No shit!? Far out, I learn something new every day. Thanks!

Must have read different sources then, from what i've read Jackson did a lot of work with Jones on Thriller [for example]. But even if, fact is, Jacksons albums sound great, Queen's do not. Don't get me wrong, Queen has great songs, but their production is really not up to the standards of their material.

No contest, Freddie all the way. Even Freddie Imitators, no matter how good are bad they may be, [url=http://freddie mercury vs frank sinatra]bitch-slap other artists :D[/url]

I'd go with Freddie Mercury

Freddie all the way.

Indeed. I'm not even sure why this is up for debate. Michael Jackson was the King of Pop for a reason. Sure, Queen had some outstanding music, but they're not really in the same league as Michael Jackson, between his work with the Jackson 5 and his solo work.

It's just that Queen was never really that big outside the UK as far as I can tell. MJ OTOH, is still huge, here in China he's probably one of the 3 most popular recording artists, and the only one that's likely to still be popular 10 years from now.

I'd have to say Freddie Mercury. I like a lot of Jacko's music; his stuff was head and shoulders above other pop at the time and remains pretty timeless. But Queen really was on another level entirely.

I jump on tinyE's ship, too. They are both great but I seem to like Freddie more that Michael. I seem to like more of Queen's songs rather than Michael's. Not that that is important. The charisma is stronger with Freddie so to speak.
Can't really compare them.

I had a MJ phase when I was a kid, but today I'd probably go with Freddie.

Eh what? Queen wasn't really that big in the US, that's it. They were big all over the world. With Michael Jackson, he was more a legend than anything else with only a few songs really being well known.

Queen also mastered many different genres, had very clever songs, wrote ALL their own music, performed all their own music, did amazing LIVE shows which weren't doing with ropes & pulleys, etc. etc. etc.

As much as I respected MJ, he was more about the life style, the man, than about the music. He was popular because he was a wierdo and I can't help but wonder whether he'd be remembered so well if he didn't have such an odd life style.

Also if you want to see who is the best singer, listen to some demos of them both and realise Freddie's voice is far superior in general.

So yeah, Freddie Mercury all the way!

I could say something smartass regarding the Freddie detractors but most of the posters in this forum, regardless of who they picked, have hit the nail on the head: It's a silly comparison. I am a rock fan and not a pop fan so even if you asked who was better MJ or Perry Ferrel I am going to say Ferrel hands down and without question. I would imagine the opposite would happen if you asked a pop fan who was better, Lennon or Timberlake.

Oh snap, I started listening to some Queen and now I'm in a semi-hurry to catch my train. :p

Freddie was by far the better vocalist, songwriter and of course musician, MJ however was possibly a more important figure regarding his early career as both a part of the jackson five and solo work which opened a door to soul and funk for millions around the world - there was something acceptible about it in a tie otherwise still tainted with bigotry and outright racism - ironic considering his chaging appearence over the years.

Edit: so I remain undecided as I like both for their differing styles.

My vote definately goes to Richard Wagner.

Freddie, afraid I don't even like MJ's music