You can try to cover a piece of **** in gold trophies but the maggots eating away at the feces will still stink just like that microsoft 98 screensaver mess of a music video.
You really can't be serious. What mini-me, their music is not even alike. Stop trying to make what you think and the delusion about your faves (and that is for janet too) pass off as facts. They are NOT.
Prince is the most acclaimed of the two, with the better music according to critics since you mentioned them in your post.
Prince is the most acclaimed of the two? How when Stevie has THREE AOTY Grammys to Prince's NONE (on top of having more than TWICE as many Grammys), SIX titles inducted into their hall of fame to Prince's THREE, and three albums in RS's top 100 GOAT albums list to Prince's two? And that's not even a fraction of Stevie's acclaim. Keep letting that site that hasn't been updated in over a year fool you.
You are making me like Stevie Wonder even less lol.
And everyone knows Prince got screwed back then because they werent ready to award a controversial artist in 1984. He was the forrunner to win, with Bruce in second place, but lost to Lionel ****ing Richie.
Your talking about an award that was won by Christopher Cross and Toto here.
He is a talented musician as far as composition and instrumental abilities. But in terms of vocals and dance, he was not the best. I personally hate his voice.
Prince is the most acclaimed of the two? How when Stevie has THREE AOTY Grammys to Prince's NONE (on top of having more than TWICE as many Grammys), SIX titles inducted into their hall of fame to Prince's THREE, and three albums in RS's top 100 GOAT albums list to Prince's two? And that's not even a fraction of Stevie's acclaim. Keep letting that site that hasn't been updated in over a year fool you.
Grammy awards and such aren't really indicative of critical acclaim.
@ Rolling Stone not being the most noted music publication in the US. PLEASE.
And title inductions, Grammys, critics' lists (hence CRITICal acclaim), and other miscellaneous awards are all examples of acclaim.
The grammy's are like one critic though. And honestly they're not all that respected. I didn't say RS wasn't the most noted but they're not "all that counts."
The grammy's are like one critic though. And honestly they're not all that respected. I didn't say RS wasn't the most noted but they're not "all that counts."
No sweetie, the Grammys aren't all that respected BY YOU. Tell that to the artists who strive for Grammys and don't get the recognition from them they spend months hoping for.
And RS is all that matters. Who else can challenge what's at the top, MTV? NPR? Pitchfork? Please.
No sweetie, the Grammys aren't all that respected BY YOU. Tell that to the artists who strive for Grammys and don't get the recognition from them they spend months hoping for.
And RS is all that matters. Who else can challenge what's at the top, MTV? NPR? Pitchfork? Please.
Obviously some artists care about Grammy's, but they're not some holy grail of critical acclaim.
And RS isn't all that matters. Pitchfork is EXTREMELY influential.
Obviously artists want to be recognized, but saying "Stevie has more Grammy's than Prince, therefor he is more critically acclaimed" is a massive
RS has less pull now, I'd bet. Pitchfork has basically created many of the most important acts of the decade.
"Stevie has more Grammy's than Prince, therefor he is more critically acclaimed"
I never said that.
RS is still the most recognized critic in music whether if you want to admit it or not. No music publication has over 50 years of service to the industry, tmk.
What mini-me, their music is not even alike. Stop trying to make what you think and the delusion about your faves (and that is for janet too) pass off as facts. They are NOT. 
@ Rolling Stone not being the most noted music publication in the US. PLEASE. 