Let's not forget that Quincey Jones wrote a whole lot of MJ's music. And while the beatles started off with an 8:6 original to cover song ratio on their albums, they stopped when they made A Hard Day's Night. So the Beatles clearly have my vote. Not that MJ wasn't amazing or anything, it's just the beatles have really brought my life out of the gutter over the past year, and I would much rather listen to their music.
Idk how yall lyk the beatles well i can c they have some good songs but i mean seriously Mj overtakes the beatles buy infinity!!! RIP mj we will never forget him
How could you fucking compare a solo singer and a band? Of course the band will win! This is a unfair test! I do not accept the result! To me, Michael Jackson is always in my heart. MJ loved kids but Beatles was busy with music.
id listen to mj over the beatles, cuz their really kinda boring, it almost seems to me that most people listen to the beatles just because of how many sales they had and for changing the music industry,and not actually for the music >.>
You said Jackson was not the greatest entertainer who do you dare place baove him.
The British invasion was nice but Jackson had a global invasion.
Beatles sold "records" , but once again, that is distinct from albums, it includes singles and all types of mediums less than a 9 or more track album. Singles were a more common unit of music then.
Jackson had more cross over appeal, racially, culturally, no I don't think it is settled at all.
they also have sold more ALBUMS!! MORE #1 SONGS, MORE #1 ALBUMS.. THE BEATLES ARE GREAT ALL OVER THE WORLD. NOT JUST IN BRITAIN AND USA.. I REPEAT THE BEATLES HAVE SOLD MORE ALBUMS THAN ANYONE.NOt singles, records, tapes but ALBUMS!!!!!!!!!! JUST LOOK WHAT THE BEATLES 1 ALBUM DID.
MJ has quite a few singles too, which they count in his sales, so that arguement is moot. I don't know how this got about popularity, but the Beatles beat him in overall talent hands down.
the beatles do not hav overall talent overatted singers that have no unique style except for lennon who is just awefull but their song writing was crazy deep. But Mj was more creative he could sing think wat u want he could dance and write and put on the most spectacular shows shows. Mjs catalogue is so different for each song while the beatles r relatively the same
Alright caryash, I'm a beatles fan to but you are getting a little out of hand. You need to try to make your comments more readable and to not be so quick to insult people. For all of you other people, don't antagonize for no good reason.
Rock was the dominant genre. From Bruce Springsteen (Whose hit song president Reagan wanted to use for his campaign) to Duran Duran, The Police, Genesis, Dire Straits, Billy Idol, Adam and the Ants, David Bowie (The guy who publically called out MTV for not playing "Black" artists) on and on. Even Cyndi lauper had to PRETEND to be Punk LOL.
Bottom line is, The Beatles were the most influential, and most successful, popular music group of the rock era, with global sales exceeding 1.3 billion records as of 2004 - more than any other artist or artists in history. Few artists of any sort, in any era, have achieved The Beatles' combination of popular success, critical acclaim and broad cultural influence. It's nice that people have their opinions, but your opinions don't change history.
Jackson is a much more recent figure and the scale of his impact has not yet been processed, and examined. I actually think that the controversy around his life is likely to seriously compromise such an examination. It is difficult to talk about the extent of someone's influence without the sense that you are lauding them in some way, and there is in many quarters little desire to laud Jackson because of the controversy of his life.
im gonna recomend to you to see the videos of this guy and see how great was paul mc cartney playing the bass, some can tthink that songs of the 60's have easy bass perfomance but you know, the beatles are the exception.
Grammy's weren't around when the Beatles were together. Really I think all of the Beatles were retired by the time the Grammy's came into existence, so amount of grammy's can't be an arguement point. For everyone who is saying Jackson sold more, that's false, the Beatles sold more. Really they will probably blow Jackson away this year because all of their albums are coming out remastered soon. Wikipedia is a good source for information. Who has found anything wrong on wikipedia?
Most Popular Song and Covered in the world... YESTERDAY by Paul McCartney, a Beatle... I forgot MJ only wrote a few of his songs, his talents were as entertainer, not a real musician.... I rest my case...
Could we end this debate the Beatles who broke up forty years ago are about to set a chard record in the UK. It is expect that all of their 14 albums will chart in the top twenty.
It takes God rest his soul Michael Jackson to die to come close this.
The truth is, if New Kids On The Block has made as big an impact their clips would have been uploaded. the very fact that they have not been uploaded shows how small time they were
Then you had the unbelievable nerve to compare Jackson to two other groups who's prime I remember very well, but that you probably don't.
Can you find footage of NYSNC, The Backstreet Boys, or any other musical act of the past or present that has scenes of hysteria anything close to the Jackson scenes? i don't think so. The closest is clips of the Beatles and even there the hysteria is nowhere near as global. So find me those clips or stop making stupid comparisons.
yessssss, i remmber long time ago the hysteria for new kids on the block when i was a kid, girls fainting and all that kind of things but no one has uploaded that videos.
and im gonna tell you again, mj caused hysteria , but beatles caused hysteria and mania.
I remember it well, not very many girls fainting at all actually, but a whole lot of crying. New Kids On The Blocks never caused choas in the middle of a major city, they never has HUNDREDS of people surrounding their hotels in OTHER COUNTRIES camping out in sleeping bags. They never stopped traffic in London. They made a few chicks cry LOL
Michael Jackson made GROWN MEN faint, something the Beatles never even did... Just teen girls
is a severe medical condition characterized by extremely elevated mood, energy, unusual thought patterns and sometimes psychosis.
That's the definition of mania, and that's what beales caused, Beatlemania is something that mj never knew, he caused hysteria like elvis or the same david beckham and other big singers
Ofcourse that in not the same label of mj because he was huge (i dont know if bigger than elvis) but the same pattern, people screaming and fainting outside hotels etc.
caryash : show me the pages??? LOOK IT UP LIKE EVERY OTHER IDIOT!!!!! its in every blog out there geesh!! and jerk?? wow that sounds like a kindergander to me! LOL
MJ was the best because he sold more than 730 Million dollars only from thriller the highest achieved by any in the industry .. i mean the beatles goal were to make that kind of achievement but there couldnt. so MJ won all the way because the whole point is to have the beast selling album which the beatles doesnt have! wiki is NOT for your info for record sells! LOL ..also michael jackson won more awards in a year than the beatles by 4] in their whole life time!!
beatles just did good and that sold more than billion, they didnt do expensive videos or dances to sell their music so to say thet they wanted to do something like thriller is a comment worthy of an idiot like you.
thriller thriller LOL is the only thing you say, THRILLER IS NOT BETWEEN THE GREATEST ALBUM ALL TIME and thaks just to that video is the most selling album COS ITS MUSIC IS JUST AVERAGE. no one covers that songs.
Caraysh you just looked that up in a dictionary. You do know that "Mania" is a REAL medical illness don't you? it is only used as a figure of speech (or a metaphor) to talk about the Beatles. What you read is a dictionary defination of the medical illness.
I wanted YOU to tell me what YOU mean when you use it. In other words, what SPECIFICALLY did the Beatles cause that Jackson didn't cause?
it's not so much they caused anything different than MJ, but it was so much bigger. If you weren't there you only have mj's mania to go by but if you were there in 64' you know damn well it was much much much bigger than what mj caused.
I'm not sure what you mean, do you mean what the Beatles caused was more global? I defer to my elders when it comes to what the experience of something was like that I'm too young to remember, but there seems to be a historical problem with it being more global. Did you mean the feeling of what was happening was bigger? I can absolutely imagine that was the case. What was going on with the Beatles represented a far more massive fundemantal change to the way things were.
no not more global there was less world access then the Beatles popularity did move across the iron curtain though underground. I mean some young people think the hysteria associated with mj was the biggest for any artist ever. That is simply not true, the hysteria for the Beatles was much bigger much bigger than even for Elvis. The changes mj caused were on a smaller scale a whole generation did not follow in his footsteps, follow his fashion and the music didn't change. With the Beatles it did
By "hysteria" in my comments I only ever meant the emotional fervor of a mass of people, that was what i was saying was comparable. I am fully aware of the fact that the social and cultural changes the Beatles help bring about were far more massive.
I think you underestimate Jackson's influence in some of your comments though. It is clear that Jackson has brought about a pretty drastic change in Popular music. There are changes in other areas, but they haven't even begun to be examined.
Whether I underestimate his influence on music is a matter of taste I don't see his domination the way the Beatles dominated the 60's there are other major music forms that are every bit as popular.
True, but the Beatles weren't the ones that popularized Rock and Roll in the first place. I would argue that not only is jackson responsible for the present industry dominance of Pop and R & B, and the overthrow of the UTTER dominance of Rock & Roll but it was his empahsis upon dance (Dance was prominent in early hip hop remember Hammer) and his conditioning of the ear of Amercan youth (and world youth) to RHYTHM DOMINATED music that is responsible for openess to the hip hop movement.
yes and no. After the army Elvis abandoned rock and it almost died. The Beatles saved it and moved it forward.Yes for some years now rock has not been the dominate form, we call these the dark ages. There is a light though as rock is making a comeback and soon will once again be on top where it belongs. Plastic artificial music that dominates today will hopefully die the ugly death it so deserves.
I wouldn't say that. The 80's sucked for rock. All you had were those horrible hair metal bands. And rock was never really the dominant genre. Rock was more of an underground thing, the really popular people were always the solo singers and dancers, even though they probably didn't deserve it. Rock'n'roll was the first rhythmic music you could dance to, so you could argue that point too.
lol Hoskins that is absolutely wrong, Rock DOMINATED the 80's and you certainly had more than Glam Rock. Why do you think Jackson and most Black artists couldn't get played on MTV? it was because they weren't Rock. Prince was on MTV before Jackson and it was only because you couldn't distinguish him from a Rock artist . Rock dominance is why Jackson did songs like Beat It with Eddie Van Halen and collaborated with Paul Mccartney to cross over. Look up the top selling artists of the time.
you are wrong, mj was pop not R&B or hip hop and what u say about mc hummer his dance looked more like break dance (do u remember it), and that kind of dance was before mj so what u say is not true.
mj had nothing or very very few to do with hip hop or R&B
I DIDNT UNDERTAND A WORD YOU SAID!!! no-one covers that song???? omg that proves that you know NOTHING about michael jackson!!! chiss brown,lenny, ll cool j,and more covered THRILLER!!!!!! he's the pervert of the century????ok he is, and the pervert is wining against the beatles!!!! ahahaha ..please!!!!!!!!!! stop bitching over the same shit!
but if PERVO didnt write thriller!! and the video was made by jones.
and yes u r right maybe few, very few artists have covered mj songs, but there is not comparation with the amount of artist that have covered beatle songs.
for you info, MJ said hisself that he wrote part of thriller and the video was ALL his idea and jones ONLY produced it..which you said it was just the video, thats ok, because the dancing was his idea, not jones!! in the 2003 [edit] MJ re- realesed it NOT jones! and the ''woo hoo'' in the thriller song is some of the part he added to it! so you dont know hwat your talking about! and why dont you reply to the comment i made on the other video eh? because you cant!
I'm going to publicly repeat something Caryash Pmed me just so people will know how utterly clueless this little kid is and not take what he says seriously.
Caryash seriously suggsted that basically the hysteria over Michael Jackson was about as big as the fervor over NSYNC and The Backstreet Boys.
hey moron, it was just names of groups, bands or whatever it is to make you see that thy cause hysteria too, one thing is hysteria and another thing is mania.
mj caused hysteria but just beatles caused mania that is beyond hysteria.
im not a native english speaker im just learning so sometimes i can make a mistake.
Caryash, there have been plenty of defenders of both sides on this page, but none of them have been anywhere near as clueless as you are. When i talk to someone who was alive during the 60's, I'm humble because I know i don't remember it, I don't care how many articles i've read. You just run your mouth like you remember ANY of this. It was people that were alive during the 60's that first started comparing what was going on in the 80's with Jackson to the craze over the Beatles.
hey man, as far as i can remember poeple peolpe have never compared beatles with mj, just silly fans of mj do that cos it's logical you always want to compare your star with the best. It's simple people dont compare beatles with mj cos what mj did is not enough to be compared with beatles, beatlemania is something that mj or any other artist never knew.
you can say whatever you want but the facts say the beatles are bigger than any other artist.
Uhh, but your nine years old, so what exactly are you going to remember?
Keep in mind that the comparison that we are talking about is a comparison of the hysteria created by each of them in their prime. I admit that from a musical standpoint the mainstream media favors the Beatles ALOT more, but that wasn't what i was talking about.
Its probably fair to make the claim that MJs audience was bigger than the Beatles because the record industry was about 1000 times bigger than it was in the 60s, too and that make The Beatles even more important, inventive, influence and successful because they did a lot with such a little music indutry back in the 60's and mj having had a really big big market and music industry couldnt exceed beatles achivements, mj is more video/entertaiment oriented though he did some great songs.
Industry was 1000 times bigger? maybe 700 times, Jackson had something to do with the modern size. it's undeniable that Elvis and The Beatles more or less built the music industry, Jackson expanded it to greater lengths across the globe for modern performers but he would have no platform at all without what they accomplished. I'm not really a fan of the Beatles music (particularly of the later stuff) but their role in the creation of modern music media simply is what it is.
Actually great songwriting, singing and playing instruments are a part of the long history of MUSIC, and nobody comes close to The Beatles. No denying history.
When you don't have the talent to continuously write great songs like The Beatles did, you come up with gimmicks like dancing, moonwalking, grabbing your crotch and extravagant stage shows to keep your album sales up.
Actually dancing and performing are a part of the long history of American show business going back to Gene Kelly Sammy Davis jr and Fred Astaire, all of whom influnced Jackson, it is called being multi-talented. It predates the self righteous Rockers.
firts off The Beatles influence mj too. MJ wouldnt have been able to be what he was without the Beatles doing it first. There wouldnt have been a Motown 25 audience without the Beatles Ed Sullivan audience first. Its easy to forget, but the Beatles were the first boy band, and most likely Berry Gordys inspiration for the J5 themselves.
They also solidified (if not invented) a lot more pop/rock staples (the middle-8, the 4-man band, writing their own songs, freely mixing genres, making the studio an instrument, arguably being there for the invention of the music video and the rockumentary).
I have to point this out. Rock was viewed as a fad and it was recieving a lot of ridicule, until the Beatles came along. They made rock into a respectable, art form, and they are officialy the most covered band of all time. They are also the band with the most air time on radio, ever, as of now.
The Beatles are good at what they do but they are limited. They cannot appeal to everyone regardless of race, nationality etc, this was always Jackson's strongsuit, from the wealthiest mansion in Beverly Hills, to the crudest hut in Mongolia . From Fred Astaire and Frank Sinatra (who lavishly praised Jackson when they were alive ) to Jay Z and Snoop to Slash of Guns and Roses (who have done the same). His scope of appeal is simply unmatched.
How many R & B stars have praised the Beatles? How many Rap stars? Did you even get the point of my comment? The Beatles have no cross over appeal. People from EVERY genre have prasied Jackson. People from Amy Lee of Evanescence to (Goth Rock) to Alicia Keyes (R & B ) . The Beatles have no disversity. Everyone knows that American Blacks dumped Rock and Roll once the Beatles came, that was how Motown got so big in the 60's.
Smokey Robinson, little richard, stevie wonder and did you see Jay z sing yesterday with mccartney? apparently not.. i guess it shows your ignorance.. Nobody was bigger than the Beatles including motown.. Beatles 20 #1 songs in 7 years..
HAHAHA, Jay Z never mention Paul Mccartney once before the Grammy's randomly put them together like they have randomly put togther plenty of other unrelated entertainers. I'm sure Eminem loves Elton John lol.
Little Richard? eh, he's more Rock and Roll than modern R & B.
Good call on Smokey and Stevie, I'll give you that.
Beatles-- Most #1 songs, most #1 albums, most albums sold, only artist or group to occupy the top 5 spots on the billboard charts.. Mccartney is the most prolific songwriter ever!! I will give you t hat mj could moonwalk...
Most black people you meet on the street don't give a whole lot of credit to any white artists. While you'll find white people are more open to what they listen to. Now that I read that comment it seems kind of racist to say, but I've found that it is a pattern.
YOU ARE RACIST YOU FUCKING PRICK!!!! SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!
wow you really are a fn of ths video eh? its becoming a chat site for you huh? talking to yourself on here? i mean give me a brake!!!!!! if you like the beatles so much than go listen to their music or look for their videos. dont come on here everyday and agrue with MJ fans for being a MJ fan!!.......
seriously dude are you insulting me? we are talking about music,so RELAXE!!!!!! good lord..........your agrument has no meaning because the only people on here that thinks the beatles are better areYOU Hoskins91 and caryash and you two keep saying the samething over and over!.... i could name a 50 page list of records that michael jackson broke that beatles didnt even coome close to!!!
pages where mj broke the beatles!!! show me that pages jerk!! you are so funny, show me that pages where u say mj broke the beatles! you are really funny.
and hoskins91 is just telling the truth, what happen is that idiot like you CANT undestant or dont want to accept the facts, but as i told you, YOU CANT CHANGE THE MUSIC HISTORY so keep dreaming cos just in your dreams mj is greater.
I hate to compare between MJ and The Beatles. But if I have to, I just need one argument to close this case : MJs songs maybe have reached the entire earth, but The Beatles has reached the universe (literally).
The Beatles were very limited technology wise. If they wanted more than 4 tracks, they had to bounce down to a new tape. They didnt have all the little plugins that we have today. Its so much easier to edit out mistakes today, do a clean punch-in on a track, etc. They had to use their brains more than we do, Im afraid. They had to get innovative and push the limits of their technology. I dont think its even possible to push the limits of our technology today, we cant even get close to it.
Therefore were not forced to be as innovative and creative to find ways to get the most out of our equipment
Not only They also solidified (if not invented) a lot more pop/rock staples (the middle-8, the 4-man band writing their own songs freely mixing genres making the studio an instrument, arguably being there for the invention of the music video and the rockumentary).
I will also add feedback sampling loops, backward instrumentation large outdoor concert tours Auto Double Tracking.
caryash - learn how to spell ass hole!! ummmm you really are a fan of this video eh? it must be your life huh? he is no more in the news????? thats just for now and MJ's legecy will continue when his kids start singing and then the''ll start talking about MJ again! because he's the greatest ENTERTAINER!!!! not just in singing but dancing as well.
This Caryash guy actually said that there was no Michael Jackson mania, Michael Jackson was just a "big star"...what like Justin Timberlake? lol what is this guy like 15 years old? He dosen't even know enough to discuss this crap.
Elvis catalog was owned by RCA then BMG who was acquired by Sony. Michael Jackson owes half of Sony music publishing catalog that includes the rights to 251 Beatles songs, estimates for that stake range from $500 million to $1 billion, also the rights to his own songs and its value. Bottom line, the Beatles and Elvis records sells are a plus for Michael since both acts will pay his estate FOREVER. The KING is Michael Jackson since he owns both acts.
and most of all..Michael just died and they already compering him to Elvis and Beatles...10 to 30 years from now generation to generation will be more pleased and influenced by MJ's music and dance. MJ is already bigger than Elvis or Beatles if they already comparing them to him...he will be bigger.
watch and see how big the beatles are on 9-9-09.. Beatles most #1 songs, most # 1 albums, most top 10 albums. mccartney is the most prolific songwriter in the history of music. Nobody is bigger then the Beatles. The latest poll ranks them #1 and revolver the best album ever..
mr moron, that's happen all time when a star die, then all is normal.
the same happened with freddie mercury after his death but once the fever desappear all is normal, the same is happening with mj, the fever for his death is desappearing and he is no more in the news.
it is normal that fans want to compare their stars with the best, BUT SORRY MAN, HE WILL NEVER EVER TOUCH THEM.
Sorry guys it's late so please excuse all the typos in that last comment. Also, thekingofpopmj123 is 34 years old. That is sad since he has the vocabulary and writing skill of a 6th grader, even though I guess even retards can use the internet. Aren't you a little old to be going around and dancing in clubs, before too long you'll look like some perverted old man trying to find your next rape victim. You don't know what you're talking about so go do some research dumbass.
Hoskins91YOU SAID- perverted old man trying to find your next rape victim huh??that made no sence!!! and yes im 34! and this is not a test,its youtube!!! i dont have to write my comments perfectly, i just have to write it so you can understand it. just because i like michael jackson doesnt mean im a kid! and un like you i actually saw michael jackson in person, so im talking for my own experience.not like you trashing mj when you dont know what your talking about! i saw mj when i was like 19.
I thought you were a kid because you type like a retard, and you're having trouble arguing against kids in middle school. Also the irrelevance of your comments also gave me the impression you were just another dumb little prick. When I saw you were 34 it shocked me. If you knew what you were talking about you should be able to out argue kids who are still in school.
oh, i didnt know you were 17, im sorry im not going to waste my time with you because your not worth it , im just going to give my opinion and also the fact : michael jackson is better. and i was talking to caryash anyway.....not you! so where do you come in at? well what ever caryash is problely not 34 either so im just going and leave you little kids alone!!!! lol
You haven't really given anything to support your opinion that MJ is better in musical ability. You're just blatantly coming out and making rude comments and ignoring any arguement against you. I'll just lable you as an obssessive fanboy, actually a 34 year old obssessive fan who argues with teenagers on the internet for hours during his free time. And you're losing. Seriously don't you have something to do? You are a grown man after all. It's not like you still live with your parents right?
your an obssessive beatles fanboy. all you can say is''dancing is not music''
well doesnt matter. wow...you must have no social life at all dude... i mean trying to start fights on youtube for no reason??? LOL...name 10 good songs that the beatles ever made. and ill do the same for MJ alright?
You're the one that made it go down hill, it was starting to get reasonable around here until you came and started preaching bullshit. And technically dancing isn't music. They are interconnected, because in order to dance you have to have at least a beat. The song listing thing is stupid too, because you could just list a bunch of random songs that you think are good. I have publsihed material to reference for my info.
I can name 20 #1 songs that they made in 7 years.. Beatles most #1 songs, most #1 albums, most albums sold, only group or artist to occupy the top 5 spots on billboard in april 64.. they didnt moonwalk they just have kicked everyones ass in the music buisness including little mj..
I have to say Hoskins, you may be 17 but you are extremely impressive in the way you discuss all of this, and you know your stuff even though we may disagree on the whole MJ Vs Beatles question.
Thank you for that. Its hard, with everything that's going back and forth here. Some of these people are making good points, but most of them are just referencing how popular he is, when I can think of several reasons why that is, that don't require him being very good. He was great, though. I just don't like people saying that just because he might be more popular now, he was more talented musically than the Beatles.
if we talk about the best selling album all time trhiller is the first by now, but if we talk about THE GREATEST ALBUMS ALL TIME, where is thriller???
Various music genres were featured in the list, including pop, rock, ska, punk, heavy metal, soul, blues, folk, jazz, hip hop, and combinations thereof.
thriller is not even in the top 20 of greatest album all time.
all kind of musician of different genres voted, EVEN HIP HOP, rap etc.
if he was the greatest or the biggest around the world he wouldnt be so far from the nunmber 1.
mj was talented and great but he had too much exposure to the media that make you thing many people he is the greatest but HE IS NOT, certanly he is in the top 5 of the greatest artist ever.
hahaha how can u not see THRILLER in the top 20 ? Last time i checked Thriller is the best selling album ever..no artist/band can fuck with that CD...you will always see it in the top as number 1...come on its common sense.."Best selling album"? Use your brain.
Thriller is not even the best sellng album in the usa.. the eagles greatest hits is the best selling album in the usa.. what did mj do without quincy jones? before he died nobody and i mean nobody gave a shit about MJ. the only reason now is because he died.. The Beatles have sold more albums, more #1 songs, more #1 albums, more top 10 albums then MJ. I wont even throw in there solo work its just not fair..
yeah right whity you're dreamin. Thriller is the best selling album in the world and usa...You cant fuck with Thriller...too many things happen in Thriller..Best music video ever, 8 grammy's, Moonwalk and many more. Why u talking QUINCY JONES? Quincy says that Michael Jackson is the most profesional and best artist he ever work it. Quincy was just a producer. On the BAD album Michael wrote and co wrote every song on that album..which is the best selling second album ever.
and Nobody gave a shit about MJ? Yeah maybe you and people who didnt listen to him but his Millions and millions of royal fans did give a damn..listen, a forgotton artist cant sell 50 massive concerts in matter of hours...to a million tickets sold..thats a record braker. And you wanna talk SOLO work lol? Dude, MJ is the most succesful SOLO artist in the history of mankind and he has the achievments and world records to back it up..every race on this planet loved MJ..only white loved the Beatles.
poor guy, his fake king just has the best selling album all time.
when mj gets 4 album in the list of GREATEST ALBUM ALL TIME, when mj gets the most covered song ever or when mj gets the first 5 place in billboard with his songs then ill say mj is the greatest.
by the way, the eagles had the best selling album in us history untill mj's death (mj had to wait his death cos he was nearly forgotten).
Actually Michael Jackson is on that list, as well as some rap artists. He's just not placed very high on any of the lists. Really every publication you can find puts the Beatles above MJ, so calling Rolling Stone magazine just a bunch of rock artists is really a lame excuse. Rolling Stone covers everything, hell Taylor Swift was on the cover once, she's Country and Pop. You don't find a lot of educated rap critics around either. But they do cover pop.
I didn't call them a bunch of rock artists. Do not put words in my mouth. I said this survey was done by 273 rock musicians. It wasn't only Rolling Stone who did it. Did I say they only talk about rock? Did I say they only like rock? Did I say anything even like that? No. I am not sure why you don't think there are many educated rap critics out, you might be categorizing. You'd be surprised what some rappers rap about.
That's what it seemed like you were implying(quite heavily emphasizing in fact). Also the reason I think that is because there aren't a whole lot of well known rap, critique publications. You usually have to rely on Rolling Stone magazine or something from VH1 because they are the only people who take all music into account and not just one genre.
They'd probably say somebody like, Run D.M.C. or Public Enemy. Pop singers of today would probably put MJ pretty high, but I don't really consider a lot of them great musical minds so I wouldn't give their opinion a whole lot of credit.
So the Rolling Stones and VH1 are the only ones you would give credit? Interesting. Could it be because that genre of music does not appeal to you? You'd be surprised, not everyone raps about drugs, sex, and alcohol.
No, I know that hip hop has become a respectable form of music, its just what hip hop has become(rap) that I don't especially like. You put on some Tupac or the groups I listed below and I'll jam to them too. I have nothing against it, it just seems like no one today considers the majority of it a great art form anymore. I won't have anybody compare rap to some of the great stuff back in the 60's and 70's though.
I am not comparing them. In fact, I already said I am not comparing the beatles to Michael Jackson. It is like comparing 50 cent to the Temptations. Two complete different genres can't be compared. But I will say this.
Every time the Beatles sold a record, Michael Jackson technically sold a record. As you probably know he owned the Beatles catalog.
You have the writing proficiency of a ten year old, we don't need to do anything to prove how intelligent you are. I haven't seen you type a complete sentence yet.
i have the writing of a ten year old? its typos stupid!!!! LOOK IT UP, before you start posting shit!!!!!!!!! then again yo are only 17 so what do you know? you dont know nothing about music if you think that comparing the beatles wiht MJ is a right match!!! if you think my grammar is bad then you problely cant read!!! .....also if your trying to change the subject to my comments, then that means you cant come up with anything to back up your agrument... im talking about MJ VS THE BEATLES!
Well I'd be okay if it were one or two but if somebody were grading your comments you would get a failing grade. I agree that there are things that make them difficult to compare to, but its not because MJ is so superior, its just because they were in different genres and time periods. I've replied to just about every comment you've directed towards me and I think most people on here agree that I'm beating you. I'm just responding to your personal insults directed at others on this forum.
beating me? THIS IS NOT A GAME!!! you havent said one good thing about the beatles! all you are trying to do is rate my comments and keeping score which is stupid!! get a life!
I like MJ too, but its a VS. video so we're supposed to share and support our opinions on who we think is better. I prefer the Beatles, and I just have better support than most of the people on here. At least I have some facts to back myself up.
OK? i just gave you the facts and what did you give me? ''oh music and dancing two different things''...thats just showing your ignorants!! i mean MJ didnt just make history in music but in dancing too, and i cant think of any artist out there that doesnt copy his style, can you?
I'm not saying that they aren't relevant to each other, but whether or not a person can dance, is not relevant to the arguement. We're talking about musical ability, that has nothing to do with dancing. That helps him to be a better live performer, but being a good dancer, doesn't help you to write and play songs. There are plenty of musical artists that don't mimic his style. The best examples of people who do are those gay boy bands and disney bands.
WOW.. thats funny:Hoskins91 -''what do dance have with overall music?? hahaha COME ON!!!!! i mean what good is music if you cant dance to it? sence MJ gave us music and a signiture dance to all his every songs! i mean what did the beatles do but sing? today's music if you dont have a dance to it its considered LAME!!!! especially POP music!!!
Music is meant to be listened to. That's the primary way to experience it. Really you can dance to anything with a beat, so if you wanted to you could dance to just about music you wanted to. Even though you'd look like an idiot. That really doesn't prove that Michael is better than the Beatles in overall musical ability. If I guy can play an instrument well, write awesome songs, and sing well, you're saying he sucks because he can't dance.
you are so silly, there are many beautiful songs that u cant dance but are quite better than any mj's song.
if u say that good music is just music u can dance then "SHE IS OUT OF MY LIFE" is garbage? that's a beautiful song u CANT dance but listen, so opera is garbage, imagine of John Lennon is garbage too!!!
Let's not forget that Quincey Jones wrote a whole lot of MJ's music. And while the beatles started off with an 8:6 original to cover song ratio on their albums, they stopped when they made A Hard Day's Night. So the Beatles clearly have my vote. Not that MJ wasn't amazing or anything, it's just the beatles have really brought my life out of the gutter over the past year, and I would much rather listen to their music.
jwateska736 1 year ago
MJ is wayyyyy BETTER! it Took 4 men to become sucessful.. But MJ as a SOLO ARTIST did it a BILLION times better.. Plus he was CROWNED THE KING!
davidnashley1985 2 years ago 51
Idk how yall lyk the beatles well i can c they have some good songs but i mean seriously Mj overtakes the beatles buy infinity!!! RIP mj we will never forget him
Mj21330 2 years ago 36
beatles... obviously. i like jackson though, he's cool.
t00117598 2 years ago
How could you fucking compare a solo singer and a band? Of course the band will win! This is a unfair test! I do not accept the result! To me, Michael Jackson is always in my heart. MJ loved kids but Beatles was busy with music.
MsRandomised 2 years ago 8
beatles
mitchellvids 2 years ago
id listen to mj over the beatles, cuz their really kinda boring, it almost seems to me that most people listen to the beatles just because of how many sales they had and for changing the music industry,and not actually for the music >.>
ds12z 2 years ago 8
To be second to Elvis I would say the Beatles.
hvdv05 2 years ago
mj alll the way!!!!!
Starbux41797 2 years ago 87
The Beatles. In forty years if Michael Jackson is as successful as the Beatles are now, I'll change my name. BEATLES FTW.
Michael is fast becoming overrated. I do like him. but honestly.
MeIsTheWalrus 2 years ago
Can't understand how you guys can waste your times arguing about who's better.
The bottom line is Beatles was a band and it took four men to make it succesful.
While MJ was with Jackson 5 and made great succes there.
But no on ever imagined the carrer he had after that.
So there's so INFO.
Don't compare Solo to Band.
Cause not is it stupid but also make no sense.
wowftw987 2 years ago 10
dude... beatles all the fucking way!!
zach6138283 2 years ago 20
sure the Beatles were successful, but Id much rather listen to MJ anyday, anytime.
nmantor 2 years ago 4
You said Jackson was not the greatest entertainer who do you dare place baove him.
The British invasion was nice but Jackson had a global invasion.
Beatles sold "records" , but once again, that is distinct from albums, it includes singles and all types of mediums less than a 9 or more track album. Singles were a more common unit of music then.
Jackson had more cross over appeal, racially, culturally, no I don't think it is settled at all.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
See my new comment then.
TCBforEP 2 years ago
you obviously are clueless on this matter
gettyman1 2 years ago 16
they also have sold more ALBUMS!! MORE #1 SONGS, MORE #1 ALBUMS.. THE BEATLES ARE GREAT ALL OVER THE WORLD. NOT JUST IN BRITAIN AND USA.. I REPEAT THE BEATLES HAVE SOLD MORE ALBUMS THAN ANYONE.NOt singles, records, tapes but ALBUMS!!!!!!!!!! JUST LOOK WHAT THE BEATLES 1 ALBUM DID.
Beatles6919 2 years ago 12
Thriller was the best selling album ever
LCPD9111 2 years ago 100
beatles are the best selling act over all though, over a billion in sales.
t00117598 2 years ago
MJ has quite a few singles too, which they count in his sales, so that arguement is moot. I don't know how this got about popularity, but the Beatles beat him in overall talent hands down.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
the beatles do not hav overall talent overatted singers that have no unique style except for lennon who is just awefull but their song writing was crazy deep. But Mj was more creative he could sing think wat u want he could dance and write and put on the most spectacular shows shows. Mjs catalogue is so different for each song while the beatles r relatively the same
blacksanta100 2 years ago
Alright caryash, I'm a beatles fan to but you are getting a little out of hand. You need to try to make your comments more readable and to not be so quick to insult people. For all of you other people, don't antagonize for no good reason.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 4
Bruce was nearly as big as Michael in the United States for a while, although not anywhere else.
anastamotic 2 years ago
I don't really consider any of those guys that great other than Bruce Springsteen and David Bowie.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
Rock was the dominant genre. From Bruce Springsteen (Whose hit song president Reagan wanted to use for his campaign) to Duran Duran, The Police, Genesis, Dire Straits, Billy Idol, Adam and the Ants, David Bowie (The guy who publically called out MTV for not playing "Black" artists) on and on. Even Cyndi lauper had to PRETEND to be Punk LOL.
anastamotic 2 years ago
Bottom line is, The Beatles were the most influential, and most successful, popular music group of the rock era, with global sales exceeding 1.3 billion records as of 2004 - more than any other artist or artists in history. Few artists of any sort, in any era, have achieved The Beatles' combination of popular success, critical acclaim and broad cultural influence. It's nice that people have their opinions, but your opinions don't change history.
HotasL 2 years ago 3
Sorry i like MJ better i dont give a damn what beatl's have to to influence people I juts like MJ dont like it o well
xXxXkuramaxXx 2 years ago 8
You're allowed to have your own opinion. It doesn' bother me as long as you're not an asshole about it.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 3
Whether the Beatles came along or not Rock and Roll was going to be dominant, Elvis had seen to that.
Jackson on the other hand, like Elvis, was the principle catalyst for the movement he brought about.
periechontology 2 years ago
Wait, i should make a correction on an earlier point here. Jackson didn't so much change music as the music industry
anastamotic 2 years ago
Jackson is a much more recent figure and the scale of his impact has not yet been processed, and examined. I actually think that the controversy around his life is likely to seriously compromise such an examination. It is difficult to talk about the extent of someone's influence without the sense that you are lauding them in some way, and there is in many quarters little desire to laud Jackson because of the controversy of his life.
anastamotic 2 years ago
im gonna recomend to you to see the videos of this guy and see how great was paul mc cartney playing the bass, some can tthink that songs of the 60's have easy bass perfomance but you know, the beatles are the exception.
see videos of this guy:
beatleojayi
see how difficult are the bass in old brown shoe.
caryash 2 years ago
Grammy's weren't around when the Beatles were together. Really I think all of the Beatles were retired by the time the Grammy's came into existence, so amount of grammy's can't be an arguement point. For everyone who is saying Jackson sold more, that's false, the Beatles sold more. Really they will probably blow Jackson away this year because all of their albums are coming out remastered soon. Wikipedia is a good source for information. Who has found anything wrong on wikipedia?
Hoskins91 2 years ago
no the Beatles won 16 Grammies
gettyman1 2 years ago
Can you put a list up or something. I never saw anything mentioned about Grammy's in everything I've read about them.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 3
Come on now, The Beatles even won an Oscar, lol... has MJ?
xsoopaflyx31 2 years ago
Most Popular Song and Covered in the world... YESTERDAY by Paul McCartney, a Beatle... I forgot MJ only wrote a few of his songs, his talents were as entertainer, not a real musician.... I rest my case...
xsoopaflyx31 2 years ago
MICHAEL JACKSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!
titti502 2 years ago 3
Could we end this debate the Beatles who broke up forty years ago are about to set a chard record in the UK. It is expect that all of their 14 albums will chart in the top twenty.
It takes God rest his soul Michael Jackson to die to come close this.
Matildamothers 2 years ago
Wait a minute let me correct something. they never caused chaos in the middle of a major city A DECADE AND A HALF AFTER THE PRIME OF THEIR CAREER!
anastamotic 2 years ago
The truth is, if New Kids On The Block has made as big an impact their clips would have been uploaded. the very fact that they have not been uploaded shows how small time they were
anastamotic 2 years ago
Then you had the unbelievable nerve to compare Jackson to two other groups who's prime I remember very well, but that you probably don't.
Can you find footage of NYSNC, The Backstreet Boys, or any other musical act of the past or present that has scenes of hysteria anything close to the Jackson scenes? i don't think so. The closest is clips of the Beatles and even there the hysteria is nowhere near as global. So find me those clips or stop making stupid comparisons.
anastamotic 2 years ago
yessssss, i remmber long time ago the hysteria for new kids on the block when i was a kid, girls fainting and all that kind of things but no one has uploaded that videos.
and im gonna tell you again, mj caused hysteria , but beatles caused hysteria and mania.
caryash 2 years ago
I remember it well, not very many girls fainting at all actually, but a whole lot of crying. New Kids On The Blocks never caused choas in the middle of a major city, they never has HUNDREDS of people surrounding their hotels in OTHER COUNTRIES camping out in sleeping bags. They never stopped traffic in London. They made a few chicks cry LOL
Michael Jackson made GROWN MEN faint, something the Beatles never even did... Just teen girls
By the way, define what you mean by "Mania"
anastamotic 2 years ago 2
mania means:
is a severe medical condition characterized by extremely elevated mood, energy, unusual thought patterns and sometimes psychosis.
That's the definition of mania, and that's what beales caused, Beatlemania is something that mj never knew, he caused hysteria like elvis or the same david beckham and other big singers
Ofcourse that in not the same label of mj because he was huge (i dont know if bigger than elvis) but the same pattern, people screaming and fainting outside hotels etc.
caryash 2 years ago
caryash : show me the pages??? LOOK IT UP LIKE EVERY OTHER IDIOT!!!!! its in every blog out there geesh!! and jerk?? wow that sounds like a kindergander to me! LOL
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
MJ was the best because he sold more than 730 Million dollars only from thriller the highest achieved by any in the industry .. i mean the beatles goal were to make that kind of achievement but there couldnt. so MJ won all the way because the whole point is to have the beast selling album which the beatles doesnt have! wiki is NOT for your info for record sells! LOL ..also michael jackson won more awards in a year than the beatles by 4] in their whole life time!!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
dont be so stupid!
do u rehearse to be moron?
beatles just did good and that sold more than billion, they didnt do expensive videos or dances to sell their music so to say thet they wanted to do something like thriller is a comment worthy of an idiot like you.
thriller thriller LOL is the only thing you say, THRILLER IS NOT BETWEEN THE GREATEST ALBUM ALL TIME and thaks just to that video is the most selling album COS ITS MUSIC IS JUST AVERAGE. no one covers that songs.
get los loser
caryash 2 years ago
Caraysh you just looked that up in a dictionary. You do know that "Mania" is a REAL medical illness don't you? it is only used as a figure of speech (or a metaphor) to talk about the Beatles. What you read is a dictionary defination of the medical illness.
I wanted YOU to tell me what YOU mean when you use it. In other words, what SPECIFICALLY did the Beatles cause that Jackson didn't cause?
anastamotic 2 years ago
it's not so much they caused anything different than MJ, but it was so much bigger. If you weren't there you only have mj's mania to go by but if you were there in 64' you know damn well it was much much much bigger than what mj caused.
gettyman1 2 years ago
mj cause hysteria, beatles caused mania.
caryash 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you mean, do you mean what the Beatles caused was more global? I defer to my elders when it comes to what the experience of something was like that I'm too young to remember, but there seems to be a historical problem with it being more global. Did you mean the feeling of what was happening was bigger? I can absolutely imagine that was the case. What was going on with the Beatles represented a far more massive fundemantal change to the way things were.
anastamotic 2 years ago
no not more global there was less world access then the Beatles popularity did move across the iron curtain though underground. I mean some young people think the hysteria associated with mj was the biggest for any artist ever. That is simply not true, the hysteria for the Beatles was much bigger much bigger than even for Elvis. The changes mj caused were on a smaller scale a whole generation did not follow in his footsteps, follow his fashion and the music didn't change. With the Beatles it did
gettyman1 2 years ago
By "hysteria" in my comments I only ever meant the emotional fervor of a mass of people, that was what i was saying was comparable. I am fully aware of the fact that the social and cultural changes the Beatles help bring about were far more massive.
I think you underestimate Jackson's influence in some of your comments though. It is clear that Jackson has brought about a pretty drastic change in Popular music. There are changes in other areas, but they haven't even begun to be examined.
anastamotic 2 years ago
Whether I underestimate his influence on music is a matter of taste I don't see his domination the way the Beatles dominated the 60's there are other major music forms that are every bit as popular.
gettyman1 2 years ago
True, but the Beatles weren't the ones that popularized Rock and Roll in the first place. I would argue that not only is jackson responsible for the present industry dominance of Pop and R & B, and the overthrow of the UTTER dominance of Rock & Roll but it was his empahsis upon dance (Dance was prominent in early hip hop remember Hammer) and his conditioning of the ear of Amercan youth (and world youth) to RHYTHM DOMINATED music that is responsible for openess to the hip hop movement.
periechontology 2 years ago
yes and no. After the army Elvis abandoned rock and it almost died. The Beatles saved it and moved it forward.Yes for some years now rock has not been the dominate form, we call these the dark ages. There is a light though as rock is making a comeback and soon will once again be on top where it belongs. Plastic artificial music that dominates today will hopefully die the ugly death it so deserves.
gettyman1 2 years ago 3
I wouldn't say that. The 80's sucked for rock. All you had were those horrible hair metal bands. And rock was never really the dominant genre. Rock was more of an underground thing, the really popular people were always the solo singers and dancers, even though they probably didn't deserve it. Rock'n'roll was the first rhythmic music you could dance to, so you could argue that point too.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 5
lol Hoskins that is absolutely wrong, Rock DOMINATED the 80's and you certainly had more than Glam Rock. Why do you think Jackson and most Black artists couldn't get played on MTV? it was because they weren't Rock. Prince was on MTV before Jackson and it was only because you couldn't distinguish him from a Rock artist . Rock dominance is why Jackson did songs like Beat It with Eddie Van Halen and collaborated with Paul Mccartney to cross over. Look up the top selling artists of the time.
anastamotic 2 years ago
you are wrong, mj was pop not R&B or hip hop and what u say about mc hummer his dance looked more like break dance (do u remember it), and that kind of dance was before mj so what u say is not true.
mj had nothing or very very few to do with hip hop or R&B
caryash 2 years ago 11
MJ had hip hop songs like "They don't care about us".
TCBforEP 2 years ago 3
SO YEAH! tell me what they did that MJ didn dot? MICHAEL JACKSON WAS AWARDED ARTIST OF THE CENTURY!!!!!!! enough said;}{;
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
he is the pervert of the century cos in music beatles and elvis have more achivements.
caryash 2 years ago
I DIDNT UNDERTAND A WORD YOU SAID!!! no-one covers that song???? omg that proves that you know NOTHING about michael jackson!!! chiss brown,lenny, ll cool j,and more covered THRILLER!!!!!! he's the pervert of the century????ok he is, and the pervert is wining against the beatles!!!! ahahaha ..please!!!!!!!!!! stop bitching over the same shit!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
but if PERVO didnt write thriller!! and the video was made by jones.
and yes u r right maybe few, very few artists have covered mj songs, but there is not comparation with the amount of artist that have covered beatle songs.
caryash 2 years ago
for you info, MJ said hisself that he wrote part of thriller and the video was ALL his idea and jones ONLY produced it..which you said it was just the video, thats ok, because the dancing was his idea, not jones!! in the 2003 [edit] MJ re- realesed it NOT jones! and the ''woo hoo'' in the thriller song is some of the part he added to it! so you dont know hwat your talking about! and why dont you reply to the comment i made on the other video eh? because you cant!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
mj is a known liar
gettyman1 2 years ago
how can he win when he loses every stat b ut one he has an album that sold the most, that's not enough unless you are really stupid.
gettyman1 2 years ago
I'm going to publicly repeat something Caryash Pmed me just so people will know how utterly clueless this little kid is and not take what he says seriously.
Caryash seriously suggsted that basically the hysteria over Michael Jackson was about as big as the fervor over NSYNC and The Backstreet Boys.
anastamotic 2 years ago
hey moron, it was just names of groups, bands or whatever it is to make you see that thy cause hysteria too, one thing is hysteria and another thing is mania.
mj caused hysteria but just beatles caused mania that is beyond hysteria.
im not a native english speaker im just learning so sometimes i can make a mistake.
caryash 2 years ago
Caryash, there have been plenty of defenders of both sides on this page, but none of them have been anywhere near as clueless as you are. When i talk to someone who was alive during the 60's, I'm humble because I know i don't remember it, I don't care how many articles i've read. You just run your mouth like you remember ANY of this. It was people that were alive during the 60's that first started comparing what was going on in the 80's with Jackson to the craze over the Beatles.
anastamotic 2 years ago
hey man, as far as i can remember poeple peolpe have never compared beatles with mj, just silly fans of mj do that cos it's logical you always want to compare your star with the best. It's simple people dont compare beatles with mj cos what mj did is not enough to be compared with beatles, beatlemania is something that mj or any other artist never knew.
you can say whatever you want but the facts say the beatles are bigger than any other artist.
caryash 2 years ago
Uhh, but your nine years old, so what exactly are you going to remember?
Keep in mind that the comparison that we are talking about is a comparison of the hysteria created by each of them in their prime. I admit that from a musical standpoint the mainstream media favors the Beatles ALOT more, but that wasn't what i was talking about.
anastamotic 2 years ago
Its probably fair to make the claim that MJs audience was bigger than the Beatles because the record industry was about 1000 times bigger than it was in the 60s, too and that make The Beatles even more important, inventive, influence and successful because they did a lot with such a little music indutry back in the 60's and mj having had a really big big market and music industry couldnt exceed beatles achivements, mj is more video/entertaiment oriented though he did some great songs.
caryash 2 years ago
Industry was 1000 times bigger? maybe 700 times, Jackson had something to do with the modern size. it's undeniable that Elvis and The Beatles more or less built the music industry, Jackson expanded it to greater lengths across the globe for modern performers but he would have no platform at all without what they accomplished. I'm not really a fan of the Beatles music (particularly of the later stuff) but their role in the creation of modern music media simply is what it is.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
Actually great songwriting, singing and playing instruments are a part of the long history of MUSIC, and nobody comes close to The Beatles. No denying history.
Just1942 2 years ago
When you don't have the talent to continuously write great songs like The Beatles did, you come up with gimmicks like dancing, moonwalking, grabbing your crotch and extravagant stage shows to keep your album sales up.
Just1942 2 years ago
Actually dancing and performing are a part of the long history of American show business going back to Gene Kelly Sammy Davis jr and Fred Astaire, all of whom influnced Jackson, it is called being multi-talented. It predates the self righteous Rockers.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
firts off The Beatles influence mj too. MJ wouldnt have been able to be what he was without the Beatles doing it first. There wouldnt have been a Motown 25 audience without the Beatles Ed Sullivan audience first. Its easy to forget, but the Beatles were the first boy band, and most likely Berry Gordys inspiration for the J5 themselves.
caryash 2 years ago
They also solidified (if not invented) a lot more pop/rock staples (the middle-8, the 4-man band, writing their own songs, freely mixing genres, making the studio an instrument, arguably being there for the invention of the music video and the rockumentary).
caryash 2 years ago
"How many R & B stars have praised the Beatles?"
Many, including Michael Jackson.
"How many Rap stars?"
Who gives a fuck?
Just1942 2 years ago
lol The Beatles were lucky to get a nod from Sinatra.
With Jackson it wasn't just luck , all of the stars from America's golden age of entertainment loved him: Sinatra, Astaire, Hepburn, Loren.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
Did they need a nod from sinatra? how fucking funny that is..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
I have to point this out. Rock was viewed as a fad and it was recieving a lot of ridicule, until the Beatles came along. They made rock into a respectable, art form, and they are officialy the most covered band of all time. They are also the band with the most air time on radio, ever, as of now.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
Michael Jackson is number ONE 4ever
mic3tta948 2 years ago
you all are dumb: MICHAEL JACKSON IS THE BETTER SINGER THAN ALL OF THEM!!!!
GOOG BYE, AND GOOD NIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!{fags!!]
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
Beatles most #1 songs, most #1 albums, most albums sold, and just watch 9-9-09 and enjoy Beatlemania again..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
Hey everybody, this guy is 34. This grown, almost middle aged, man is calling a bunch of teenagers fags on the Internet.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
Even Elvis had wider appeal than the Beatles.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
oh really! LOL
you are just another ignorant mj fan that doesnt have any idea about it and just write silly thing.
caryash 2 years ago
The Beatles are good at what they do but they are limited. They cannot appeal to everyone regardless of race, nationality etc, this was always Jackson's strongsuit, from the wealthiest mansion in Beverly Hills, to the crudest hut in Mongolia . From Fred Astaire and Frank Sinatra (who lavishly praised Jackson when they were alive ) to Jay Z and Snoop to Slash of Guns and Roses (who have done the same). His scope of appeal is simply unmatched.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
That's why i tell you IGNORANT, cos you are talking many stupid things.
Beatles have appeal to all people, all color and race you just say that cos you fake king doesnt have good arguments to be compared with the beatles.
Poor guy are you, Frank Sinatra and even more stars have praised the beatles much more than mj, you know why? cos they did it all.
Even Frank Sinatra said that SOMETHING is the best love song ever.
caryash 2 years ago
How many R & B stars have praised the Beatles? How many Rap stars? Did you even get the point of my comment? The Beatles have no cross over appeal. People from EVERY genre have prasied Jackson. People from Amy Lee of Evanescence to (Goth Rock) to Alicia Keyes (R & B ) . The Beatles have no disversity. Everyone knows that American Blacks dumped Rock and Roll once the Beatles came, that was how Motown got so big in the 60's.
These were the same people that loved Elvis.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
Smokey Robinson, little richard, stevie wonder and did you see Jay z sing yesterday with mccartney? apparently not.. i guess it shows your ignorance.. Nobody was bigger than the Beatles including motown.. Beatles 20 #1 songs in 7 years..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
HAHAHA, Jay Z never mention Paul Mccartney once before the Grammy's randomly put them together like they have randomly put togther plenty of other unrelated entertainers. I'm sure Eminem loves Elton John lol.
Little Richard? eh, he's more Rock and Roll than modern R & B.
Good call on Smokey and Stevie, I'll give you that.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
Beatles-- Most #1 songs, most #1 albums, most albums sold, only artist or group to occupy the top 5 spots on the billboard charts.. Mccartney is the most prolific songwriter ever!! I will give you t hat mj could moonwalk...
Beatles6919 2 years ago
Most black people you meet on the street don't give a whole lot of credit to any white artists. While you'll find white people are more open to what they listen to. Now that I read that comment it seems kind of racist to say, but I've found that it is a pattern.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
YOU ARE RACIST YOU FUCKING PRICK!!!! SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!
wow you really are a fn of ths video eh? its becoming a chat site for you huh? talking to yourself on here? i mean give me a brake!!!!!! if you like the beatles so much than go listen to their music or look for their videos. dont come on here everyday and agrue with MJ fans for being a MJ fan!!.......
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
seriously dude are you insulting me? we are talking about music,so RELAXE!!!!!! good lord..........your agrument has no meaning because the only people on here that thinks the beatles are better areYOU Hoskins91 and caryash and you two keep saying the samething over and over!.... i could name a 50 page list of records that michael jackson broke that beatles didnt even coome close to!!!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
pages where mj broke the beatles!!! show me that pages jerk!! you are so funny, show me that pages where u say mj broke the beatles! you are really funny.
and hoskins91 is just telling the truth, what happen is that idiot like you CANT undestant or dont want to accept the facts, but as i told you, YOU CANT CHANGE THE MUSIC HISTORY so keep dreaming cos just in your dreams mj is greater.
caryash 2 years ago
I hate to compare between MJ and The Beatles. But if I have to, I just need one argument to close this case : MJs songs maybe have reached the entire earth, but The Beatles has reached the universe (literally).
caryash 2 years ago
The Beatles were very limited technology wise. If they wanted more than 4 tracks, they had to bounce down to a new tape. They didnt have all the little plugins that we have today. Its so much easier to edit out mistakes today, do a clean punch-in on a track, etc. They had to use their brains more than we do, Im afraid. They had to get innovative and push the limits of their technology. I dont think its even possible to push the limits of our technology today, we cant even get close to it.
caryash 2 years ago
Therefore were not forced to be as innovative and creative to find ways to get the most out of our equipment
Not only They also solidified (if not invented) a lot more pop/rock staples (the middle-8, the 4-man band writing their own songs freely mixing genres making the studio an instrument, arguably being there for the invention of the music video and the rockumentary).
I will also add feedback sampling loops, backward instrumentation large outdoor concert tours Auto Double Tracking.
caryash 2 years ago
caryash - learn how to spell ass hole!! ummmm you really are a fan of this video eh? it must be your life huh? he is no more in the news????? thats just for now and MJ's legecy will continue when his kids start singing and then the''ll start talking about MJ again! because he's the greatest ENTERTAINER!!!! not just in singing but dancing as well.
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
his kids? but he was gay!!
oh i forgot that he asked some friend to donate their sperma right!
caryash 2 years ago
This Caryash guy actually said that there was no Michael Jackson mania, Michael Jackson was just a "big star"...what like Justin Timberlake? lol what is this guy like 15 years old? He dosen't even know enough to discuss this crap.
anastamotic 2 years ago
stupid, there'wasnt jackson mania actually is the first time i ever hear that and sounds stupid like you.
u pretend to know a lot about it but u r just a simple and ignorant fan.
caryash 2 years ago
I pretend to know alot? you talked to me before?
if it's the first time you have heard of a mania or hysteria over michael jackson you shouldn't even be in this conversation.
What did you accidentally put the Beatles instead of the Jonas Brothers or Taylor Swift into your CD player and discover a new act?
anastamotic 2 years ago
Elvis catalog was owned by RCA then BMG who was acquired by Sony. Michael Jackson owes half of Sony music publishing catalog that includes the rights to 251 Beatles songs, estimates for that stake range from $500 million to $1 billion, also the rights to his own songs and its value. Bottom line, the Beatles and Elvis records sells are a plus for Michael since both acts will pay his estate FOREVER. The KING is Michael Jackson since he owns both acts.
femaledancer1 2 years ago
and he was broke when he died and mccartney is a billionaire..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
Beatles6919: Latest Update on Michael Jackson's Worth
ATV Catalog share (50%) of songs worth an estimated $1 billion;
Michael Jackson's Catalog of songs (100% share ) worth an estimated $1 billion;
Michael Jackson brand rights, worth an estimated $3 billion.
Total worth: $5 billion as of June 30, 2009.
Stop believing the MEDIA and you own research.
femaledancer1 2 years ago
maybe yes but the most preious thing in that cataloge are the publishing rights for the beatles songs.
caryash 2 years ago
mj just has the half of the publishing rights, NOT THE RIGHTS OF THE SONGS.
im sure mj will lose soon the publishing rights, cos many companies want them.
mj rights are worth as much as the beatles??
NOOOOOOO
caryash 2 years ago
caryash: You sound like a kid. If MJ did NOT leave his publishing rights to those company then they are SOL.
femaledancer1 2 years ago
and most of all..Michael just died and they already compering him to Elvis and Beatles...10 to 30 years from now generation to generation will be more pleased and influenced by MJ's music and dance. MJ is already bigger than Elvis or Beatles if they already comparing them to him...he will be bigger.
MarkoSogz 2 years ago
watch and see how big the beatles are on 9-9-09.. Beatles most #1 songs, most # 1 albums, most top 10 albums. mccartney is the most prolific songwriter in the history of music. Nobody is bigger then the Beatles. The latest poll ranks them #1 and revolver the best album ever..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
lol, make me laugh.
mr moron, that's happen all time when a star die, then all is normal.
the same happened with freddie mercury after his death but once the fever desappear all is normal, the same is happening with mj, the fever for his death is desappearing and he is no more in the news.
it is normal that fans want to compare their stars with the best, BUT SORRY MAN, HE WILL NEVER EVER TOUCH THEM.
caryash 2 years ago
hey jerk, mj is just more famous (just this days because his death and the coverage media) but bigger will be always beatles and elvis.
YOU MUST BE A CLOWN
caryash 2 years ago
Sorry guys it's late so please excuse all the typos in that last comment. Also, thekingofpopmj123 is 34 years old. That is sad since he has the vocabulary and writing skill of a 6th grader, even though I guess even retards can use the internet. Aren't you a little old to be going around and dancing in clubs, before too long you'll look like some perverted old man trying to find your next rape victim. You don't know what you're talking about so go do some research dumbass.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
Hoskins91YOU SAID- perverted old man trying to find your next rape victim huh??that made no sence!!! and yes im 34! and this is not a test,its youtube!!! i dont have to write my comments perfectly, i just have to write it so you can understand it. just because i like michael jackson doesnt mean im a kid! and un like you i actually saw michael jackson in person, so im talking for my own experience.not like you trashing mj when you dont know what your talking about! i saw mj when i was like 19.
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
I thought you were a kid because you type like a retard, and you're having trouble arguing against kids in middle school. Also the irrelevance of your comments also gave me the impression you were just another dumb little prick. When I saw you were 34 it shocked me. If you knew what you were talking about you should be able to out argue kids who are still in school.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
oh, i didnt know you were 17, im sorry im not going to waste my time with you because your not worth it , im just going to give my opinion and also the fact : michael jackson is better. and i was talking to caryash anyway.....not you! so where do you come in at? well what ever caryash is problely not 34 either so im just going and leave you little kids alone!!!! lol
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
You haven't really given anything to support your opinion that MJ is better in musical ability. You're just blatantly coming out and making rude comments and ignoring any arguement against you. I'll just lable you as an obssessive fanboy, actually a 34 year old obssessive fan who argues with teenagers on the internet for hours during his free time. And you're losing. Seriously don't you have something to do? You are a grown man after all. It's not like you still live with your parents right?
Hoskins91 2 years ago
your an obssessive beatles fanboy. all you can say is''dancing is not music''
well doesnt matter. wow...you must have no social life at all dude... i mean trying to start fights on youtube for no reason??? LOL...name 10 good songs that the beatles ever made. and ill do the same for MJ alright?
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
You're the one that made it go down hill, it was starting to get reasonable around here until you came and started preaching bullshit. And technically dancing isn't music. They are interconnected, because in order to dance you have to have at least a beat. The song listing thing is stupid too, because you could just list a bunch of random songs that you think are good. I have publsihed material to reference for my info.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
hahahaha..... you still couldnt name 10 good songs that the beatles made and your still talking negetive about MJ.
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
I can name 20 #1 songs that they made in 7 years.. Beatles most #1 songs, most #1 albums, most albums sold, only group or artist to occupy the top 5 spots on billboard in april 64.. they didnt moonwalk they just have kicked everyones ass in the music buisness including little mj..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
I have to say Hoskins, you may be 17 but you are extremely impressive in the way you discuss all of this, and you know your stuff even though we may disagree on the whole MJ Vs Beatles question.
Onieracraft 2 years ago
Thank you for that. Its hard, with everything that's going back and forth here. Some of these people are making good points, but most of them are just referencing how popular he is, when I can think of several reasons why that is, that don't require him being very good. He was great, though. I just don't like people saying that just because he might be more popular now, he was more talented musically than the Beatles.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
if we talk about the best selling album all time trhiller is the first by now, but if we talk about THE GREATEST ALBUMS ALL TIME, where is thriller???
caryash 2 years ago
It was done by rock and roll musicians, if you did pop or even rap, michael jackson would be #1.
dannyz780 2 years ago
Various music genres were featured in the list, including pop, rock, ska, punk, heavy metal, soul, blues, folk, jazz, hip hop, and combinations thereof.
thriller is not even in the top 20 of greatest album all time.
caryash 2 years ago
Actually, Thriller is #20. And what I was saying was if people from a different genre of music did it, they would be different people.
dannyz780 2 years ago
all kind of musician of different genres voted, EVEN HIP HOP, rap etc.
if he was the greatest or the biggest around the world he wouldnt be so far from the nunmber 1.
mj was talented and great but he had too much exposure to the media that make you thing many people he is the greatest but HE IS NOT, certanly he is in the top 5 of the greatest artist ever.
caryash 2 years ago
The Rolling Stones themselves said it was done by 273 rock musicians, so why the hell would I believe you.
dannyz780 2 years ago
just believe that you wont see thriller in the top 20 unless mj' fan make their own list.
caryash 2 years ago
What? Look at the list, it is number #20, if you are going to say untrue facts about it, then I will say that Sgt.Pepper is not number 1.
dannyz780 2 years ago
hahaha how can u not see THRILLER in the top 20 ? Last time i checked Thriller is the best selling album ever..no artist/band can fuck with that CD...you will always see it in the top as number 1...come on its common sense.."Best selling album"? Use your brain.
MarkoSogz 2 years ago
Thriller is not even the best sellng album in the usa.. the eagles greatest hits is the best selling album in the usa.. what did mj do without quincy jones? before he died nobody and i mean nobody gave a shit about MJ. the only reason now is because he died.. The Beatles have sold more albums, more #1 songs, more #1 albums, more top 10 albums then MJ. I wont even throw in there solo work its just not fair..
Beatles6919 2 years ago
yeah right whity you're dreamin. Thriller is the best selling album in the world and usa...You cant fuck with Thriller...too many things happen in Thriller..Best music video ever, 8 grammy's, Moonwalk and many more. Why u talking QUINCY JONES? Quincy says that Michael Jackson is the most profesional and best artist he ever work it. Quincy was just a producer. On the BAD album Michael wrote and co wrote every song on that album..which is the best selling second album ever.
MarkoSogz 2 years ago
and Nobody gave a shit about MJ? Yeah maybe you and people who didnt listen to him but his Millions and millions of royal fans did give a damn..listen, a forgotton artist cant sell 50 massive concerts in matter of hours...to a million tickets sold..thats a record braker. And you wanna talk SOLO work lol? Dude, MJ is the most succesful SOLO artist in the history of mankind and he has the achievments and world records to back it up..every race on this planet loved MJ..only white loved the Beatles.
MarkoSogz 2 years ago
Moron, is that your only argument?
poor guy, his fake king just has the best selling album all time.
when mj gets 4 album in the list of GREATEST ALBUM ALL TIME, when mj gets the most covered song ever or when mj gets the first 5 place in billboard with his songs then ill say mj is the greatest.
by the way, the eagles had the best selling album in us history untill mj's death (mj had to wait his death cos he was nearly forgotten).
i have many many more arguments, DO U HAVE MANY?
caryash 2 years ago
Actually Michael Jackson is on that list, as well as some rap artists. He's just not placed very high on any of the lists. Really every publication you can find puts the Beatles above MJ, so calling Rolling Stone magazine just a bunch of rock artists is really a lame excuse. Rolling Stone covers everything, hell Taylor Swift was on the cover once, she's Country and Pop. You don't find a lot of educated rap critics around either. But they do cover pop.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
I didn't call them a bunch of rock artists. Do not put words in my mouth. I said this survey was done by 273 rock musicians. It wasn't only Rolling Stone who did it. Did I say they only talk about rock? Did I say they only like rock? Did I say anything even like that? No. I am not sure why you don't think there are many educated rap critics out, you might be categorizing. You'd be surprised what some rappers rap about.
dannyz780 2 years ago
That's what it seemed like you were implying(quite heavily emphasizing in fact). Also the reason I think that is because there aren't a whole lot of well known rap, critique publications. You usually have to rely on Rolling Stone magazine or something from VH1 because they are the only people who take all music into account and not just one genre.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
I see. What I was saying, again, was that if you asked not rock and roll musicians, let's say hip hop, I am sure you would get different results.
dannyz780 2 years ago
They'd probably say somebody like, Run D.M.C. or Public Enemy. Pop singers of today would probably put MJ pretty high, but I don't really consider a lot of them great musical minds so I wouldn't give their opinion a whole lot of credit.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
So the Rolling Stones and VH1 are the only ones you would give credit? Interesting. Could it be because that genre of music does not appeal to you? You'd be surprised, not everyone raps about drugs, sex, and alcohol.
dannyz780 2 years ago
No, I know that hip hop has become a respectable form of music, its just what hip hop has become(rap) that I don't especially like. You put on some Tupac or the groups I listed below and I'll jam to them too. I have nothing against it, it just seems like no one today considers the majority of it a great art form anymore. I won't have anybody compare rap to some of the great stuff back in the 60's and 70's though.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
I am not comparing them. In fact, I already said I am not comparing the beatles to Michael Jackson. It is like comparing 50 cent to the Temptations. Two complete different genres can't be compared. But I will say this.
Every time the Beatles sold a record, Michael Jackson technically sold a record. As you probably know he owned the Beatles catalog.
dannyz780 2 years ago
Not every record since the 60's. I don't know when he bought their songs but I know they have a significant lead regardless.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 2
oh, and the next time you point out someone's intelligence, you might want to make you your comments are in order first! *just a thought*
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
You have the writing proficiency of a ten year old, we don't need to do anything to prove how intelligent you are. I haven't seen you type a complete sentence yet.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
i have the writing of a ten year old? its typos stupid!!!! LOOK IT UP, before you start posting shit!!!!!!!!! then again yo are only 17 so what do you know? you dont know nothing about music if you think that comparing the beatles wiht MJ is a right match!!! if you think my grammar is bad then you problely cant read!!! .....also if your trying to change the subject to my comments, then that means you cant come up with anything to back up your agrument... im talking about MJ VS THE BEATLES!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
Well I'd be okay if it were one or two but if somebody were grading your comments you would get a failing grade. I agree that there are things that make them difficult to compare to, but its not because MJ is so superior, its just because they were in different genres and time periods. I've replied to just about every comment you've directed towards me and I think most people on here agree that I'm beating you. I'm just responding to your personal insults directed at others on this forum.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
beating me? THIS IS NOT A GAME!!! you havent said one good thing about the beatles! all you are trying to do is rate my comments and keeping score which is stupid!! get a life!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
you are only downing MJ because you are a beatles fan. but hey its only your opinion! HA!!! like i care what you think!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
I like MJ too, but its a VS. video so we're supposed to share and support our opinions on who we think is better. I prefer the Beatles, and I just have better support than most of the people on here. At least I have some facts to back myself up.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
OK? i just gave you the facts and what did you give me? ''oh music and dancing two different things''...thats just showing your ignorants!! i mean MJ didnt just make history in music but in dancing too, and i cant think of any artist out there that doesnt copy his style, can you?
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
I'm not saying that they aren't relevant to each other, but whether or not a person can dance, is not relevant to the arguement. We're talking about musical ability, that has nothing to do with dancing. That helps him to be a better live performer, but being a good dancer, doesn't help you to write and play songs. There are plenty of musical artists that don't mimic his style. The best examples of people who do are those gay boy bands and disney bands.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
I don't really like your example, since I would put 50 cent down at the bottom of most lists of greatest musical artists of all time.
Hoskins91 2 years ago
WOW.. thats funny:Hoskins91 -''what do dance have with overall music?? hahaha COME ON!!!!! i mean what good is music if you cant dance to it? sence MJ gave us music and a signiture dance to all his every songs! i mean what did the beatles do but sing? today's music if you dont have a dance to it its considered LAME!!!! especially POP music!!!
thekingofpopmj123 2 years ago
Music is meant to be listened to. That's the primary way to experience it. Really you can dance to anything with a beat, so if you wanted to you could dance to just about music you wanted to. Even though you'd look like an idiot. That really doesn't prove that Michael is better than the Beatles in overall musical ability. If I guy can play an instrument well, write awesome songs, and sing well, you're saying he sucks because he can't dance.
Hoskins91 2 years ago 2
you are so silly, there are many beautiful songs that u cant dance but are quite better than any mj's song.
if u say that good music is just music u can dance then "SHE IS OUT OF MY LIFE" is garbage? that's a beautiful song u CANT dance but listen, so opera is garbage, imagine of John Lennon is garbage too!!!
do be so silly man, COME ON! ARE U KIDING ME?
WHAT DID BEATLES DO BUT SING??
caryash 2 years ago
hey a saiy izinit bout tyme dey buryied datta wackie jackie fag boy it shure izza stairtin two stinke boy
Super69EGO 2 years ago