Latest on MJJC

Calvin Harris has made chart history, becoming the first artist ever to score eight Top Ten singles

InvincibleTal said:
Isn't he the new Katy Perry then?
Click to expand...

yup, katy perry-cheater 2.0
it is well known how manipulative and faked the charts today are. by record companies and radio stations. it is a record in this new fake charts era (since begining the '00s). but not in the old good real days when SALES are build the charts. real charts are about sales, nothing else.
so, mike is still the record holder.
 
Last edited:
mjchris said:
yup, katy perry-cheater 2.0
it is well known how manipulative and faked the charts today are. by record companies and radio stations. it is a record in this new fake charts era (since begining the '00s). but not in the old good real days when SALES are build the charts. real charts are about sales, nothing else.
so, mike is still the record holder.
Click to expand...

The official charts are made up of sales, only sales and so by your definition, a 'real chart' - you're probably thinking of billboard? Mj's not the record holder, it's not the end of the world, and i'm pretty sure most of us didn't know mj held this partic record.
 
Respect77 said:
Yes, there were a couple of defensive comments as well. That IMO came from the misunderstanding of Harris' comment (some took it as bragging), but by the time you came in and chose to lecture people that actually calmed down and people realized that he said what he said more as a tongue in the cheek comment.
Click to expand...

It was still going on despite the fact the misunderstanding had been cleared up. There are comments like the ones I mentioned on this very page even after it had all cleared up. These comments came from those who read nothing more than either the original post or the thread title and just instantly get defensive over anything like that.

But it had died down so it's better off being left alone.
 
L.T.D said:
It's obvious. Why would they bother commenting at all if they didn't know him? It's the way it's said as well.

It's not a 'Oh I see, I don't actually know who he is :S'. If it was worded in a way that came across as sincere then it wouldn't be a problem. But it's more of a 'Pfft, I don't even know who this nobody is!'. Which comes across as trying to belittle him, you can't tell me that you haven't seen that in this thread.

Not saying that every single person in here who has said they don't know him is trying to belittle him, but the majority are. I've seen enough of it over the years to know the motive behind it.

It goes like this, someone signs in and sees a thread title talking about a newer artist and they immediately see red. They live in fear that some new up and coming artist is going to be compared to Michael and instantly go on the defense, this is escalated when the topic of the thread is something to do with a new artist breaking one of Michael's records.

A lot of the time the first thing they'll do is try and belittle the artist being discussed in any way they can.
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter to me that he broke Michael's record, and I'm not saying, "Oh, Calvin Harris sucks", or "I think he should just stop making music period. There are people that like his music, and that's fine. And he didn't say he was better than Michael or anything, so there's no reason for us to belittle him.
 
I think many fans were surprised that Michael´s record was broken by someone who wasn´t wellknown for many of us.
That´s why fans say they don´t know who he is.
I hadn´t heard about him either but for me there are so many artists who I have no idea about who they are
 
Bonnie Blue said:
The official charts are made up of sales, only sales and so by your definition, a 'real chart' - you're probably thinking of billboard? Mj's not the record holder, it's not the end of the world, and i'm pretty sure most of us didn't know mj held this partic record.
Click to expand...

u are sure? cause thats false.
the uk charts also counts the donwloads. and its very cheap for companies to buy them to push up the position of the song on the charts. cause they will get most of the money back later.
and in other countries, for example the usa, they use also the airplay to push up a song on the chart.
that is for example why madonna never have the chance to archive an top song (top 5 or even number 1) anymore. cause the radio stations against her.
that shows you that its a different chart system. and yes, michael jackson is still the record holder.
u didnt know that michael jackson have this record? that is well known in the fanbase.
 
I'm clearly a bad fan as i had never heard of this record and neither had calvin harris, as he assumed mj held it for thriller.

We're not talking about the usa so the fact they use airplay is irrelevant to this thread about the uk. When you said sales, i would have assumed you would allow sales of downloads too. That's how people buy singles nowadays. If you're not going to allow the new way of purchasing music, then you're perfectly right noone is going to ever beat any of mj's records and we can breathe a sigh of relief.
 
^You are not a bad fan. There are lots of records I don't know that Michael has. He has so many lol. He has so many awards and honors in his life.
 
Bonnie Blue said:
I'm clearly a bad fan as i had never heard of this record and neither had calvin harris, as he assumed mj held it for thriller.

We're not talking about the usa so the fact they use airplay is irrelevant to this thread about the uk. When you said sales, i would have assumed you would allow sales of downloads too. That's how people buy singles nowadays. If you're not going to allow the new way of purchasing music, then you're perfectly right noone is going to ever beat any of mj's records and we can breathe a sigh of relief.
Click to expand...

you're not a bad fan.
but its is simple. the charts from today dont present the reality.
a download, a few cents, is completely different to a physical sold single, a few euros.
and its always so ridiculous when the media on radio or tv talking about 150 mio sold "copies", when 90% of them are cheap downloads. thats not a big achievement.
i mean its a big difference to archive 10 mio physical sold copies or 10 mio cheap downloads.
i shake my head when someday, and this day will come for sure, someone says... "hey i have sold more copies then michael jackson." yeah, sure. when 90% of them are such cheap downloads.
and they allready do. like on rihanna. i'm always laughing and shaking my head when i hear the charts on radio. and they talking about... "wow she sold so many copies, 150 mio, oh my god".... ^^

generally they should categorize it in two sections. one is the physical sales. and second is the downloads.
so when they match the best selling artists, they should use only the physical sales. and they can also match artists on donwloads.

in my opinion the charts also should work like this. two different charts. but they should not count them together. and so they can say, when someone have 7 top 10 hits, its a real record.
 
Last edited:
marebear said:
^You are not a bad fan. There are lots of records I don't know that Michael has. He has so many lol. He has so many awards and honors in his life.
Click to expand...

Me neither....lol...that's actually the last thing I care or know about as a fan, although I know MJ did care about such things :)
 
mjchris said:
you're not a bad fan.
but its is simple. the charts from today dont present the reality.
a download, a few cents, is completely different to a physical sold single, a few euros.
and its always so ridiculous when the media on radio or tv talking about 150 mio sold "copies", when 90% of them are cheap downloads. thats not a big achievement.
i mean its a big difference to archive 10 mio physical sold copies or 10 mio cheap downloads.
i shake my head when someday, and this day will come for sure, someone says... "hey i have sold more copies then michael jackson." yeah, sure. when 90% of them are such cheap downloads.
and they allready do. like on rihanna. i'm always laughing and shaking my head when i hear the charts on radio. and they talking about... "wow she sold so many copies, 150 mio, oh my god".... ^^

generally they should categorize it in two sections. one is the physical sales. and second is the downloads.
so when they match the best selling artists, they should use only the physical sales. and they can also match artists on donwloads.

in my opinion the charts also should work like this. two different charts. but they should not count them together. and so they can say, when someone have 7 top 10 hits, its a real record.
Click to expand...

The music biz is just like any other facet of business, it changes with new technology and buying habits alter, they're not going to decide to have different music charts to accommodate each advent of new technology. It might be a bit unfair on older artists' singles sales to have cheap downloads but you could argue the move towards downloading singles rather than albums has actually made mj's album numbers look pretty unassailable.

In any case, this thread isn't about numbers of singles which is affected by a comparatively cheap price compared to earlier times, but positions in the charts. A top 10 is a top 10 in whatever decade, it's a level playing field, based on outselling your competition not on volume.

marebear said:
^You are not a bad fan. There are lots of records I don't know that Michael has. He has so many lol. He has so many awards and honors in his life.
Click to expand...
Thanks marebear, that's sweet. And i agree with arklove, fans might not know all the records mj has, but we can be sure mj did.
 
Last edited:
Bonnie Blue said:
The music biz is just like any other facet of business, it changes with new technology and buying habits alter, they're not going to decide to have different music charts to accommodate each advent of new technology. It might be a bit unfair on older artists' singles sales to have cheap downloads but you could argue the move towards downloading singles rather than albums has actually made mj's album numbers look pretty unassailable.

In any case, this thread isn't about numbers of singles which is affected by a comparatively cheap price compared to earlier times, but positions in the charts. A top 10 is a top 10 in whatever decade, it's a level playing field, based on outselling your competition not on volume.


Thanks marebear, that's sweet. And i agree with arklove, fans might not know all the records mj has, but we can be sure mj did.
Click to expand...

it changes?.... not true.
there was vinyl... sales charts. it does not change when music cassettes started. it does not when cds started, it does not change when mini disc started. it does not change when dvds started. it does not changed when bluray started. downloads is not a technology. nothing physical. and thats why airplay charts existed additionally all the time.
airplay and downloads was only added to manipulate the charts. to make it easy to archive something only legends can too. to make it easily possible for companies to create something that does not exists. to show the world "how big" their so called "star" is.
and there will be no new legends, mega stars anymore. noone in the world today can archive anything like michael jackson, presley, beatles without this cheating system. FACT!
a top 10 today is worthless to a top 10 15 years ago. you can not compare a to top 10 from today with a top 10 from before 2000. like i said before, they archieve this so called "records" today in another chartsystem. a chartsystem that is worthless. but they dont have the real records. the records noone will be archieve in the future, if they dont use the correct system.
music died several years ago. and the level of good music is very low. there is no "QUALITY" music out there anymore.
 
Last edited:
Oh lawd. Where do I begin with this thread.

Let me first start off that this is all with love, l.o.v.e. :)

With that said, omg what is wrong with you people??

I'll just address random comments in this weird post:

-So because you've never heard of Calvin Harris, that means he sucks? Some of you must be living under a rock. I don't know how you managed to avoid some his bigger hits.

-If anyone actually think his tweet about the news was him being a pompous and bragging, I feel bad that humor seems to pass right by you and don't get when people are joking. Calvin's a pretty funny, laid back guy. He was responding to the news about his chart status for gawds sake.

-I don't get why you all have to discredit him because of the way charts and music buying habits have changed. DEAL WITH IT. It's a new day. People buy music differently now, so the charts had to change their criteria to adapt to the times. Yes, MJ was the best and all that. Bla bla bla. Why take away from this mans success in this present day?

-Why the hate for Katy Perry?? As stated above, it's a new day and time. I loved the TEENAGE DREAM album and like that she got 5 #1's from the LP. Good for her. You don't have to like her music or anything, but yeesh. You guys are attacking her and taking away from her success as if she changed radio/chart rules. Like it or not, she had 5 #1 hi singles from a single album.

-Back to Calvin, I understand he's not a household name, as he's the producer (and vocalist on tracks). But he's kind of awesome. His first 2 studio albums were actually alot different than his current stuff. He did his own vocals for the tracks and his live shows were with a full band. However, he decided to change his career and shift to just producing for other people and occasionally doing his own vocals (and his live shows are no longer band oriented, but rather DJ sets).


There. I just had to get that out.

Srsly, as far as this current album goes, I don't know how some of you slept on Feel So Close, Bounce, and We Found Love (which was technically on Rihannas album first).

I love his videos for this album. They all are centered around L.A. and Vegas and all have consistent feel/look. Even the cover art for the album/singles are all a similar theme.

Bounce (ft. Kelis)


Feel So Close
 
I don't even know who the hell this guy is. so that says a lot about him.lol. plus it would be nice if this guy was humble about his success. Michael was always humble about his success. he never claimed to be the biggest star ever, even though he was.
 
michaeljackson&lisamarie said:
I don't even know who the hell this guy is. so that says a lot about him.lol. plus it would be nice if this guy was humble about his success. Michael was always humble about his success. he never claimed to be the biggest star ever, even though he was.
Click to expand...

He is humble... He never said he was the biggest star... I guess you just skimmed this thread and let others form your opinion.

And apparently, if YOU don't know who he is, he must be just horrible and unworthy.
 
Last edited:
AtlasAir said:
He is humble... He never said he was the biggest star... I guess you just skimmed this thread

And apparently, if YOU don't know who he is, he must be just horrible and unworthy.
Click to expand...

well I'm not going to lie I did just skim over the thread. and yes I don't know who he is, but I never said his musick was horrible. anyway if he is humble then that's great. It's always good to be humble.
 
His tweets:

"I'll never dance, sing or be an ultimate musical legend & icon like MJ but he didn't know anything about sidechaining so it all balances out."

"Eight Top 10s from my album 18 Months now! So happy!!!"

Sounds like he's just proud.

And the first tweet is tongue in cheek. Sidechaining is a technical term with music software and effects (which he specializes in, obviously).
 
L.T.D said:
Threads like this are the reason I barely come here anymore. A new artist is mentioned and you just rip them apart if they are even mentioned in the same sentence as MJ.

So touchy, did it say anywhere in the entire article that they were comparing him to MJ or he was better than MJ in any way? On top of that, he complimented MJ and said he would never be a true musical legend like MJ. So what is your problem?

I can't stand when you fans react like this. All like 'Who?' 'Never heard of him!'. We get it, it wasn't clever the first time, you don't need to keep telling us you don't know who he is in some sort of attempt to belittle him. He's a nice guy, clearly respects Michael so what more could you want. You all need to take a step back and take a look at yourselves and the way you react to things like this. I understand the mentality of having to protect Michael and anything that is said about him, I've been doing it for years and years. But save your energy for when it's truly needed, I'm begging you.
Click to expand...

Lol I feel ya. I did like what Calvin did with that Rihanna song. People gotta eat. :lol: I remember when there was all this big hubbub about Katy Perry and her "quest to topple MJ". I was like "whatever, if she does, great, if she doesn't, okay." I kinda like some Katy Perry songs. People are hardcore around here. :lol:
 
MJ didn't have to feature big artists on all his singles for hits which end up on all their albums too.
CH album is practically a greatest hits collection, so the so-called success doesn't count.
 
It isn't so-called, it IS a success.
And I'm not sure you understand that he's doing the music/song writing and having guests do the vocals...

tumblr_mlf7cuw2z11qf806jo1_500.jpg
 
AtlasAir said:
It isn't so-called, it IS a success.
And I'm not sure you understand that he's doing the music/song writing and having guests do the vocals...

tumblr_mlf7cuw2z11qf806jo1_500.jpg
Click to expand...

:yes:

Exactly he's the music maker. It's no different from other dance producers (David Guetta for instance). He made the music. Guests got to sing on it.

This is always a problem whenever someone compares the success of one act to Michael, you can't compare. It's totally different. So I say let Calvin celebrate his UK milestone. It's not hurting the legacy of MJ none. Don't always focus on stats to confirm how great Michael was and is.

That's why I don't get why it's posted here besides from the fact that a record of Michael's was broken after, what, 20 years? lol
 
Calvin didn't compare himself to MJ.
The press did, and only in terms of #1 singles from a single album.
And when one hears news like that, one might say wow thats pretty cool.
:)

But like I said on my post on the previous page, for those who care, his first 2 albums were just himself doing the vocals (and his live show was with a band).
I think he got tired of doing that, and shifted to doing the Guetta/DJ route.
I guess it was more lucrative in the long run. But he still does vocals too (ie Feel So Close).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top