Thread: R and B is back
View Single Post
Old 03-13-2013, 09:32 AM   #41
NotYetGreat
Great college starter
 
NotYetGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,546
NotYetGreat has a terrific reputationNotYetGreat has a terrific reputationNotYetGreat has a terrific reputationNotYetGreat has a terrific reputationNotYetGreat has a terrific reputationNotYetGreat has a terrific reputation
Default Re: R and B is back

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burgz V2
Miguel sucks. Dude's first single bombed terribly and he changed his entire sound and look and everything. I'm sorry but I'll save my respect for artists who keep it real from the jump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMl02nqA0hg

I mean come on, this looks like a lame imitation/fusion of Usher and B2K smdh

Since when was reinvention of one's style a demerit to one's talent or career? Usher seemed to change it up every damn album he came out with. Stevie Wonder from the 60s DEFINITELY didn't sound like Stevie Wonder from the 80s. If anything, Miguel trying out a new sound, which also deviated from the regular R&B music that flooded/floods the airwaves is pretty damn cool. I mean, in another era full of club bangers with repetitive beats and synths, stuff like what the artists in the OP produce are more of what the genre needs. And let's face it, not all artists carry the same style they do as when they first get known, but hey, if they try it out and are able to make the sound theirs, then why not, right?
NotYetGreat is offline   Reply With Quote