Michael Jackson verses Beatles:Come together better version

[logansoldcigar]

Although Revolver came out a couple of months after Pet Sounds, Both McCartney and George Martin have gone on record as saying that Sgt Pepper was effectively the beatles response to Pet Sounds.(Pepper was released in May 67, just over a year after Pet Sounds). IMO, they would have been too far down the road with revolver for it to be an answer to Pet Sounds)

incidentally, for a record that's stunning, try "In My Life" by George Martin: A selection of beatles songs covered by various artists, including Jim Carrey, Robin Williams, Bobby McFerrin and Goldie hawn amongst others. Im, not usually a fan of covers, but some of these are excellent.

Goldie Hawn does a lounge lizard version of Hard Days Night that just oozes sex.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The Beatles are real.
MJ is a flashy, substanceless show.
Beatles.
Beatles.
Beatles.
Beatles.

Beatles.
Beatles.
Beatles.
Beatles are the best.

 

[jaguarr]

I personally feel that covers should only be done if your going to reinvent the song. Otherwise your just copying.

Like MJ's cover, G &R's knocking on heaven's door, Twisted's cover of Iron Man, and Alien Ant Farm's cover of Smooth Criminal.

I'm sorry, but none of those are examples of reworkings of songs that are in any way better than the originals.

jag

 

[Spider-Bite]

I'm sorry, but none of those are examples of reworkings of songs that are in any way better than the originals.

jag

while I dont' think twisted's cover of Iron Man, or Alien Ant Farm's cover of smooth criminal are better than the original, I do think that they reinvented the song. And I personally can't stand Bob Dylan's voice. It's terrible.

 

[jaguarr]

while I dont' think twisted's cover of Iron Man, or Alien Ant Farm's cover of smooth criminal are better than the original, I do think that they reinvented the song. And I personally can't stand Bob Dylan's voice. It's terrible.

Axl Rose doesn't exactly have a great voice, either.

jag

 

[Spider-Bite]

so can i, except i prefer to play Bass.

Im rubbish on all of them, but i can play them.

Doesnt make me talented.

I didn't say that was the reason he was talented. And he isn't rubbish on them. I said he was talented because he's written many great songs, he's the best dancer of all time, one of the best vocalists with a whopping range of 4 octaves, with the ability to perform excruiatingly difficult note combinations. And he's a great choreographer. And unlike most musicians he can actually sing amazing without the help of computers.

And half of what you think are instruments are actually his voice. check it.
[YT]frg6bTojb_4[/YT]

 

[Spider-Bite]

Axl Rose doesn't exactly have a great voice, either.

jag

I think he has an awesome voice. Yeah it sounds like he's dying, but it sounds great too. And the stuff he has done is difficult. Sometimes you gotta put personal taste aside and just look at how difficult it is what the person is doing. How much skill and practice does it take, or how much power do they have in their voice.

look at the last part of the song.

[YT]pEzuC5UoM8g[/YT]

 

[jaguarr]

I think he has an awesome voice. Yeah it sounds like he's dying, but it sounds great too. And the stuff he has done is difficult. Sometimes you gotta put personal taste aside and just look at how difficult it is what the person is doing. How much skill and practice does it take, or how much power do they have in their voice.

As a vocalist myself, I can honestly say that Axl has one of the weakest voices in rock history. He can do some hellacious screams but everything else he does with his voice is neither skilled nor talented and he does everything you are not supposed to do with your voice from a technical perspective. He'll be lucky if he can sing another 10 years if that, and he already can't hit the notes that he used to back when GNR started up because he's thrashed his voice with his poor vocal technique. The stuff he sings is not difficult to sing, man. Sorry.

jag

 

[Spider-Bite]

As a vocalist myself, I can honestly say that Axl has one of the weakest voices in rock history. He can do some hellacious screams but everything else he does with his voice is neither skilled nor talented and he does everything you are not supposed to do with your voice from a technical perspective. He'll be lucky if he can sing another 10 years if that, and he already can't hit the notes that he used to back when GNR started up because he's thrashed his voice with his poor vocal technique. The stuff he sings is not difficult to sing, man. Sorry.

jag

hmmmm. Well I have to say that yes the way he sings is hard on the vocal chords, and I don't doubt he can't sing the way he used to, and wont be able to later down the road. Neither can Brian Johnson from AC/DC, whom has a voice I love, but I don't think he's that talented.

I can't help but think that if that stuff was easy to do that he would have been successfully immitated, since during the late 80's record labels were looking hard for bands to model after them.

 

[jaguarr]

hmmmm. Well I have to say that yes the way he sings is hard on the vocal chords, and I don't doubt he can't sing the way he used to, and wont be able to later down the road. Neither can Brian Johnson from AC/DC, whom has a voice I love, but I don't think he's that talented.

I can't help but think that if that stuff was easy to do that he would have been successfully immitated, since during the late 80's record labels were looking hard for bands to model after them.

GNR is a great example of a band that was far better than the sum of it's parts. They're all adequate or mediocre musicians (yes, including Slash). Their original drummer was the only one of the group who was a truly accomplished musician and they kicked him out due to his massive heroin habit. The rest of them are average musicians, though. Notice I didn't say they were BAD musicians. They just aren't accomplished. They had an ear for great guitar riffs and hooks and channeled their rage into something that sounded fresh. They were also one of the first hard rock bands to foresake the big hair/glam look and start looking hard and rough around the edges instead. They also had a reputation for being "dangerous'; drinking, drugging, getting into fights. Nothing really new under the sun as far as rock bands go, but they sold it as if it were. It was that image and raw attitude and chemistry of the band that made them what they were, and that's something you can't just replicate on a whim like the record execs were trying to do.

At any rate, I've heard a 100 bar bands do GNR songs and sound exactly like GNR used to when they played them, right down to Axl's nasally whine. Yes, GNR rocked, but that was when they were the original incarnation and a result of the chemistry that came with all of them playing together. As individuals, none of them are very spectacular, IMHO as a musician.

jag

 

[Motown Marvel]

And I personally can't stand Bob Dylan's voice. It's terrible.

you were pressing your luck with the beatles, dont you dare blaspheme bob dylan!

 

[Dwarf lord]

And I personally can't stand Bob Dylan's voice. It's terrible.

Bob Dylan also has more soul in just his voice than Michael Jackson has in his whole body through out his whole career. And he can also write circles around Jackson. You think Knocking on Heaven's Door is a good song, that's no where near his best.

 

[Tangled Web]

You Really Got Me predates it by a year. And Think For Yourself only fuzzed out the bass.

Damn you got me. You really got me. heh.





Is he bashing Zimmerman now? I'll admit that he's up there with Lennon and McCartney when it comes to writing.

 

[Kmack]

Jackson did a good cover worthy of praise but Lennon > MJ anyday.

 

[logansoldcigar]

GNR is a great example of a band that was far better than the sum of it's parts. They're all adequate or mediocre musicians (yes, including Slash). Their original drummer was the only one of the group who was a truly accomplished musician and they kicked him out due to his massive heroin habit. The rest of them are average musicians, though. Notice I didn't say they were BAD musicians. They just aren't accomplished. They had an ear for great guitar riffs and hooks and channeled their rage into something that sounded fresh. They were also one of the first hard rock bands to foresake the big hair/glam look and start looking hard and rough around the edges instead. They also had a reputation for being "dangerous'; drinking, drugging, getting into fights. Nothing really new under the sun as far as rock bands go, but they sold it as if it were. It was that image and raw attitude and chemistry of the band that made them what they were, and that's something you can't just replicate on a whim like the record execs were trying to do.

At any rate, I've heard a 100 bar bands do GNR songs and sound exactly like GNR used to when they played them, right down to Axl's nasally whine. Yes, GNR rocked, but that was when they were the original incarnation and a result of the chemistry that came with all of them playing together. As individuals, none of them are very spectacular, IMHO as a musician.

jag

i second this theory, and I offer solid evidence to support it:

Velvet Revolver. for all intents n purposes, GnR with a different singer. and they are rubbish.

i would add this about Mr Axl. whatever the guys flaws as a vocalist and person, he does have charisma by the bucketload, and that goes an awful long way

 

[jaguarr]

i second this theory, and I offer solid evidence to support it:

Velvet Revolver. for all intents n purposes, GnR with a different singer. and they are rubbish.

i would add this about Mr Axl. whatever the guys flaws as a vocalist and person, he does have charisma by the bucketload, and that goes an awful long way

And Scott Weiland is ten times the vocalist Axl is, to further cement the argument.

jag

 

[The Chairman]

Bob Dylan also has more soul in just his voice than Michael Jackson has in his whole body through out his whole career. And he can also write circles around Jackson. You think Knocking on Heaven's Door is a good song, that's no where near his best.

You nailed. Dylan is not Sinatra, but he's the perfect interpreter for his songs. As I said previously, when it comes to capturing the right attitude and emotions his songs are meant to project, no one comes close to what he does. He owns his songs, and makes them distinct. Other than Hendrix's version of "All Along The Watchtower" (which Dylan himself is the only cover that he thinks is better than his original), no one has come close to surpassing Dylan's originals.

 

[The Chairman]

Also, on the subject of "You Really Got Me", The Kinks are severely underrated. Davies is right up there with Lennon and Dylan. He may not have touched any real deep emotions or on social issues, his songs have a great wit to them, and overall, the man's a ****ing genius.

 

[jaguarr]

Also, on the subject of "You Really Got Me", The Kinks are severely underrated. Davies is right up there with Lennon and Dylan. He may not have touched any real deep emotions or on social issues, his songs have a great wit to them, and overall, the man's a ****ing genius.

I would agree and the influence on modern rock The Kinks had is sorely underestimated.

jag

 

[logansoldcigar]

And Scott Weiland is ten times the vocalist Axl is, to further cement the argument.

jag

and one 10th the charisma. I watched them on Live 8 (andf Ive seen GnR live several times), and i were yawning. I think youve utterly hit the nail on the head with that point. as a band, GnR had something. i hesitate to use thew term, but they had the x factor. seperated, it dont work

 

[The Chairman]

I would agree and the influence on modern rock The Kinks had is sorely underestimated.

jag

Finally. Along with The Who, I'd say they were one of the first punk bands. The overall attitude and rawness of it was fairly ahead of its time.

Also Noel and Liam have nothing on The Davies brothers when it comes to sibling rivalry in rock and roll. Ray stabbed David with a ****ing fork.

 

[logansoldcigar]

and the whole discussion slowly drifts away from the kiddie fiddler to people that had a lasting impact and influence on music as a whole.(I still say that MJ's biggest influence, as with Madonna, imo, will be the use of video as part of the extended package, not just as a song promotion, and not necessarily his music, which i personally find bland and clinical.)

Me, im going to light a cigarette, and listen to smile.
nighty night

 

[logansoldcigar]

Finally. Along with The Who, I'd say they were one of the first punk bands. The overall attitude and rawness of it was fairly ahead of its time.

Also Noel and Liam have nothing on The Davies brothers when it comes to sibling rivalry in rock and roll. Ray stabbed David with a ****ing fork.

Noel and Liam are a pair of c*cks.

 

[The Chairman]

Noel and Liam are a pair of c*cks.

With no balls.

 

[Spider-Bite]

GNR is a great example of a band that was far better than the sum of it's parts. They're all adequate or mediocre musicians (yes, including Slash). Their original drummer was the only one of the group who was a truly accomplished musician and they kicked him out due to his massive heroin habit. The rest of them are average musicians, though. Notice I didn't say they were BAD musicians. They just aren't accomplished. They had an ear for great guitar riffs and hooks and channeled their rage into something that sounded fresh. They were also one of the first hard rock bands to foresake the big hair/glam look and start looking hard and rough around the edges instead. They also had a reputation for being "dangerous'; drinking, drugging, getting into fights. Nothing really new under the sun as far as rock bands go, but they sold it as if it were. It was that image and raw attitude and chemistry of the band that made them what they were, and that's something you can't just replicate on a whim like the record execs were trying to do.

At any rate, I've heard a 100 bar bands do GNR songs and sound exactly like GNR used to when they played them, right down to Axl's nasally whine. Yes, GNR rocked, but that was when they were the original incarnation and a result of the chemistry that came with all of them playing together. As individuals, none of them are very spectacular, IMHO as a musician.

jag

From what I've seen critics refer to Appetite for Destruction as one of the greatest rock albums of all time. I know they had an image. Me personally I never care about image. It's irrelevant to talent as well as the sound. I think a person would have to feel that way in order to be a Michael Jackson fan as well. MJ probably has the worst image of any musician out there right now, and it's been pretty bad since the early 90's when his face started getting creepy and Neverland tales started emerging.

but G&R made some really good songs. You said yourself the had an ear for melodies and that's important for being respected and considered talented.

I really don't know how you can call Slash mediocre though. He's an amazing guitarist. I'm sure you've heard the solo at the end of November Rain. It's amazing. You should also hear his solo he did for Michael Jackson's billie jean at the 1995 mtv video music awards.

As far as accomplishments though? Appetite for Destruction was huge. I can't emember correctly but I think it sold like 18 million copies and both Use Your Illusions 1 and 2 each sold like 14 million copies.

I dont think Axle is one of the best vocalists of all time or anything. I just think he had a uniqe voice and laid down some vocals for some songs that sounded really good. And his voice was moving in certain songs.