Michael Jackson: The Greatest Singer Ever…Really?- NME article

[HIStory]

Idiots. Really! So MJ was only a good singer as a child? What a stupid article - and what respect they have for their own readers!

If they were mentioning his childhood vocal skills at least they should have mentioned songs which really do that: like Who's loving you, With a child's heart etc. That they mentioned "I want you back" to make their "point" (which is a nice little song but it doesn't showcase Michael's vocal ability that much) is just another proof to me that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He probably knows MJ's greatest hits, the usual ones, and that's it.

 

[ilmjj]

They shouldn't have asked the question if they didn't want to hear the answer. Weasel...

 

[MIST]

Ignore the article
they just want Michaels fans to come to their page and comment.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

If they were mentioning his childhood vocal skills at least they should have mentioned songs which really do that: like Who's loving you, With a child's heart etc. That they mentioned "I want you back" to make their "point" (which is a nice little song but it doesn't showcase Michael's vocal ability that much) is just another proof to me that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He probably knows MJ's greatest hits, the usual ones, and that's it.

what a stupid comment about his voice.heres me thinking he was the same human being at 10 as he was at 30.and using i want u back as an example lol dont tell me the spotty teenager on work experience who wrote this article only knows i want u back.cause lets face it anyone can sing i want u back its hardly a song that showcases vocal ability.whos loving you now thats a song but of course spotty boy wont know that song.

I guess we can take enjoyment at how annoyed they are that mj won in the words of the king half of me you'll never be so dont u feel threatened by me.

 

[claudiadoina]

what a stupid comment about his voice.heres me thinking he was the same human being at 10 as he was at 30.and using i want u back as an example lol dont tell me the spotty teenager on work experience who wrote this article only knows i want u back.cause lets face it anyone can sing i want u back its hardly a song that showcases vocal ability.whos loving you now thats a song but of course spotty boy wont know that song.

I guess we can take enjoyment at how annoyed they are that mj won in the words of the king half of me you'll never be so dont u feel threatened by me.

Louis Johnson said on an interview in 2009 that in IWYB are the best vocals from J5 era and also said that this song is unbeatable, nobody could have done it like Michael.

 

[Krshna28]

They are also insulting the general public who contributed towards Michael's 850,000,000 sales............


......they are saying that people don't have any taste in music........but its more like NME know nothing about good music!!!!!!

 

[love is magical]

I know this is OT, but I love your siggy, he looked so cool in the TDCAU video. I know I'm probably in the minority on this one, but I think the Brazil version is his best ever music video.

Thank you! The siggy is created by Moonball. She's a member of MaxJax. She likes creating siggy for others.

I love TDCAU Brazil version. He's amazing in it. Spike Lee did a great job. I love everything from the colorful landscape to the extended drumbeats at the end. Such a powerful video. unk:

 

[Moonwalker.Fan]

... so...take an action and just comment their article-s and let them know what fans think about it...

OK, partially they are right, MJs voice wasnt same and the last 10 years of MJs life... it was totally weak..., but This is It.... showed/proved that it had its "power".... (although it was weakened)....

But its NME..., what else can we/you expect.... from them? (for those who know what the NME mag is about...)

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Louis Johnson said on an interview in 2009 that in IWYB are the best vocals from J5 era and also said that this song is unbeatable, nobody could have done it like Michael.

well thats his opinion same as everyone else.imo it doesnt compair to whos lovin u

 

[MJNorway]

Michael Jackson is in the curriculum in one of the worlds most advanced singing courses, called "Complete Vocal Institute"

You don't get to be there unless you have a worldwide top range vocally

Anyone talking down on Michael as a singer knows nothing about singing and thats a fact.

 

[Alma]

I understand being upset at the magazine for their stupidity. But let's not get carried away and use this as a reason to bash other artists.

Axl Rose, Bob Marley, and David Bowie all had fantastic voices. If you guys are not familiar with an artist and a body of work, might I suggest look them up and objectively looking at them instead of just assuming they are terrible because MJ has to be so great. Denouncing other artists just to make yourself feel better about MJ, or just to lift MJ up is no different than NME and their antics.

Axl, Bob, and David all were great for many of the same reasons MJ was great. Their voices were unique, very dificult to imitate, instantly recognizable, and emoted so much emotion. Their voices moved people.

Can you imagine anyone else singing Redemption Song? Can you imagine someone else singing Major Tom? Can you imagine someone else singing November Rain and it still being the same song?

?...

I'm sorry, but I'm very much entitled to express my feelings on a discussion forum, about not liking an artist or their voice, and it's certainly not out of spite the way I've expressed myself. .. I also didn't insult anybody, nor called anyone stupid or used expletives and the like. I am very much familiar with the others' voices, and I appreciate Bob Marley's music a great deal. There were/have been much much better voices around for them to use in that poll, though, that nobody could ever replicate or surpass in terms of vocals range and emotion, and which deserved to be in that list much much more as opposed to those I've enlisted, for instance. Not sure why a whole post should be created to in a way chastise others for their lack of appreciation for said voices. The alternatives used, for instance, were hands-down much more needed and they are very much forgotten or not even known by a lot of people nowadays, those artists that were not there, alongside Michael, who thankfully was there, were very much The Voice. ... Of course I'd pick Jackie Wilson any day over Axl Rose, or Sammy Davis Jr. over Mick Jagger, or Karen carpenter or Johnny Mathis over David Bowie or other people in that list, and I'd remove them from that list. While of course I'll understand that people have different preferences about anything, and I've stated mine, doesn't mean I'm an uneducated listener or throwing heavy words to make me feel better. ..

...

 

[Alma]

OK, partially they are right, MJs voice wasnt same and the last 10 years of MJs life... it was totally weak..., but This is It.... showed/proved that it had its "power".... (although it was weakened)....

It was totally weak, huh?


lol, what else to say?..

 

[ExoticPrincess]

They put MJ on the list and then they gonna go gripe now that he topped said list.

Bunch a dummies!

 

[analogue]

They're just annoyed that some white male rocker didn't win

 

[Justthefacts]

... so...take an action and just comment their article-s and let them know what fans think about it...

OK, partially they are right, MJs voice wasnt same and the last 10 years of MJs life... it was totally weak..., but This is It.... showed/proved that it had its "power".... (although it was weakened)....

But its NME..., what else can we/you expect.... from them? (for those who know what the NME mag is about...)

Wow, so according to you the voice expert his voice was totality weak. Hey no one told me Seth Riggs joined MJC

 

[ginvid]

?...

I'm sorry, but I'm very much entitled to express my feelings on a discussion forum, about not liking an artist or their voice, and it's certainly not out of spite the way I've expressed myself. .. I also didn't insult anybody, nor called anyone stupid or used expletives and the like. I am very much familiar with the others' voices, and I appreciate Bob Marley's music a great deal. There were/have been much much better voices around for them to use in that poll, though, that nobody could ever replicate or surpass in terms of vocals range and emotion, and which deserved to be in that list much much more as opposed to those I've enlisted, for instance. Not sure why a whole post should be created to in a way chastise others for their lack of appreciation for said voices. The alternatives used, for instance, were hands-down much more needed and they are very much forgotten or not even known by a lot of people nowadays, those artists that were not there, alongside Michael, who thankfully was there, were very much The Voice. ... Of course I'd pick Jackie Wilson any day over Axl Rose, or Sammy Davis Jr. over Mick Jagger, or Karen carpenter or Johnny Mathis over David Bowie or other people in that list, and I'd remove them from that list. While of course I'll understand that people have different preferences about anything, and I've stated mine, doesn't mean I'm an uneducated listener or throwing heavy words to make me feel better. ..

...

Who said you insulted anyone? The post was a general warning to the board for the way the tone was going because of the article. There were much better voices for them to use ...according to you. But you are not the say all be all. My post is my opinion as well. Of which, of course we are both very welcome to express. I obviously could discern you knew about at least Bob Marley since you mentioned him according to his songs, about which you said you enjoyed. So I need not be reminded about what you know. The comment was a general one for people who were taking the tone of talking down on voices of people they don't even know about. It is very common for people to hold MJ in esteem by talking down on other artists. If I wanted my post to apply directly to you, I would have quoted you to leave no doubt.

If the post does not apply to you, then there really is no need for you to respond. The people to whom it applies will very easily get the message.

Thank you.

 

[marebear]

Why don't they talk to his singing/voice coach? It sounds like they asked a question and didn't like the answer they got.

 

[Alma]

Who said you insulted anyone? The post was a general warning to the board for the way the tone was going because of the article. There were much better voices for them to use ...according to you. But you are not the say all be all. My post is my opinion as well. Of which, of course we are both very welcome to express. I obviously could discern you knew about at least Bob Marley since you mentioned him according to his songs, about which you said you enjoyed. So I need not be reminded about what you know. The comment was a general one for people who were taking the tone of talking down on voices of people they don't even know about. It is very common for people to hold MJ in esteem by talking down on other artists. If I wanted my post to apply directly to you, I would have quoted you to leave no doubt.

If the post does not apply to you, then there really is no need for you to respond. The people to whom it applies will very easily get the message.

Thank you.

I felt it referred to my post as well, obviously, since I've explicitly said how I don't like the artists I've enlisted. As for there being much better voices out there for them to use, there were, that wasn't according to myself, and this is not an attempt to shut ppl off or anything. I knew why I intervened, your post enlisted precisely most of the artists I've mentally removed from that list.. ..But no biggie....

I'm sorry, but I don't wanna get on with this and get grossed out by yet more such unnecessary arguments. Thanks for responding. ..

 

[Ashtanga]

Bla bla bla....

 

[Gonetoosoon]

what a stupid comment about his voice.heres me thinking he was the same human being at 10 as he was at 30.and using i want u back as an example lol dont tell me the spotty teenager on work experience who wrote this article only knows i want u back.cause lets face it anyone can sing i want u back its hardly a song that showcases vocal ability.whos loving you now thats a song but of course spotty boy wont know that song.

I guess we can take enjoyment at how annoyed they are that mj won in the words of the king half of me you'll never be so dont u feel threatened by me.

... Really?

I think you'll find Michael completely owns that song. No one could sing it exactly like him.

Sure it doesn't show case his talents as much as 'Who's Loving You' but nonetheless.. that's quite a statement to make.

 

[ginvid]

I felt it referred to my post as well, obviously, since I've explicitly said how I don't like the artists I've enlisted. As for there being much better voices out there for them to use, there were, that wasn't according to myself, and this is not an attempt to shut ppl off or anything. I knew why I intervened, your post enlisted precisely most of the artists I've mentally removed from that list.. ..But no biggie....

I'm sorry, but I don't wanna get on with this and get grossed out by yet more such unnecessary arguments. Thanks for responding. ..

NP. I suppose when one is misunderstood it is better to correct the misunderstanding so that everyone is on the same level (albeit with a little less attitude on my part) so I apologize for that.

As for the names that I choose to respond to about who had a great voice, it seemed I was seeing Axl, David, etc over and over again (this might just be how I perceived it since I really like their voices) so I replied about them. Others were mentioned but I didn't like their voices either so I didn't mention them in my post.

So anyway, I was just replying to make sure I was understood and to make sure you were not feeling stomped on for your opinion. That is what I wanted to confirm. My original post was part moderation and part my opinion on the subject. I will be more careful in the future to make they are more clearly discernable.

 

[Severus Snape]

He was the greatest singer in his field [i.e. not opera-type singing or anything like that] the world has ever seen. There was nothing strange or parody-like about his voice--those vocal tricks he does add to the mood of the songs, they are unique and worthy of praise. It's certain enough you won't be confusing him with any other singer when you hear him on the radio--unlike some of the people in this list who sound eerily similar to each other.

Why should we listen to music magazines anymore anyway? They're just a bunch of ignorant b-----s with their heads so far up their own a----les they can't even hear the music anymore.

 

[claudiadoina]

He was the greatest singer in his field [i.e. not opera-type singing or anything like that] the world has ever seen. There was nothing strange or parody-like about his voice--those vocal tricks he does add to the mood of the songs, they are unique and worthy of praise. It's certain enough you won't be confusing him with any other singer when you hear him on the radio--unlike some of the people in this list who sound eerily similar to each other.

Why should we listen to music magazines anymore anyway? They're just a bunch of ignorant b-----s with their heads so far up their own a----les they can't even hear the music anymore.

In Vibrations Magazine Collector 2009 there is a very long and detailed and interview with Seth Riggs about Michael's voice and his other musical interests and preferences .This interview was exclusive for this magazine and it's in french. I don't know french so good (nor english :smilerolleyesto translate it but it's a great interview and if someone could translate it I would gladly copy it from the magazine.

Or perhaps an english variant does exist already?Is it available somewhere?
Does anybody know?

 

[BenBigBoy]

WTF Why Can't they Accept the Truth? :doh:

 

[benscarr]

I somehow expected them to be sour losers. I say sour losers, because snobish magazines like NME never liked MJ, so for them seeing him topping their poll is like painful losing.

If he had said his favourite was Freddy Mercury I could understand that because he was an awesome singer (he's my other favourite singer on the list), but Kurt Cobain, David Bowie? I like them both, but as great singers? Please....

And to say Michael didn't have a great singing performance since his childhood or She's out of my life once again highlights what's wrong with all these snobish music magazines and their snobish critics: they don't know anything in depth about Michael's career (if they did they wouldn't say something so utterly ridiculous like that), yet they criticize him.

But I don't get upset about it. Like I said I kind of expected them to make some negative remark about Michael. They are all too predictable. However it's the audience and people who will keep Michael's legacy alive and they do!

I respectfully disagree with you about David Bowie as a vocalist. If you have heard all of his albums, you will find that he's an amazing vocalist, and he should in my view have been No.2 on the list after Michael then followed by Prince at No.3. Like Michael, Bowie is a versatile vocalist who can sing many different genre of music with ease.

NME, is a magazine I don't take seriously because it takes it's self way too seriously. It accuses Michael voice of being a parody of it's self. But NME has been a parody of it's self for the last 20yrs. It's hay day was in the 1970's and 80's, and it was a must have "Rock" magazine for students. It's never really been friendly towards Michael Jackson, it's the type of magazine that still really divides music in to black and white music, and really hates the fact Michael dominated both black and white music, as shown by Michael gaining the most votes for best vocalist. Also the fact that Michael has such a unique voice that isn't stereotypically black and steeped in Soul/R&B so they can put Michael in a sub category under NME's beloved "Rock" and "Indie" music will also irritate them.

I hate everything NME stands for. People say it's a snobbish magazine, but I say they have nothing to be snobbish about. Because the editors and writers of that magazine often have a very narrow and bigoted view on music. It tends to like "bands", and bands holding guitars and looking bored on stage singing earnestly in to the mic, unwashed and emaciated looking. In skinny jeans and a cap and saying how much they hate David Cameron or who ever is the Prime Minister etc. It's a social magazine really not a music one. In fact I can't think of any good music magazine, I stopped buying them 10yrs ago or so. Because all these crappy magazine's like NME (which I never really bought), Q Music Magazine, Rolling Stone, Spin etc have been writing the same old predictable crap about Michael for over 20yrs. Rolling Stone putting Michael around No.35 in the most immortal pop stars of all time was a joke. That only happened because the Editor had the power to put Michael there. When the public vote Michael is normally No.1, sometimes No.2 or 3 like when HMV did a public vote about pop stars and music in 1999/2000, and the media were surprised how popular Michael still was. So no matter how NME try write Michael out of history, or say he wasn't as amazing as he is. The fact is Michael is the greatest talent of all time in music, and the most popular to. And that parody of a magazine NME can't change that.

 

[twinklEE]

just a case of sour grapes...they asked the public to vote....and the public voted....

Wow, this botherd them so much that they had to write an article about it. You know what? I don't care. The poll is finished and MJ won. End of story.
All I have to say to the author of the article is this: hahahahhahahahahahahahha. In your face, you loser! :tease: You can moan and whine as much as you want, all it does is make you look like an idiot. And did I say hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah? Oh. I did. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Ao true fuck them

 

[HIStory]

I respectfully disagree with you about David Bowie as a vocalist. If you have heard all of his albums, you will find that he's an amazing vocalist, and he should in my view have been No.2 on the list after Michael then followed by Prince at No.3. Like Michael, Bowie is a versatile vocalist who can sing many different genre of music with ease.

NME, is a magazine I don't take seriously because it takes it's self way too seriously. It accuses Michael voice of being a parody of it's self. But NME has been a parody of it's self for the last 20yrs. It's hay day was in the 1970's and 80's, and it was a must have "Rock" magazine for students. It's never really been friendly towards Michael Jackson, it's the type of magazine that still really divides music in to black and white music, and really hates the fact Michael dominated both black and white music, as shown by Michael gaining the most votes for best vocalist. Also the fact that Michael has such a unique voice that isn't stereotypically black and steeped in Soul/R&B so they can put Michael in a sub category under NME's beloved "Rock" and "Indie" music will also irritate them.

I hate everything NME stands for. People say it's a snobbish magazine, but I say they have nothing to be snobbish about. Because the editors and writers of that magazine often have a very narrow and bigoted view on music. It tends to like "bands", and bands holding guitars and looking bored on stage singing earnestly in to the mic, unwashed and emaciated looking. In skinny jeans and a cap and saying how much they hate David Cameron or who ever is the Prime Minister etc. It's a social magazine really not a music one. In fact I can't think of any good music magazine, I stopped buying them 10yrs ago or so. Because all these crappy magazine's like NME (which I never really bought), Q Music Magazine, Rolling Stone, Spin etc have been writing the same old predictable crap about Michael for over 20yrs. Rolling Stone putting Michael around No.35 in the most immortal pop stars of all time was a joke. That only happened because the Editor had the power to put Michael there. When the public vote Michael is normally No.1, sometimes No.2 or 3 like when HMV did a public vote about pop stars and music in 1999/2000, and the media were surprised how popular Michael still was. So no matter how NME try write Michael out of history, or say he wasn't as amazing as he is. The fact is Michael is the greatest talent of all time in music, and the most popular to. And that parody of a magazine NME can't change that.

I don't have anything against David Bowie, I like a couple of songs from him, though I have never thought of him as a "great vocalist" before. But you are right, I don't know everything from him, so probably you are right about his vocals. To me Freddie Mercury is second on that list, I just love him, I even voted for him, even though he was in competition with Michael (I gave him 9 stars and 10 to Michael).

I totally agree about music magazines. I don't even know what's the point of a bunch of people telling other people what to like. I have always felt magazines like these are for people who can't make their own decisions. I don't care what's considered to be "cool" by the media, I won't let any of them tell me what to like and what to hate. I know what these type of magazines usually like, so they are pretty predictable which means they cannot think outside of a certain box.

They expect artists to be "serious", sing about politics and social things. Not realizing that those messages about current politics etc. may sound "serious" now, but they won't mean anything to anybody in 100 years. While the kind of message that Michael had is universal and will still be undetstood and enjoyed.

That's why I'm glad about Joseph Vogel's upcoming book. Finally a writer who gets him and also is fair to him and his aim is not to look "cool" with the snobs of this business.

 

[Mneme]

just a case of sour grapes...they asked the public to vote....and the public voted....

Yes! There are some superb musician and there are some excellent dancers. That's true....

But Michael is the PRIMUS INTER PARES!!!!!!!!!!!
Because: He was a superb musician and an exquisite-excellent dancer.

 

[claudiadoina]

Yes! There are some superb musician and there are some excellent dancers. That's true....

But Michael is the PRIMUS INTER PARES!!!!!!!!!!!
Because: He was a superb musician and an exquisite-excellent dancer.

Yes, he was THE ULTIMATE CONSUMMATE ARTIST we know that but how we make this known for everybody else?:sad:

 

[Tony R]

You're all going to have a hard time in life if you get upset everytime someone disagrees with you.