Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 11:45:41 GMT -5
The "memorable" argument is easy to say now since the Katy Perry songs are fresh and the "Bad" songs are 20+ years old. I think it is safe to say that there are people on this board that haven't even listened to all 5 "Bad" songs or weren't even born yet when the album came out. What is "memorable" 20 years from now is just as subjective as the "which one is better?" question. Like I said, correct me 20 years form now if I'm wrong. Who know. I could very well be. Basically I would classify your statement as an opinion rather than a fact
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Aug 20, 2011 11:47:14 GMT -5
and on the flipside, sometimes albums and songs grow on you over time. They may not be instant the first time you hear them. How many times does a critic listen to an album before reviewing it? Once? That's an excellent point. It is. I occasionally review albums for my website and it can be tedius because I don't like reviewing after one listen and in most cases, two listens. I need to sit on it for at least a week and listen to it in different settings, while walking, and I listen to it as I write about it on the computer. I also need to skim through lyrics if that is to be a focus, and read up about the process online through wikipedia. So yeah, listening to an album just once would not cut it. Yes, they are. Nobody with even an ounce of taste or core knowledge of music is going to say anything Katy has recorded can stack up against MJ's hits. I have to agree with you. We can all like what we like, but do we really think that Katy's singles will be as memorable and looked upon as fondly in 20 years from now as "Man In The Mirror", "The Way You Make Me Feel" and "Bad" are looked upon? I think it's safe to say those three hits alone are more culturally significant than any of Katy's songs will ever be. And not that videos have to do with the Hot 100 but he videos for "Feel" and "Bad" pretty much trump Katy's entire output. I may disagree with you here. I feel like people are giving uber respect to MJ and his record because of MJ. When people think of him, they often think of Thriller and the impact that that record had. Bad was the followup and the singles from it were basking in the glory that was Thriller and the name attached. MJ was HUGE. I don't really feel like any of the #1 songs from that record have had long lasting impact other than them being MJ songs. You don't forget 1980s Michael Jackson because it's impossible to do. I feel like those songs sound dated as I bet Katy's singles will. I don't think Katy's will last as long because Katy Perry isn't as big a name as Michael Jackson but I also think the reason why the Bad singles are looked back upon is because they are MJ singles, and not because of the songs or album themselves.
|
|
Tea-why
3x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2008
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by Tea-why on Aug 20, 2011 11:50:35 GMT -5
Like I said, correct me 20 years form now if I'm wrong. Who know. I could very well be. Basically I would classify your statement as an opinion rather than a fact I already admitted that you could.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 11:54:47 GMT -5
Katy Perry has been on the scene only a couple years, so of course Michael Jackson is a bigger name than Katy Perry. If Katy Perry continues on this course, that could eventually change.
Even when "Bad" came out, Michael Jackson had been charting for nearly 18 years.
|
|
MikeCheck12
Diamond Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 15,880
|
Post by MikeCheck12 on Aug 20, 2011 11:54:56 GMT -5
We won't be hearing these Katy Perry tracks 25 years from now. (just sayin')
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 11:55:46 GMT -5
We won't be hearing these Katy Perry tracks 25 years from now. (just sayin') Yeah, we could easily be hearing different Katy Perry tracks None of us know for sre
|
|
Tea-why
3x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2008
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by Tea-why on Aug 20, 2011 11:56:21 GMT -5
I get what you guys are saying, but like I mentioned earlier if these songs are just memorable because they're simply MJ songs, then why does he still have forgettable songs from the 80's as well?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 11:58:03 GMT -5
Can you define "forgettable"?
I think, one persons "forgettable" song could be someone elses "favorite" song
|
|
kirby2725
Gold Member
Joined: February 2008
Posts: 555
|
Post by kirby2725 on Aug 20, 2011 11:58:26 GMT -5
What's interesting is that even with this record, Katy isn't really finding the respect from her peers or the rest of the industry that Michael had...
She hasn't even really reached the level of respect that other artists today have managed to achieve, like Gaga, Justin Timberlake and Beyoncé... Although she has more #1's than all three of them...
I guess it goes to show how little the singles game really matters nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 20, 2011 12:00:44 GMT -5
We won't be hearing these Katy Perry tracks 25 years from now. (just sayin') ...okay? Does this have any relationship to the quality of the tracks though? I think not. if these songs are just memorable because they're simply MJ songs, then why does he still have forgettable songs from the 80's as well? Conversely, would you say the quality of the ones we do hear often is greater than all of the other 80 songs that you're implying aren't remembered?
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 20, 2011 12:02:06 GMT -5
What's interesting is that even with this record, Katy isn't really finding the respect from her peers or the rest of the industry that Michael had... She hasn't even really reached the level of respect that other artists today have managed to achieve, like Gaga, Justin Timberlake and Beyoncé... Although she has more #1's than all three of them... I guess it goes to show how little the singles game really matters nowadays. Tell that to the label making millions off of her singles. You don't make money for simply having "respect"
|
|
Tea-why
3x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2008
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by Tea-why on Aug 20, 2011 12:02:34 GMT -5
Can you define "forgettable"? I think, one persons "forgettable" song could be someone elses "favorite" song But I'm talking about what I remember or forget, I'm talking about what the general public seems to remember more.
|
|
|
Post by Peaches. [Ch, r. is] on Aug 20, 2011 12:06:16 GMT -5
Can you define "forgettable"? I think, one persons "forgettable" song could be someone elses "favorite" song But I'm talking about what I remember or forget, I'm talking about what the general public seems to remember more. The "general public" remembers them because A) they were big hits back then B) they still get radio play today C) they like the songs. It has nothing to do with quality.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 12:06:51 GMT -5
There ahave been a lot of predictions and opinions presented in this discussion that people saying them believe to be true.
Katy > Michael or Michael > Katy or Katy has no respect or Katy won't last or whatever
Anyone want to offer reasons to support their opinions?
|
|
Tea-why
3x Platinum Member
Joined: March 2008
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by Tea-why on Aug 20, 2011 12:09:18 GMT -5
We won't be hearing these Katy Perry tracks 25 years from now. (just sayin') ...okay? Does this have any relationship to the quality of the tracks though? I think not. if these songs are just memorable because they're simply MJ songs, then why does he still have forgettable songs from the 80's as well? Conversely, would you say the quality of the ones we do hear often is greater than all of the other 80 songs that you're implying aren't remembered? Well I do think the songs from him that are remembered as opposed to forgotten mirror how acclaimed/culturally signifigant they are verses how they weren't, but like I stated, I agree that this is all opinion. I am taking public consciousness and acclaim in mind when I write these things, so it's not simply what I think, it's what I notice people/critics generally think of these songs. If it was just me than "Black Or White" is more significant and memorable than "Billie Jean", because to my life it is.
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,751
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 20, 2011 12:27:40 GMT -5
We won't be hearing these Katy Perry tracks 25 years from now. (just sayin') Yeah, we could easily be hearing different Katy Perry tracks bingo.
|
|
slw84
7x Platinum Member
I only tolerate legends
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 7,896
|
Post by slw84 on Aug 20, 2011 13:15:12 GMT -5
Yeah, we could easily be hearing different Katy Perry tracks bingo. Spree is that the cover for Peacock...her next single or is that fanmade. :o :o :o
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 13:18:33 GMT -5
Spree is that the cover for Peacock...her next single or is that fanmade. :o :o :o fanmade
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,751
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 20, 2011 13:21:09 GMT -5
It's fanmade, and I love it.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Aug 20, 2011 14:48:09 GMT -5
I think Katy'd songs could still be played in 25 years but in only certain contexts the way MJ's Bad songs are. I rarely hear any of those #1s anywhere except when there's some sort of an MJ special or themed thing. Outside of 80s specials, those songs are rarely referenced. I don't think it's far outside the realm of possibility for Teenage Dream or Firework to get similar treatment in relation to early 2010s music by 2036.
|
|
|
Post by Push The Button on Aug 20, 2011 15:29:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Push The Button on Aug 20, 2011 15:29:57 GMT -5
This is all a moot point, as 2m pointed out. No one thought that Cyndi Lauper's songs would be around in 2011, yet everyone can sing "Girls Just Want To Have Fun" and "Time After Time."
|
|
Verisimilitude
8x Platinum Member
'90s Zealot
Joined: July 2010
Posts: 8,960
|
Post by Verisimilitude on Aug 20, 2011 15:38:10 GMT -5
This is all a moot point, as 2m pointed out. No one thought that Cyndi Lauper's songs would be around in 2011, yet everyone can sing "Girls Just Want To Have Fun" and "Time After Time." And "True Colors".
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Aug 20, 2011 16:44:16 GMT -5
This is all a moot point, as 2m pointed out. No one thought that Cyndi Lauper's songs would be around in 2011, yet everyone can sing "Girls Just Want To Have Fun" and "Time After Time." Good point. Cyndi is hardly the household name as Michael Jackson is yet nearly 30 years after, a selection of her hits, while they sound dated in production, are still recognizable and considered classics, even if Cyndi hasn't had a significant hit in over twenty years. (I realize she's still putting out albums and had a few singles a few years back, including a song co-written with members of Dragonette but she, unfortunately, didn't have the same success as Cher was able to for example).
|
|
Honeymoon
3x Platinum Member
Joined: November 2006
Posts: 3,256
|
Post by Honeymoon on Aug 20, 2011 17:31:59 GMT -5
Certainly. Even if "Last Friday Night" is Katy's final number one (which is unlikely) and she never charts again (even more unlikely), she could be totally forgotten ten years from now for all we know, that doesn't mean "Teenage Dream", "California Gurls", "Firework" and "Hot 'n Cold" won't still be famous pop songs of the era years from now
|
|
MikeCheck12
Diamond Member
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 15,880
|
Post by MikeCheck12 on Aug 20, 2011 19:09:30 GMT -5
Cyndi's songs were good. And had meaning.
Will we be singing "is that a hickey or a bruise"? in 25 years? Somehow, I think not.....
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 19:20:06 GMT -5
Cyndi's songs were good. And had meaning. Will we be singing "is that a hickey or a bruise"? in 25 years? Somehow, I think not..... Why? I get that you don't like Katy Perry's songs but that doesn't mean others don't or the future children of America in 2035 won't Cyndi Lauper was the bubblegum pop of the day but now is being called "good" and "has meaning" because it is 25 years old
|
|
kingofpain
Platinum Member
You give me the sweetest taboo.
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,816
|
Post by kingofpain on Aug 20, 2011 19:29:26 GMT -5
Cyndi has been fairly busy over the past few years. She did that stint on Celebrity Apprentice, released a blues album and constantly makes the rounds on talk shows. I wouldn't say she's disappeared or been forgotten at all. So she hasn't had a Hot 100 hit in 20 years. Neither has Village People and everyone knows YMCA and In The Navy, and to a lesser degree Macho Man.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2011 19:30:39 GMT -5
It is called "The Y" now ;)
|
|
SPRΞΞ
Diamond Member
Joined: July 2009
Posts: 21,751
|
Post by SPRΞΞ on Aug 20, 2011 20:46:38 GMT -5
Certainly. Even if "Last Friday Night" is Katy's final number one (which is unlikely) and she never charts again (even more unlikely), she could be totally forgotten ten years from now for all we know, that doesn't mean "Teenage Dream", "California Gurls", "Firework" and "Hot 'n Cold" won't still be famous pop songs of the era years from now i still think Teenage Dream is going to last the longest.
|
|