quote:Originally posted by AudioGuy:
Are you telling me that you never heard of Q before he produced MJ???
Sure - but I've heard of a lot of people. That has nothing to do with the question.
quote:The reason that Q was chosen to produce MJ in the first place was because of his enormous body of work.
Well - as you know - "enormous" has nothing to do with quality.
quote:No one else could have produced MJ and made him into the superstar that he is/was besides Q.
My brother - Nancy Reagan said it best: "JUST SAY NO"!!! You better lay off that pipe before it makes permanent damage.
quote:As I have stated before, MJ did not come close to having the sales that he had with Q, on his post Q albums - he was still making money from "Thriller" when "Awful", I mean, "Bad" came out.
So what? If Q was really that talented he could have replicated his talent elsewhere. He did not - not even remotely close. So what are we to believe about his talent?
BTW - your two arguments are converging here. You believe that marketing is the most important thing to an artists' commerical success. You also believe that Q's producing and arranging skills are what "made" Michael. If artist talent is so unimportant and if Q is so good - why wouldn't record companies have invested the marketing to make ANYBODY Q worked with into mega-stars? If:
Q + Marketing = Mega Star
then why didn't that equation work for ANYBODY else?
quote:You neglected to mention that he has done numerous movie soundtracks, numerous tv show themes, he has worked with Miles, Dizzy, Train, Monk...
So what? What does that have to do with this argument? And btw - "working with" someone doesn't mean jack. You know how many people can say that they "worked with someone"? And btw - Q's own websites do not list the credits that you site for him here.
quote:just about anybody who is anybody in music, across all genres...
Again - HIS website suggests otherwise.
quote:(He produced "We Are the World")
Well, with that point, I'm sold!!