Customer Discussions > Michael Jackson: This Is It forum

Rolling Stone Magazine list of 100 Greatest Singers - MJ is only #25, Bob Dylan is #7? This is absurd.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-21 of 21 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 14, 2010 2:17:34 AM PST
Suze says:
Why is Michael Jackson listed as #25 in RS Magazine's list of 100 Greatest Singers. He should be in the top 5.

Posted on Jan 16, 2010 2:59:24 AM PST
Miss Jay says:
this is absurd they have no clue what they are talkign about obviosly. I believe Michael was the best entertainter in the world. he was at least the most successfull. We also have to take into consideration that ppl like Elvis and co. were not writing and producing their own songs but michael did that and he danced and made his own choriogrophy. No one can compete with MJ cause he is and will always be the best entertainer the world has ever seen!

Posted on Jan 16, 2010 12:55:23 PM PST
Fizzle says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jan 22, 2010 12:00:56 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 22, 2010 12:02:21 AM PST
Corny songs? Really? I would really love to see you dance or sing like that. I don't think I would be dancing to "Man in the Mirror" or "Heal the World"... This proves that your ignorance is really shining through right about now. And in the same league as Britney Spears or Justin Timberlake? You really can't get any more idiotic at this point, hopefully. Go do some more research. Then, come back and maybe next time you'll have a valid argument.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 22, 2010 10:25:06 AM PST
Hongxing Li says:
The truth is Michael Jackson is the most popular and beloved American singer in Asian where most people don't even like to dance. People in Japan watched his shows sitting orderly with their hands on their laps but they still love him dearly. I would like to check experts' safety rating when buying a car, but which music to listen? I just follow my heart.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 22, 2010 12:57:03 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 22, 2010 1:02:23 PM PST
Okay, I typically do not respond to posts on the internet but this statement is just absurd. Perhaps it's the writers age that reflects the opinion that Michael Jackson is in anyway comparable to Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake. Yes, he is a pop singer. But he has been singing since the age of 5. He has consistently put out not only popular but excellent songs that are very well composed and produced. Even if I was not an MJ fan it would not take much for me to listen to not only his musical compositions as a solo artist, but also those that he wrote and produced for others as well as when he was with his brothers. Perhaps you are used to his most recent work which I still greatly appreciate. But anyone with in depth knowledge of any artist who objectively critiques MJ's life works would agree on one thing and that is that he was a wonderful if not excellent vocalist. He entirely came up with many of his own melodies and musical compositions without even knowing how to read music. He has impeccable pitch and appreciates great work. I love so many types of music and musicians. Britney Spears does not write her own music, she can't sing perfect melody, but people still like her. No offense to fans of Britney or other popular musical artists. But I do believe that MJ's musical genius is not even up for debate here. Even if we wasn't an excellent dancer, even if he did not write and compose his own songs, and even he never performed one concert, never made any popular videos, and never redefined music and pop culture, or influenced one single person. He was a vocalist first. Any sound engineer, vocal coach, or musical historian will tell you that. And he was a damn good one. Bob Dylan does excellent work. I can objectively appreciate his work. But an excellent vocalist he was not. I still like his voice but I think MJ wins out over him any day of the week.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 22, 2010 1:46:38 PM PST
Couldn't have said it any better, K. Hughes-Hester. Thanks.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 24, 2010 1:17:39 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 24, 2010 1:20:33 AM PST
NeverAdopted says:
Both Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake are basically students of Michael Jackson. Britney's choreographed videos are inspired by Michael Jackson; and Timberlake almost mimics the singing voice and style of Michael Jackson. Michael sings, dances, and writes a great deal of his music. People that do not care for an artist, need not waste time insulting them; simply move on. I bet if you spoke to Bruce Springsteen, Sting, Bob Dylan, James Taylor, or Peter Gabriel; all of them would strongly disagree with you. Michael is in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 24, 2010 1:19:38 AM PST
NeverAdopted says:
Thank you very much!!

Posted on Jan 26, 2010 1:55:11 PM PST
Alicia Marie says:
Really? Rolling Stone sucks for that; what a bunch of stuck up dumbasses they must be. As well as clueless!

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 26, 2010 8:24:19 PM PST
F. LOPEZ says:
now this is by far the most asinine thing i've heard when it pertains to mj...........conjuring up the never to place mj in a category with britney spears and justin timberlake is completely absurd. #25 is an outrage, mj is by far the greatest "musician" and entertainer of our generation (scratch that), our lifetime! please offer up a "musician" that rivals his expertise in his field!

Posted on Jan 28, 2010 10:00:38 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 28, 2010 10:02:40 AM PST
sunset*gal says:
i am a huge fan of britney and justin...so i remain neutral in any criticisms of them. (but i agree, mj outshines them both) but this crap about bob dylan being a better vocalist than mj?? rollingstone must've gotten a lot of flack for that 'what went wrong' mj issue they did at the time of his passing. they focused too much on the tabloids and not on his true talent.

what irks me when rollingstone, or anyone else, bring up those tired accusations...they never discuss ALL the facts. they make it seem like it was all mj's fault he got sued so much...why not take the time to look into the backgrounds of those accusers? hell, the FANS know more about the facts than rollingstone or any of those 'media sources' ever could.

rollingstone was dead wrong putting mj @ #25. i think michael is a superb vocalist...way better than elvis, john lennon, all of them. he wouldn't have been a top selling recording artist since the age of 10 if he wasn't a good singer. listen to butterflies on the invincible cd...tell me, his singing isn't perfect? i can listen to that song all day non-stop. and i'm sorry, bob dylan just doesn't do that to me. besides, isn't he more known for his guitar playing than his vocal talent? i'm not a fan of his, so i really don't know too much about his music.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 29, 2010 11:05:35 AM PST
If you think that's something to gripe about, they placed PRINCE @ #30. What were they thinking when they placed MJ @ #25 & PRINCE @ #30. Both of these artists should have at least been placed in the top 3. Forget the top 5. Both PRINCE & MJ have vocal ranges that R out of this world 4 male artists. I'm wondering if the figures R based on actual polls or R they just a collection of writers' opinions.

Posted on Jan 29, 2010 12:47:34 PM PST
sunset*gal says:
i totally agree...prince and mj are way better than bob dylan as far as singing goes. how bob dylan made it into the top 10 and they didn't is beyond me. i personally like mj more than prince...but how did bob dylan beat the both of them?? i think you're right...fans didn't vote on this, it was the writers. which to me is stupid, we're the ones who buy the music, they critique it. why not have a poll where everyone can vote? in my opinion, mj should've been #1, def. not # 25! LOL!

Posted on Jan 31, 2010 4:47:36 PM PST
September says:
Lose Rolling Stone. So many of their articles have an elitist attitude about Michael. Like it's cool to go against the public love for him and recognition of his remarkable genius. They try hard to be the super sophisicated nose-in-the-air "if everyone loves him he must be mediocre" drones. If MJ is 25th, I can't imagine who 1-24 are. Probably RS relatives.....

Posted on Jan 31, 2010 4:50:17 PM PST
September says:
Lose Rolling Stone. So many of their articles have an elitist attitude about Michael. Like it's cool to go against the public love for him and recognition of his remarkable genius. They try hard to be the super sophisicated nose-in-the-air "if everyone loves him he must be mediocre" drones. If MJ is 25th, I can't imagine who 1-24 are. Probably RS relatives.....

Posted on Feb 2, 2010 1:47:50 PM PST
[Deleted by the author on Feb 2, 2010 1:48:18 PM PST]

Posted on Feb 2, 2010 3:41:02 PM PST
Julie says:
consider the Magazine,
they have always had some sort of vendetta against him
or the writter/editer does

Posted on Feb 4, 2010 11:47:53 PM PST
D. Mok says:
Most of those morons put John Lennon (an okay singer at best) and Mick Jagger (whose pitch and timbre are horrible and has only attitude to save him) and Frank Sinatra (who has phrasing but very, very limited emotional range) above much superior and more deserving singers like Bob Marley, Michael Jackson, Polly Jean Harvey, Freddie Mercury, Son House, B.B. King, Kate Rusby, Levon Helm, Emmylou Harris, Joan Baez, Alex Chilton, Sebastian Bach, Eric Bloom, Brad Delp, Brandi Carlile, Neko Case, Norah Jones, Mike Patton, Bono, Cyndi Lauper, Don McLean, Laura Nyro, Edith Piaf, Angie Hart, Joan Osborne, Phil Anselmo, Eddie Vedder, Phil Collins, George Michael, Martha Wainwright...

Posted on Feb 5, 2010 1:23:39 PM PST
Sparkly says:
Who cares what others say? Facts are there. Michael is the best and the most beloved on this earth. No one can deny. I'm a fan of classical vocalist like Maria Callas, fan of many powerful popular vocalists like Whiteney Houston, Maria Carey. and so what, Michael Jackson is the best of all. His skills of interpreting music, his ability of mastering his silky voice tops everyone. Those with hatred who can't get over the facts will die sooner or later. MJ's spirit lives on forever!

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 6, 2010 12:04:57 AM PST
C.J. says:
I know arguments like this are inevitably subjective, but you think George Michael is a superior vocalist to Frank Sinatra? Wow-- someday I hope to visit your magical kingdom.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  17
Total posts:  21
Initial post:  Jan 14, 2010
Latest post:  Feb 6, 2010

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about
ƒ}ƒCƒPƒ‹EƒWƒƒƒNƒ\ƒ" THIS IS IT ƒRƒŒƒNƒ^[ƒYEƒGƒfƒBƒVƒ‡ƒ" (1-‡'gj [DVD]
ƒ}ƒCƒPƒ‹EƒWƒƒƒNƒ\ƒ" THIS IS IT ƒRƒŒƒNƒ^[ƒYEƒGƒfƒBƒVƒ‡ƒ" (1-‡'gj [DVD] (DVD)
4.7 out of 5 stars   (964)