kinda unfair since gaga is a professional tribute act.

Guardian joins the debate.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/mus...y-rick-wakeman

Both were very good imo but you can't really compare them.

I find it rather tasteless to pity them against each other as if it's a competition. Both were a celebration of his musical career.

ATRL has spoken, again!

Lorde's, because it was actually about Bowie.

Them not being able to find any other excuse, ahhhhhhhhhh

Lorde*

A parody =/= a worthy tribute.

Lorde was better.

Gaga's felt more true to Bowie for me

? Excuse for what? I liked Lorde's more, and so did David Bowie's family.

Gaga easily.

Lorde was nice, but she lacked vocally during the chorus. Gaga's belts could've done wonders to Life on Mars. I wish she performed it

Anyway both are tributes and needs to be appreciated for what they are - DAMN TRIBUTE.

There isn't bad/good tribute, it's a tribute. Especially considering how hard they worked for it (mainly Gaga, whose performance is something 98% of the pop stars CAN'T do).

If I were to base my whole career on being a glam rock super star who was famous for re inventing himself over and over, based on true musicianship and an out of this world personality, creating and blending genres;

Would I like for my life to be summarised with a girl wearing generic black clothes standing there singing one of my songs?

or

would I like a girl who summarises what made me an Icon in 6 minutes, paying homage to my glam rock style, penchant for transformation with the help of never before used technology; making sure to incorporate all musical streams I have touched in my life with my friend who helped me create one of my arguably greatest albums?

A joke. If Gaga's tribute is 4, the others should be minus 50.

But yeah the Guardian.

Guardian and Telegraph vs. All the celebrities that posted about Gaga, TIME Magazine, Vanity Fair and so on.

There is no debate, really.

Lorde, talent always wins!

Oh my, I dont know where to start.

Bowie was so much more than a "glam rock superstar". Glam rock era was certainly very important and influential, but short lived when he scrapped it not even after four years and moved forward, killing all his glam personas one after another.

And do you know what he went on to do next? Record Station to Station, for which he invented a new signature look of his - a slim "generic" (for real?) black suit with waistcoat over a white shirt. Sounds familiar? That suit was like a base for Bowie on which he created the Thin White Duke. And while he never went back to his glam rock fashion, he actually brought this black suit back during Heathen tour. Lorde most probably chose the suit knowing that she is performing with Bowies friends who played on the Heathen album and tour with him dressed like that.

As you have mentioned, Bowie was a musician and artist that experimented with, covered and influenced more genres than you and me probably can name. He was not just an icon, he became a legend because he never stopped to evolve and change. Do you really think that a six minute medley based around his glam rock persona can sumarise his career and incorporate all his musical streams? Hardly. Medleys can maybe work for artists like MJ or Queen who had their formula, but not for a such diverse musician who never stopped to experiment. Not even a whole concert can do that. To even try to summarize his vast work is a losing game.

So isnt it better to try and sing one of his greatest songs the best you can, with all your heart and soul, than just to jump from one chorus to another, while not letting even one of his songs to fully shine?

Lorde can't sing, it was kinda awful so I'll go with the queen of pop

Educate him.