Unpopular Opinion: Christina deserved the Best New Artist award over Britney at the 2000 Grammy Awards.

[mythology]

4 hours ago, Newrie said:

I am not even talking about BRITNEY’s range because it is irrelevant, the topic of the post was who deserved a Grammy the most, not who’s voice has the biggest range. I have said over and over that what matters is how the artist move the receptor, the listener, the receiver, the viewer. And that your ONLY argument is that “Christina has a bigger range”. Which is totally irrelevant to music and art, Bob Dylan has been a part of so many people’s and other musicians’s lives, he is an iconic poet and artist and how big is his range?! A random guy who got accepted to the local church choir because of his range is NOT even near Bob Dylan, let alone a better artist than him. 
You guys are so repetitive, you just confirmed what I have had to write over and over; none of you speak of how you feel when listen to ms. Cultural Appropriation screaming with her downright ugly Kermit voice. It is just “her range, her range, her range”. Yeah, she has range, an ugly tone, a charisma that is dead inside and doesn’t touch your heart or sweeps you away to a different world, oh no, you are there and the only thing you can think about while listening to the tortured hedgehog is “she has a bigger range than Britney”. 

If you think Britney can sing better than Floptina you're delusional.  Britney herself admitted that her voice is nothing special and is just ok, and that she wishes she had a voice like Christina.  Take several seats

[Newrie]

46 minutes ago, mythology said:

If you think Britney can sing better than Floptina you're delusional.  Britney herself admitted that her voice is nothing special and is just ok, and that she wishes she had a voice like Christina.  Take several seats

Christina has an ugly voice and she screams. Britney might have said that because she was self-aware and got criticised for her voice and lipsyncing. She is always nice. Christina’s voice is nothing special, her fame is purely white privilege. Britney’s voice IS special, she would NOT have become such an icon without that super distinctive voice!

Talk about being delusional if you don’t understand even that. Her voice is everything, no one else sounds like that. Bob Dylan is not Luciano Pavarotti and if he had been that, he would never had become such an icon. It is because his unique voice and expression (as well as his lyrics).

 

btw, you are yet another one who is proving my point, again talking about Christina’s technical singing (although she technically gets dissed by voice coaches and professional singers). 
 

Take the entire row and sit down. 

[rosenotes]

foolishness and ****ery

[StephenDallas]

Britney is an icon. Christina Aquliagwa is successful pop star 

[Poutsos]

I don't want to make it a conversation of who deserved it. They both do. Christina yes, showed a string vocal ability upon her arrival, even though, her voice is NOT my thing (too loud, shouting, and vocal acrobatics from start to end). BUT I still believe Britney 1000% should have got that Grammy, because of her impact which was from the start, she was the pop girl arrival. Her performance ability which is much better than Christina's, and also people wanted and gravitate to Britney more. She has more star quality. By the way, say "Baby One More Time" is just a catchy pop song. So what is "Genie In A Bottle?" The second coming of Jesus?  

Peace! 

[mythology]

2 hours ago, Newrie said:

Christina has an ugly voice and she screams. Britney might have said that because she was self-aware and got criticised for her voice and lipsyncing. She is always nice. Christina’s voice is nothing special, her fame is purely white privilege. Britney’s voice IS special, she would NOT have become such an icon without that super distinctive voice!

Talk about being delusional if you don’t understand even that. Her voice is everything, no one else sounds like that. Bob Dylan is not Luciano Pavarotti and if he had been that, he would never had become such an icon. It is because his unique voice and expression (as well as his lyrics).

 

btw, you are yet another one who is proving my point, again talking about Christina’s technical singing (although she technically gets dissed by voice coaches and professional singers). 
 

Take the entire row and sit down. 

Are you trolling, or are you seriously arguing that Britney can sing better than Christina?  Holy **** ****, Lmfaoooo!!!!!

You get the award for Britard of the Generation.  Congrats!!!

[Newrie]

6 minutes ago, mythology said:

Are you trolling, or are you seriously arguing that Britney can sing better than Christina?  Holy **** ****, Lmfaoooo!!!!!

You get the award for Britard of the Generation.  Congrats!!!

No, you just lack reading comprehension. The entire time I have said that it doesn’t matter who “sings better”, because that is irrelevant. Like I said, Bob Dylan is an icon, also because of his voice that range between like 2 notes. 
I said Christina has an ugly voice and that she is screaming, not performing art. Britney’s voice is unique.
You don’t know what that word means I take it. I can’t be asked to repeat again, for the 11th time what I already have written over and over. If you can’t read, then, so be it. 

[mythology]

16 minutes ago, Newrie said:

No, you just lack reading comprehension. The entire time I have said that it doesn’t matter who “sings better”, because that is irrelevant. Like I said, Bob Dylan is an icon, also because of his voice that range between like 2 notes. 
I said Britney’s voice is unique. You don’t know what that word means I take it. I can’t be asked to repeat again, for the 11th time what I already have written over and over. If you can’t read, then, so be it. 

Unique isn't necessarily good;  Her voice has been criticized by  for being too nasal, childish, and weak.  She sounds like a chipmunk high off helium most of the time

It's not an impressive voice and simply can't compete with Floptina's, and you will deal

[Hooked-On-Knee]

11 hours ago, mythology said:

Christina had a better quality album overall, and much stronger vocals than our fave's.  Floptina is the better singer and her album proved that easily.  We just have to deal

Talent is objective but E-Mail My heart (best song in history) was better than anything on that album.

[mythology]

2 minutes ago, Hooked-On-Knee said:

Talent is objective but E-Mail My heart (best song in history) was better than anything on that album.

That song is incredibly lame and cheesy.  All this proves is that you have awful taste

[JP9101]

[PickleSpears]

Meh I get torn on this. On one hand, Christina has the better voice. But is the Best New Artist award really just about vocals? Bc on the other, Britney was way more successful. BOMT is better than Genie imo. Plus Britney had Sometimes and Crazy out. Britney's videos were better. Her sales were better. Her performances were better. Britney already had iconic moments/costumes. So... Christina really only had her vocals and I'm sure that's really big to the Grammy's but I was honestly surprised when Christina won.

[Hooked-On-Knee]

2 hours ago, mythology said:

That song is incredibly lame and cheesy.  All this proves is that you have awful taste

I'm not the one stanning Christina Aguilera.

Not even @Blackout2006 having better musical taste.

 

[Hooked-On-Knee]

2 hours ago, mythology said:

It's not an impressive voice and simply can't compete with Floptina's, and you will deal

I don't know why I agree with you so much (I'm trolling in my other comments aside from the E-Mail My Heart supremacy. ), like i love how you call out all this bias and double standards Britney fans give Britney but then act all petty towards artists who have achieved more or have more skill in another area.

[davidspears]

Christina had a much more successful string of singles than Britney did in America.

I believe she had 3 out of 4 go to number one.

[mannequin19]

15 hours ago, Newrie said:

You must be tone-deaf. 1.17 is too funny. The soldiers looks like they are being tortured Another screaming compilation

Her “music” was actually used for torturing.! Christina Aguilera’s music was used for torturing prisoners at Guantanamo.

Having a powerful voice does not make anyone a better singer. Like Dolly Parton is also a musical genius, just as much as Courtney Love is. She is actually more of a genius since she have written so many amazing songs. If you just scream and strain your voice, does not actually transfer any emotions that moves people and brings them to another sphere/world, it isn’t actually music. Everyone who “defends” Christina as a musician in this thread are trying to justify it as something objective but none of you are saying that she has moved you in any way, and that is the only reason singers get a God-like status. 

christina can have terrible technique & still be a good singer lmfao. vocal technique does not matter nearly as much in pop music as it does in opera, musical theatre, etc. tons of singers with horrible technique are capable of sounding good. she often sounds like she is in pain & might pop several veins but then there are times when she tones it down & sounds absolutely beautiful. she is called the voice of her generation for a reason. YOU may not like her voice which is totally your prerogative but she wasn't known as the better vocalist for no reason. 

[Sia]

On 2/23/2021 at 7:09 AM, G-unit said:

 Britney still loves and supports BOMT to this day.  I think Britney deserved it more.

Have we forgotten the awkward response she gave when James Corden asked her what "Oops!" was about? She clearly does not care for any of those songs haha!

[Hooked-On-Knee]

56 minutes ago, Sia said:

Have we forgotten the awkward response she gave when James Corden asked her what "Oops!" was about? She clearly does not care for any of those songs haha!

There have been rumours about her hating Oops!... since it was made, is anyone surprised?

We're not talking about Oops!... though, ...Baby One More Time seems more like an album Britney would like now because it's her most soft R&B/Soul influenced one and because we been knew she loves cheesy stuff. Would she like it back in 2004? Obviously not but I can see her having a soft spot for it now. '

In The Zone is probably the only album she's eternally liked, maybe Glory but it's too new to decide, I think at some points in time she may have felt alienated from all of her albums in phases.

[Hooked-On-Knee]

2 hours ago, mannequin19 said:

christina can have terrible technique & still be a good singer lmfao. vocal technique does not matter nearly as much in pop music as it does in opera, musical theatre, etc. tons of singers with horrible technique are capable of sounding good. she often sounds like she is in pain & might pop several veins but then there are times when she tones it down & sounds absolutely beautiful. she is called the voice of her generation for a reason. YOU may not like her voice which is totally your prerogative but she wasn't known as the better vocalist for no reason. 

This is really random but I don't disagree with you, I just don't get your point.

Christina and Britney def have their own technique issues (and even share some like the raising on the larynx), but I do think both sing beautiful like you mentioned when they tone it down from their signature sounds (Xtina's loud voice full of riffs and belts, Britney's throaty yet high-pitched voice). They both have a really sweet and emotive falsetto and chest voice when they put in the effort, despite both differing in technical ability.

I do think that regardless of whether or not Christina had such a gorgeous tone when she tones it down, she would have still been known as the Voice of a Generation, because even if she has technique issues, her signature voice is really what's cemented as what people think VOCALIST, Britney's case is the reverse, I doubt people would have ever taken her seriously as a vocalist had she done pop music regardless of what tone she sang in. Even during the ...Baby One More Time era where she sung live and delivered performances like the Open Arms ones on the ...Baby One More Time tour, nobody thought she was a decent vocalist. The way she was consistently marketed throughout the first few years of her career cemented her more as an idea of this extravagant dancer whose celebrity embodied what people dreamt a POP STAR was, not a singer.

[Lex993]

Actually she didn’t considering she released Reflection during the 1999 Grammy eligibility period. Don’t understand how you can release your debut single before the 9/30/98 cutoff and qualify for the 10/1/98-9/30/99 Grammy period but whatever.