white male rocker taste will never rate a "disco" act like Bee Gees high. Or Michael Jackson, for that matter.

 

[Smoore]

A song is not just about the lyrics.

I am aware. It's layers. Lyrics, instruments, and hidden bits. This article was about songwriting, which would be lyrics. I didn't read the list because like others have stated, it is predictable. But I can think of people who are better lyricists than Michael in a way which the lyrics are more thought out with double meanings and deeper or contradicting opinions. Michael has done that occasionally, true. As for song structure. I know he had really great beats. But thats what they were, beats. I don't believe he has ever back masked in his songs, included sound bites of things from pop culture, or done a concept album/opera type album. Those are off the top of my head.

 

[barbee0715]

I am aware. It's layers. Lyrics, instruments, and hidden bits. This article was about songwriting, which would be lyrics.

I didn't understand your post because songwriting is lyrics but it's also composition. It's words and music. Lyricist and composer. Sometimes it's the same person. Sometimes it's not. Both parts are songwriting though.

I can name off some better lyricists than Michael but his lyrics conjure the emotion of the song even if they don't always entirely make sense on a page. The lyrics (or the pronunciation of them, even,) hit an emotional core-your soul.

BUT Michael's melodies and harmonies were way more than just beats. He's hard to compete with when it comes to melody, IMO.

 

[kevin_1990]

That list is all over the place

 

[KOPV]

I think some people are taking it too hard, too serious that Michael is #34 on the list instead of top 5, or #1.. It's a magazine, not Guinness World Records.

It's not like others are looking at the list and mentally equating MJ's value of his skills by what rolling stone magazine says.

There have been thousand of songwriters through recorded music history.. Rolling Stone Mag. is not the staple of much! It struggles to stay relevant now days anyway..

 

[HIStory]

I am aware. It's layers. Lyrics, instruments, and hidden bits. This article was about songwriting, which would be lyrics. I didn't read the list because like others have stated, it is predictable. But I can think of people who are better lyricists than Michael in a way which the lyrics are more thought out with double meanings and deeper or contradicting opinions. Michael has done that occasionally, true. As for song structure. I know he had really great beats. But thats what they were, beats. I don't believe he has ever back masked in his songs, included sound bites of things from pop culture, or done a concept album/opera type album. Those are off the top of my head.

1) Songwriting doesn't mean just lyrics. It's the whole song, including music.

2) Michael's songs aren't "just beats". Are you even serious about this? I am pretty sure MJ's songs also have melodies, harmonies and lots of other elements that make a song complete. And he wrote some of the most memorable songs in popular music history.
And if he didn't have a concept/opera album, back masks, "sound bites of things from pop culture" (I assume you mean sampling) that means he cannot be a great songwriter? You have an interesting view of what it means to be a great songwriter, but I disagree that any of those elements are needed to be a great songwriter.

As for the lyrics. Like Barbee said, sure there are better lyricists than Michael, but a song isn't just lyrics. If it was it would be called a poem, not a song. In case of a song music and lyrics have to work together and convey certain feelings in the listener - be it happiness, be it thinking about something, be it sadness etc. There are songwriters who are stronger in the lyrics department and there are songwriters who are stronger in the music department. Michael was in the latter category, it's probably no coincidence that he tended to write the music first and then he wrote lyrics to it. He was more a musician than a poet. But the bottom line is that the music and the lyrics work together. A song does not need to be a poem to be just as or even more powerful. In a song the music and the lyrics have to achieve together something. And if the music and the performance of the song is good then the lyrics do not necessarily need to be compex to achieve an artistic goal. That's actually the beauty of a song: that it's so much more than just the words in it.

And black music is more music focused than lyrics focused. Black artists tend to express deep feelings and thoughts more musically than lyrically. That's more in the black tradition.

 

[KOPV]

^
That's the 'new school' for ya!

You got he beats and the lyrics.. "lets here the beat".."Let me lay something down on it"..

I can't get mad at smoore... That's the music industries fault right there! fake @$$ producers and crew.

 

[Smoore]

^
That's the 'new school' for ya!

You got he beats and the lyrics.. "lets here the beat".."Let me lay something down on it"..

I can't get mad at smoore... That's the music industries fault right there! fake @$$ producers and crew.

New school? I barely listen to "new school". Today's mainstream music is trash. I listen to the likes of Hendrix, Cash, Beatles, Queen, Marilyn Manson, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Eric Clapton, Black Sabbath, Heart, Bob Marley. Hardly new school. I just wrote my ramblings at a time when I was feeling uptight. So, it isn't very well thought out. Lmfao The point I'm meaning is, this article is about songwriting. Yes, a song is more than lyrics. My rambling really possibly could be defined as concepts or elements of music, rather than just lyrics itself. I mean, any artist will have pieces of their work scrutinized for being too simple. Off the top of my head, Manson was once ridiculed for the lyrics "I'm on my way down, I'd like to take you with me", when a reporter commented on the notion that Manson's lyrics were knowledgeable and full of insight. Something to the tune of that. Michael has written some really clever lyrics, and he has come up with some really powerful material full of melodies, harmonies, and so much more instrumentally. Personally songwriting is strictly lyrics, seeing as songwriting is a process of creating something to sing and say. Also, yes. You were correct. I meant sampling, but the word escaped me. Thank you. Overall I feel everyone is taking this too seriously, even me. It's based on someone else's opinion anyways. Just like we all tend to have.

 

[Psychoniff]

1) Songwriting doesn't mean just lyrics. It's the whole song, including music.

2) Michael's songs aren't "just beats". Are you even serious about this? I am pretty sure MJ's songs also have melodies, harmonies and lots of other elements that make a song complete. And he wrote some of the most memorable songs in popular music history.
And if he didn't have a concept/opera album, back masks, "sound bites of things from pop culture" (I assume you mean sampling) that means he cannot be a great songwriter? You have an interesting view of what it means to be a great songwriter, but I disagree that any of those elements are needed to be a great songwriter.

As for the lyrics. Like Barbee said, sure there are better lyricists than Michael, but a song isn't just lyrics. If it was it would be called a poem, not a song. In case of a song music and lyrics have to work together and convey certain feelings in the listener - be it happiness, be it thinking about something, be it sadness etc. There are songwriters who are stronger in the lyrics department and there are songwriters who are stronger in the music department. Michael was in the latter category, it's probably no coincidence that he tended to write the music first and then he wrote lyrics to it. He was more a musician than a poet. But the bottom line is that the music and the lyrics work together. A song does not need to be a poem to be just as or even more powerful. In a song the music and the lyrics have to achieve together something. And if the music and the performance of the song is good then the lyrics do not necessarily need to be compex to achieve an artistic goal. That's actually the beauty of a song: that it's so much more than just the words in it.

And black music is more music focused than lyrics focused. Black artists tend to express deep feelings and thoughts more musically than lyrically. That's more in the black tradition.

Oh man, respect77, you truly nailed it. But do you The Beatles and Bob Dylan were masters in both the lyrical and song department? Or was it more lyrics? Where there black artists who mastered both?

 

[HIStory]

Oh man, respect77, you truly nailed it. But do you The Beatles and Bob Dylan were masters in both the lyrical and song department? Or was it more lyrics? Where there black artists who mastered both?

I know it's blasphemous to some but I am not a fan of either the Beatles or Dylan so I guess it is a matter of taste if you consider them "masters". To me they are musically not that exciting, to be honest. As for the Beatles' lyrics I think they had some good ones, but I truly think often they were trolling. LOL.

I also did not say there weren't black artists who were good at both. Stevie Wonder, Michael are examples of being good at both IMO. Oh, and let's not forget Marvin Gaye. To me all of these artists (and many others) are a lot more exciting and interesting than the Beatles or Dylan.

For the record, I did not say Michael wasn't good in the lyrics department. Songs like Is It Scary or Threatened or Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' or Jam or TDCAU or Earth Song etc. are lyrically great IMO. But I think often you will find that black artists rely more on musical ways of expressing and conveying certain things, while the idea that lyrics need to be the center of the song has rather been a white (rock) tradition. Maybe that has to do with the fact that black artists tend to emote better (IMO), so they have musical tools at their disposal (think of emotional ad-libs, for example, beat boxings etc.) that white artists typically do not master that well (again IMO - and sorry if it sounds like a generalization, but that's my observation) and for which they have to make up with lyrics. That's my theory at least.

 

[barbee0715]

Where there black artists who mastered both?

Smokey.

 

[barbee0715]

Where there black artists who mastered both?

Smokey.

And yes, respect is right about the emoting. You can read lyrics on a printed page and say "what?" But hear the song and it makes perfect sense. You know what they're singing about.

But, thinking about it-Come Together lyrics sound like somebody rather high on something. . And I'm sure they were.

 

[Psychoniff]

I know it's blasphemous to some but I am not a fan of either the Beatles or Dylan so I guess it is a matter of taste if you consider them "masters". To me they are musically not that exciting, to be honest. As for the Beatles' lyrics I think they had some good ones, but I truly think often they were trolling. LOL.

:hysterical: Totally agree mate!!!

I also did not say there weren't black artists who were good at both. Stevie Wonder, Michael are examples of being good at both IMO. Oh, and let's not forget Marvin Gaye. To me all of these artists (and many others) are a lot more exciting and interesting than the Beatles or Dylan.


First of, I never got the hype about MG's songwriting ability, second, what about Sly Stone and Curtis Mayfield? They were great songwriters right?

 

[KOPV]

There are many black artists that master both.. It just gets overlooked too often (especially with the greats) because at the time the music industry and various companies that dealt with public relations would basically erase fact and write history they want it to.. Glorify white artists and not give the credit where credit was due.

I'm not trying to make this a battle between the races, and i'm not trying to take anything from Great white musician/artists.. It's just a fact that it happened that way.. Even to the point of stealing a song written by a black artist and have a white artist sing it so it can be popular and never give that artist recognition..

 

[Psychoniff]

Smokey.

And yes, respect is right about the emoting. You can read lyrics on a printed page and say "what?" But hear the song and it makes perfect sense. You know what they're singing about.

But, thinking about it-Come Together lyrics sound like somebody rather high on something. . And I'm sure they were.

The lyrics are read to be like stream-of-consciousness.

 

[HIStory]

what about Sly Stone and Curtis Mayfield? They were great songwriters right?

Yes, of course. Like KOPV said there are many black artists with great lyrics, I just named three examples, but of course that's not the whole list.