Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
The internet may not be around forever, so you don't know what the future will bring. We don't know what will happen with the music industry in the future.
|
In a technology savy society as this one, we can only go forward. If we have advanced technology why would we suddenly go back to old ways of doing things? That doesnt even make sense. Pretty soon albums will be ancient as well as the radio and they'll be other ways artists will promote their new music.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
Music videos and dancing aren't strictly music, it's more general entertainment.
|
I know which is basically the same thing I said in my last post but you just worded differently. If you read my last post again I state that Michael didnt surpass The Beatles
musically being that they were pop and covered similar music. However Michael did hell of alot more variety and I also said that He innovated the music video medium which is why it is so popular today and artists put more time/effort into their videos than before music videos like Beat It, Billie Jean and Thriller. Also dance and stage performances and this is objective and you know this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
Obviously he catered to a different generation of fans as his music was done in a different period.
|
Didnt I say way earlier that they shouldnt be compared because one is different from the other and two they are from two different eras? You minimized Michaels achievement so I am simply challenging that with objective responces.
They catered to a 50's 60's generation of fans and Michaels fan base spans BEYOND that it spans before and even beyond his solo prime. Michael has fans from the 60's 70's with his brothers with the Jackson 5/The Jacksons and fans from 80's90's during his peak. He has new generation of fans in the 00's and will have more to come. Every era in some shape of form can related to him. ALL races and ages as well. The Beatles primarily cater to a caucasion audience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
More of a global impact? It's hard to say,
|
Are you kidding me?
You do not have to be a fan but denying the global success of Michael Jackson is like denying the impact of the Beatles. Michael was an international superstar and his influence spans BEYOND POP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
The Beatles were known globally as well. And The Beatles explored very many genres in their music, with many different kinds of vocals.
|
I never said The Beatles were not globally known. And what are these many genres did the Beatles do because the music of theres that I have listen to the genre has been pretty consistent. Light rock pop..
Michael did soul r&b, rock, gospel, pop, funk, new jack swing.. I can show examples of songs if you like. Not only that he wrote most of his songs and most of his hits were written by him himself. Ex. Beat it, Smooth Criminal, Billie Jean, The Way You Make Me Feel, Dirty Diana, Jam, In the Closet etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
Michael Jackson was arguably more limited in his music and the people he appealed to was probably more limited as well. And it's hard to say he did as many pop classics as The Beatles.
|
How was his music limited? Because to be honest one can argue the same about the Beatles who didnt cover much genres in their music. So people who listen to Michael Jackson have bad taste in music? People can easily say the same thing about The Beatles a popular band lol thats not good reasoning.
That is obsurd
Michael has a ton of classics even with his brothers that still get airplay on the radio and people still bump to. I think more people might call The Beatles a legend but will bump the Off the Wall album or Thriller before a Beatle C.D. the average 15 yr old today. Anybody really. The Beatles only appeal to one demographic where as Michael is loved by many.
You mean to tell me I Want You Back, Rock With You, Dont Stop Till You Get Enough, Billie Jean arent classics to just name a few? I dont know what world you are living in then because it definitly isnt earth lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
Look at how many people have covered The Beatles songs, including soul singers. And really what makes you think The Beatles only appealed to a small demographic? Their sales strongly suggests otherwise.
|
Michael is the biggest saling solo artist of all time and even as a solo artist he out sells The Beatles. The Beatles arent even the greatest selling band, I believe its the Eagles.
The fact that some artists cover Beatle songs doesnt valid their impact or legacy. There are people that cover Madonna songs. I know alot of artists that cover MJ and J5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight
The Beatles would have got any accolades and awards that were around at the time they were around. And look at the number of classic albums most people think The Beatles did compared to Michael Jackson.
|
I disagree with that because why is it that Stevie Wonder has the most grammys as a solo artist then? He has 20 plus grammys.
But anyway awards truly dont mean anything I just added that in this arguement. If you look at an artist like Marvin Gaye who only has one grammy but a catalogue of classics and influence it shows awards dont determine what makes you a legend but in this arguement it was necessary to add that since you were insinuating they had more
musical achievement than Michael which is not true.