Will anyone ever eclipse Michael Jackson?

[Road Hog]

Music (and music radio) are so fragmented these days that there may never be another artist that crosses over as big as Elvis, the Beatles, MJ or even Drake. It's more likely it'll be a female artist along the lines of Taylor Swift who is very popular among males.

Smartest thing I ever posted here.

[golden eagle]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

[thspfc]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

[Rothman]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

Bruno has a broader appeal and his songs have slipped deeper into popular culture.

Drake's just going to slip into oblivion.

[thspfc]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

Bruno has a broader appeal and his songs have slipped deeper into popular culture.

Drake's just going to slip into oblivion.

That's politician speak. Words that sound nice together. No evidence or even possible methodology of proof.

[Rothman]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

Bruno has a broader appeal and his songs have slipped deeper into popular culture.

Drake's just going to slip into oblivion.

That's politician speak. Words that sound nice together. No evidence or even possible methodology of proof.

Pfft.  So's everything about this thread and the general subjectivity of musical taste.

[thspfc]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

Bruno has a broader appeal and his songs have slipped deeper into popular culture.

Drake's just going to slip into oblivion.

That's politician speak. Words that sound nice together. No evidence or even possible methodology of proof.

Pfft.  So's everything about this thread and the general subjectivity of musical taste.

Music taste is subjective; how popular an artist is is not.

[Rothman]

Drake doesn't even hold a candle to Bruno Mars, much less Michael Jackson or Prince. I do like some of Drake's music, but nothing he has will be considered classics except on throwback R&B stations 20 years from now.

Drake is objectively a bigger artist than Bruno Mars ever has been.

"Classic" is highly subjective. What are Bruno's "classics"?

Uptown Funk...

Drake's got mumble crap.

Bruno also has That's What I Like and his current work with Anderson .Paak as the duo Silk Sonic. At least, on a throwback R&B station in 20 years.

Uptown Funk is the only one that beats Drake's biggest hits, and Drake has more big hits overall.

Bruno has a broader appeal and his songs have slipped deeper into popular culture.

Drake's just going to slip into oblivion.

That's politician speak. Words that sound nice together. No evidence or even possible methodology of proof.

Pfft.  So's everything about this thread and the general subjectivity of musical taste.

Music taste is subjective; how popular an artist is is not.

Not in the sense we're talking about.

[1995hoo]

People still buy albums?

It's actually become in fashion again. I don't understand why, but it has.

It's because people are tired of online services jerking them around and deleting music they already paid for. With a physical album, the only way the person who sold it to you can get it back is by breaking into your house.

Sure, but there are still CDs and .mp3s. The hipsters seem to specifically be into vinyl though.

An "album" does not solely mean an LP record. A CD, or a download of a full set of songs (e.g., if you download the Beatles' Rubber Soul or whatever) is still an "album." The term originated in the era of 78-rpm records, when a "record" normally had one song per side (hence the Grammy Award category for "Record of the Year" referring to what is often called a "single" or to one track of an album) and an artist wishing to release a larger collection of songs released a set of records together in an "album." That term stuck when the invention of the LP made it possible to put more tracks on a single disc.

The one that always puzzles me is when younger people use the word "digital" to refer solely to downloads, as if a CD were somehow not "digital" despite it being right there in the full name and logo ("Compact Disc Digital Audio").

[Road Hog]

People still buy albums?

It's actually become in fashion again. I don't understand why, but it has.

It's because people are tired of online services jerking them around and deleting music they already paid for. With a physical album, the only way the person who sold it to you can get it back is by breaking into your house.

Sure, but there are still CDs and .mp3s. The hipsters seem to specifically be into vinyl though.

An "album" does not solely mean an LP record. A CD, or a download of a full set of songs (e.g., if you download the Beatles' Rubber Soul or whatever) is still an "album." The term originated in the era of 78-rpm records, when a "record" normally had one song per side (hence the Grammy Award category for "Record of the Year" referring to what is often called a "single" or to one track of an album) and an artist wishing to release a larger collection of songs released a set of records together in an "album." That term stuck when the invention of the LP made it possible to put more tracks on a single disc.

The one that always puzzles me is when younger people use the word "digital" to refer solely to downloads, as if a CD were somehow not "digital" despite it being right there in the full name and logo ("Compact Disc Digital Audio").

I'm guessing they mean an MP3 or similar file format that is portable. The option is disappearing fast, but it used to be you could either "rip" CDs to obtain the file or "burn" the file onto an audio CD. Those capable computers will soon be like gold, I predict.

[7/8]

The one that always puzzles me is when younger people use the word "digital" to refer solely to downloads, as if a CD were somehow not "digital" despite it being right there in the full name and logo ("Compact Disc Digital Audio").

Digital vs. physical. You're right that a CD technically falls under both categories, but younger people think of digital as meaning "on a computer", in which case a CD is only digital once you burn the files off of it.

I'm guessing they mean an MP3 or similar file format that is portable. The option is disappearing fast, but it used to be you could either "rip" CDs to obtain the file or "burn" the file onto an audio CD. Those capable computers will soon be like gold, I predict.

I doubt it. You can buy an external CD/DVD burner for $30CAD that plugs in to your computer via USB.

[vdeane]

People still buy albums?

It's actually become in fashion again. I don't understand why, but it has.

It's because people are tired of online services jerking them around and deleting music they already paid for. With a physical album, the only way the person who sold it to you can get it back is by breaking into your house.

Sure, but there are still CDs and .mp3s. The hipsters seem to specifically be into vinyl though.

An "album" does not solely mean an LP record. A CD, or a download of a full set of songs (e.g., if you download the Beatles' Rubber Soul or whatever) is still an "album." The term originated in the era of 78-rpm records, when a "record" normally had one song per side (hence the Grammy Award category for "Record of the Year" referring to what is often called a "single" or to one track of an album) and an artist wishing to release a larger collection of songs released a set of records together in an "album." That term stuck when the invention of the LP made it possible to put more tracks on a single disc.

The one that always puzzles me is when younger people use the word "digital" to refer solely to downloads, as if a CD were somehow not "digital" despite it being right there in the full name and logo ("Compact Disc Digital Audio").

I'm guessing they mean an MP3 or similar file format that is portable. The option is disappearing fast, but it used to be you could either "rip" CDs to obtain the file or "burn" the file onto an audio CD. Those capable computers will soon be like gold, I predict.

It's possible to buy and download MP3s directly, at least from Amazon, although it seems like they keep making it less and less convenient to do so (I so miss the days when I could just add items to the MP3 cart, pay all at once, and then download a ZIP file with everything already organized in folders by artist/album).  Between my desktop, my laptop, my phone, and my external hard drive with backups of my desktop and laptop, the copyright owners would have to hack into a lot of stuff to prevent me from playing something whenever I want (note that I don't use the Amazon Music app or anything like that; I just play the MP3s in VLC).