lol !!
?????
lol !!
I've seen people on Youtube saying that Terence Trent D'Arby/Sananda is better than both Mike & Prince.
That extra unexplainable something is explained only through your admiration (or lack thereof.)
There's nothing objective to put Prince below Michael in the realm of music. If anything, objectivity seems to point towards Prince being the greater musician. But even then, the argument from subjectivity outweighs all, especially if you delve into the larger realm of entertainment. For example, I'm more entertained by Prince and his band live than I am with Michael's live performances, and opinions differ greatly on this, depending on whether you prefer the performance of musicianship or that of dance and theatrics, etc.
The better showman? Michael. The better musician? Prince. The better singer? Michael (no question).
Two out of three is why I prefer Michael, but Prince is probably my second favourite artist.
DirtyDianaMJ☆;2780579 said:I love Prince, but I think his music sounds the same..If you hear one Prince song, you've heard them all....
The better dancer? Michael.
I take it you've never heard of David Bowie, Sun Ra, P-Funk, Grace Jones, or Madonna.Lady Gaga is totally original
Michael Jackson fans have horrible taste in music
nope ..i think she's the female version of madonna....Lady Gaga is the female version of Michael Jackson.
shes innovative, incredibly talented and totally original
shes even got the same kinda personality as Michael she loves her fans and is very thankful of her gift.
Lady Gaga is the female version of Michael Jackson.
shes innovative, incredibly talented and totally original
shes even got the same kinda personality as Michael she loves her fans and is very thankful of her gift.
If anything, objectivity seems to point towards Prince being the greater musician.
That's more like a horrible generalization rather than an unpopular opinion.
Also, my classical & romantic composers would like a word with you.
Prince virtually crafted the Minneapolis sound all by himself.
replicate the horn section of a funk band using a synth - which is really all there is to the Mineappolis sound. Prince, Jam & Lewis and Jesse Johnson just took it to new levels.
Madonna has handled her career almost perfectly (bar the Sex book!) and is the ideal example of how to be a superstar and not completely lose your mind.
I give her major props for Sex and Erotica. Just as I do Janet's expression of sexuality.
That extra unexplainable something is explained only through your admiration (or lack thereof.)
There's nothing objective to put Prince below Michael in the realm of music. If anything, objectivity seems to point towards Prince being the greater musician. But even then, the argument from subjectivity outweighs all, especially if you delve into the larger realm of entertainment. For example, I'm more entertained by Prince and his band live than I am with Michael's live performances, and opinions differ greatly on this, depending on whether you prefer the performance of musicianship or that of dance and theatrics, etc.
Not to start another Madonna/Janet marathon but Janet was much filthier than Madonna ever was aurally (no pun intended - well maybe a bit).
And if Madonna ever did make a sexy record, she remembered that the sex was secondary to the melody. E.g Justify My Love, Erotica - both incredibly sexy records but both brilliant in terms of melody & musicality.
The only time Janet got that balance spot on is with the filthy and brilliant if.
she remembered that the sex was secondary to the melody
But what Prince, much like Stevie, did was fuse together his own unique blend of many different styles. Soul, funk, rock, folk (Joni Mitchell), jazz, new wave, and electronic developments at the time.
"Never Let You Go", "Baby", "One Time". All three are better than Billie Jean, and even you have to agree.
The better showman? Michael. The better musician? Prince. The better singer? Michael (no question).
Two out of three is why I prefer Michael, but Prince is probably my second favourite artist.