base talk Female Pre-2000 Artists with the most monthly listeners on Spotify

[swissman]

I'd also argue that even singers from bands where no one singer was the lead creative/vocal force existed as artists during the time of being in a group.

So all the Spice Girls (despite only Geri and Mel C releasing a solo album in the 1990s) are artists from the 1990s because they were prominent, notable, internationally recognized artists from the time period whether they had a solo debut album or not.

 

And especially when the lead singer was the most notable member.

So Diana Ross was an artist in the 1960s.

So Debbie Harry was an artist in the 1970s.

So Annie Lennox was an artist in the 1980s.

 

To say otherwise is kind of like looking the other way. I get why Billboard may need to categorize things with such black-and-white technicality because they're all about tabulation and organization of data, and making an exception for one reasonable example means making an exception for all, but come on. This is a Twitter stat. It's more than valid to include who they've included. And on top of that, as is always stated in these examples, Beyoncé absolutely recorded songs as a solo artist (not credited as Destiny's Child) in the 1990s thus making her an artist that was pre-2000 even by exact technicality.

[Rev8]

17 minutes ago, swissman said:

Does singer doing work as a solo artist not exist until they have their own album though?

 

By that logic, Normani didn't exist as an artist until lat year. Lil Nas X didn't exist until last year when his lead single came out, Diana Ross didn't exist as an artist until 1970...

 

I get your point. I get that you want to exclude her from this list because "technically" her own lead single/first album was in 2003 but do you really think the list would look all that different if we said it was for artists pre-2004?

Isn't it literally just collabs?

How much streams do her 90s stuff have? Any certification?

 

 

Lil Nas X's first song was his Own song

it had video and all, the collab was just the cherry on top

 

Normani's singles, she was The main artist

and lets not forget she is still getting clowned for not releasing an album anyways

 

wasn't Diana's group, once called "Diana Ross and the Supremes", isn't at all in the same situation here

 

 

No one is seeing Beyonce as a 90s act

only the Hive is fighting for that right, when Bey's first era was during the Digital Uproar

even P!nk was on her 3rd album by the time

how are u gonna put her with the girls who had working Eras before even P!nk?

[Saddy]

4 hours ago, Rev8 said:

Love them girls

 

but ya, Beyonce did debut in 2003

so it's always odd to see her in Pre-00s lists

Yep, it's true

[swissman]

1 hour ago, Rev8 said:

Isn't it literally just collabs?

How much streams do her 90s stuff have? Any certification?

 

 

Lil Nas X's first song was his Own song

it had video and all, the collab was just the cherry on top

 

Normani's singles, she was The main artist

and lets not forget she is still getting clowned for not releasing an album anyways

Featured artist or not, she was credited as a solo artist in the 1990s, thus she was working solo pre-2000s. I don't think it matters how much streams these works have, no more than it'd matter if Britney's 1999 album had no streams, as it still shows work as a solo artist before the 2000s. You are going off this "technicality" that Beyoncé can't be a pre-2000s artist while at the same time not allowing for other technicalities. She did work as a singer credited as Beyoncé in the 1990s. The works where the artist "Beyoncé" is credited exist and you can't really despute that.

 

As for Normani and Lil Nas, I understand why they are largely regarded as bonafide solo artists before their solo albums, but your own words stipulated that one must have a "first album and it's lead single" which applied to neither. Changing the goalpost is fine, I get your reasons, but it still seems a bit unreasonable.

 

1 hour ago, Rev8 said:

No one is seeing Beyonce as a 90s act

And yet the reason we're even debating this is because people do.

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by swissman

[Rev8]

5 minutes ago, swissman said:

Featured artist or not, she was credited as a solo artist in the 1990s, thus she was working solo pre-2000s. I don't think it matters how much streams these works have, no more than it'd matter if Britney's 1999 album had no streams, as it still shows work as a solo artist before the 2000s. You are going off this "technicality" that Beyoncé can't be a pre-2000s artist while at the same time not allowing for other technicalities. She did work as a singer credited as Beyoncé in the 1990s. The works where the artist "Beyoncé" is credited exist and you can't really despite that.

 

As for Normani and Lil Nas, I understand why they are largely regarded as bonafide solo artists before their solo albums, but your own words stipulated that one must have a "first album and it's lead single" which applied to neither. Changing the goalpost is fine, I get your reasons, but it still seems a bit unreasonable.

 

And yet the reason we're even debating this is because people do.

Lil Nas literally had an EP, which is still a big ass project

Normani has singles that Charted and were even hits

Beyonce in the 90s? 2 features (non-single) which were part of someone else's album?

 

Yet u are comparing them?

 

 

As stevyy already showed, Beyonce had her first Single,Album,Certification,Award and whatever else, in the 2000s decade.

Her true step in her solo career.

Surprised u aren't arguing about her being her group "so she automatically should be a 90s artist" tho :0

[tiagol88]

Beyonce doesn't have a single stream from the 90's counting from her own Spotify page. Having her as a 90's act makes no sense for her monthly listeners because nothing from that decade counts. Her first solo recording happened in the 00's.

Her entire streaming feed, from albums, singles and collabs, etc...are from the 00's, 10's, etc...

 

This isn't rocket science. Her oldest thing on Spotify is "Work It" from 2002. 

 

Just because she was featured on an obscure album track from a Missy Elliot album from 1998 that doesn't even have 1M streams since Spotify debuted means nothing and you all know it. It's weird to try and push Bey as a 90's artist. No one ever saw her as that 

 

Destiny's Child? Yeah, for sure of course. Not solo Bey. 

[SavagePapi]

Beyonce should not be on these lists, if we're being honest. Not sure why the kids keep doing this. It's not really fair for the MPGs who actually debuted before 2000 as solo artists, and it takes away from the credibility of these so called "lists".

 

Beyonce was part of a GROUP. She did not debut until 2003. This has been clear from the GP and the music industry for years now. Nobody has ever seen or mentioned Beyonce as a 90s SOLO ARTIST.

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by SavagePapi

[naval23]

Beyonce and JLo omg 

[LikeaRebel]

3 hours ago, stevyy said:

The thing is that Madonna never gets the credit she deserves... as ...

 

.- the biggest female physical albums and singles artist of all times

.- ONE of the biggest female digital acts of all times.

.- ONE of the biggest female streaming acts of all times. 

 

The endurance is unmatched. 

 

Whoever our favs are... nobody compares to that. The closest there are, are the ever mentioned whose names I've just forgotten... but one starts with a W, another one with a M and another one with a C. 

 

The OP makes her look like one of many... when she in facts stands alone in all of her records and achievements.

[swissman]

2 hours ago, Rev8 said:

Lil Nas literally had an EP, which is still a big ass project

Normani has singles that Charted and were even hits

Beyonce in the 90s? 2 features (non-single) which were part of someone else's album?

 

Yet u are comparing them?

The point I'm making is you asked when Beyoncé's lead single and first album were, implying that these are what defines a solo artist, and I used examples to show that this is not necessarily the case.

 

As you are showing with these two examples, there are many ways for a solo artist to exist, having EP, charting singles or otherwise, a solo artist simply is an artist who is not part of a group who records/releases music under their name, which Beyoncé did in 1999.

 

For example, if an artist only recorded 2 songs (features) in their entire career, is it impossible to place the time in which that artist existed? Do they simply not exist despite being on actually published, sold, and consumed works? If you were cataloguing them for an archive, would you not put a year since the song wasn't important enough?

 

I know that Beyoncé having two features as examples of solo work isn't the biggest, best, most obvious marker of her solo status, however if we are going by technicalities, then we must allow technical fact into it, otherwise you're just cherry-picking the evidence.

 

2 hours ago, Rev8 said:

As stevyy already showed, Beyonce had her first Single,Album,Certification,Award and whatever else, in the 2000s decade.

Her true step in her solo career.

Surprised u aren't arguing about her being her group "so she automatically should be a 90s artist" tho :0

I'm not sure what this shows but the idea that an artist only exists once they sell x amount of albums, which simply is not the case.

Edited April 17, 2022 by swissman

[swissman]

2 hours ago, SavagePapi said:

Beyonce should not be on these lists, if we're being honest. Not sure why the kids keep doing this. It's not really fair for the MPGs who actually debuted before 2000 as solo artists, and it takes away from the credibility of these so called "lists".

 

Beyonce was part of a GROUP. She did not debut until 2003. This has been clear from the GP and the music industry for years now. Nobody has ever seen or mentioned Beyonce as a 90s SOLO ARTIST.

 

Nowhere in this tweet or the OP does it say "solo artist". It just says "artist". And how can you argue that Beyoncé, solo (given that she does have solo credits) or within her group, was not a recording artist in the 1990s? Beyoncé is very clearly a pre-2000s artist.

[swissman]

Even if we exclude Beyoncé from this list, Jennifer Lopez and Britney each debuted 1-2 years before to the 2000s, barely making it into this list, so it's not as if they're in some altogether different generation as Beyoncé who cannot and should not in any way be grouped with Beyoncé, each having released only one album prior to 2000, while Destiny's Child released two and made their professional music debut 1-2 years before either.

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by swissman

[SavagePapi]

33 minutes ago, swissman said:

Nowhere in this tweet or the OP does it say "solo artist". It just says "artist". And how can you argue that Beyoncé, solo (given that she does have solo credits) or within her group, was not a recording artist in the 1990s? Beyoncé is very clearly a pre-2000s artist.

Beyonce was pre-2000s as part of a group. She did not released her debut single until 2003. With your logic, Kelly Rowland, Michelle Williams deserve to be on the list too if they had the same amount of listeners? That makes zero sense to me.

 

J.Lo, Britney & X-Tina should be included because they debuted before the year 2000, as the title states. It's not hard to comprehend.

 

Beyonce should not be on the list. Neither, would Justin Timberlake in a male list. They debuted as solo artists post-2000, and are not considered 90s or even Late-90s artists, their respected groups were. This makes these "fan-made" lists lose all their credibilities. Devoted stans for certain artists make them up as they go.

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by SavagePapi

[Rev8]

7 minutes ago, swissman said:

The point I'm making is you asked when Beyoncé's lead single and first album were, implying that these are what defines a solo artist, and I used examples to show that this is not necessarily the case.

 

As you are showing with these two examples, there are many ways for a solo artist to exist, having EP, charting singles or otherwise, a solo artist simply is an artist who is not part of a group who records/releases music under their name, which Beyoncé did in 1999.

 

For example, if an artist only recorded 2 songs (features) in their entire career, is it impossible to place the time in which that artist existed? Do they simply not exist despite being on actually published, sold, and consumed works?

 

I know that Beyoncé having two features as examples of solo work isn't the biggest, best, most obvious marker of her solo status, however if we are going by technicalities, then we must allow technical fact into it, otherwise you're just cherry-picking the evidence.

 

I'm not sure what this shows but the idea that an artist only exists once they sell x amount of albums, which simply is not the case.

And then I explained the difference of the examples u gave me

They are literally on their Own projects, big projects, which they went out and promoted

U are just nitpicking at this point talking about 2 features in an entire career ?

 

tiagol88 also gave a really great example here

even SavagePapi made a pretty good point

Bey really doesn't have anything from the 90s that gives her leverage or whatever, in these lists

 

u are nice to chat to tho

never mean

16 minutes ago, swissman said:

Even if we exclude Beyoncé from this list, Jennifer Lopez and Britney each debuted 1-2 years before to the 2000s, barely making it into this list, so it's not as if they're in some altogether different generation as Beyoncé who cannot and should not in any way be grouped with Beyoncé, each having released only one album prior to 2000, while Destiny's Child released two and made their professional music debut 1-2 years before either.

 

Not a good example to give, since both's debuts were a large thing for Music back then (and it was actually an album,videos,singles) They were ACTIVELY solo entities

and Again, Destiny's Child is not Beyonce and vice versa.

 

I've always said that a Beyonce comparison with Jlo/Britney is a bit unfair, especially when a large part of the Hive has always compared Bey's 1st album to Britney's 4th, which is a total disaster in logic altogether

 

 

[swissman]

1 minute ago, Rev8 said:

And then I explained the difference of the examples u gave me

They are literally on their Own projects, big projects, which they went out and promoted

U are just nitpicking at this point talking about 2 features in an entire career ?

I don't want to go back and forth on this first part any longer, it seems we are both saying the same things over and over and no one budges.

 

I realize there is a difference, but that difference doesn't account for what you claimed Beyoncé needed in order to be on this list, which was a lead single/solo album.

 

My point here is that an artist exists if they do work that exists.

 

1 minute ago, Rev8 said:

Not a good example to give, since both's debuts were a large thing for Music back then (and it was actually an album,videos,singles) They were ACTIVELY solo entities

and Again, Destiny's Child is not Beyonce and vice versa.

Both debuts were a large thing, sure, but scale of career doesn't necessarily define a career.

 

Beyoncé may not be Destiny's Child and vice versa, and yet she was still a recording artist at the time. She still went to work for Columbia and got into recording booths with top producers and co-wrote those songs and sang their leads (and often their background vocals too), performed concerts and accepted televised awards and all that. She may not have been a technical "solo" artist, but she was an artist, she had a career in the 1990s, solo or not.

 

If someone wants to open a thread stating explicitly "solo artist as defined by their first work as a lead artist only" then sure. There's nothing more to say. If we are talking about artists then Beyoncé is just as much a part of the 1990s as Debbie Harry was the 1970s in music.

 

[Saddy]

28 minutes ago, swissman said:

Even if we exclude Beyoncé from this list, Jennifer Lopez and Britney each debuted 1-2 years before to the 2000s, barely making it into this list, so it's not as if they're in some altogether different generation as Beyoncé who cannot and should not in any way be grouped with Beyoncé, each having released only one album prior to 2000, while Destiny's Child released two and made their professional music debut 1-2 years before either.

 

Sis both of them released SOLO stuff (not features) and DEBUTED as SOLO artists in the 1999, so they are automatically pre-2000s SOLO artists. Even if they release last month of December 1999, they are still pre-2000 artists because their SOLO albums/single were released in 1999 not in 2000 (and it doesn't matter if they had success with the first album/singles or not)  

 

 

[swissman]

14 minutes ago, SavagePapi said:

Beyonce was pre-2000s as part of a group. She did not released her debut single until 2003. With your logic, Kelly Rowland, Michelle Williams deserve to be on the list too if they had the same amount of listeners? That makes zero sense to me.

Well would absolutely subscribe to that same logic. Why wouldn't I? They're not even the lead singer/creative force/face of the group.

 

14 minutes ago, SavagePapi said:

J.Lo, Britney & X-Tina should be included because they debuted before the year 2000, as the title states. It's not hard to comprehend.

Where did I dispute their inclusion on this list though?
 

I merely stated that they all sneaked in to the pre-2000s category very close to the cutoff and so comparing them to Shakira, let alone Madonna is just as "unorganized" as comparing them to Beyoncé.

 

Anyway, we should remember that "2000" is just an arbitrary number. When a decade happens, it's not as if everything starts over and resets.

 

If this list intends to prove something by grouping artists of a certain era together they should specify the reason to even compare/group these artists together such as "Pre-Digital" or "Pre-Streaming"  or whatever.

 

 

 

 

[wanderlust]

i mean, madonna fans aren't adding the bands she was in in the late 70s to count her for those lists like beyonce fans do for the 90s.. granted, they weren't really successful, but still..

[swissman]

21 minutes ago, Saddy said:

Sis both of them released SOLO stuff (not features) and DEBUTED as SOLO artists in the 1999, so they are automatically pre-2000s SOLO artists. Even if they release last month of December 1999, they are still pre-2000 artists because their SOLO albums/single were released in 1999 not in 2000 (and it doesn't matter if they had success with the first album/singles or not)  

 I strongly pointed to the fact that they debuted in the 1990s though. I've not disputed that in the slightest.

 

My point is that generations/eras of music are not defined by decade nor millennium otherwise once the clock hit 2010, dancepop would have been out and some new genre in, but in fact it lasted for a few more years before trends and the industry changed. So acting like including Beyoncé, an artist who created 2 albums in the 1990s (even if part of a group) is sooooooo unjust to these other artists, some of which debuted less than a year before 2000 is a bit laughable, and far too reliant on the parameters.

 

Jennifer Lopez and Britney Spears are pre-2000s artists. Yes. So is Elvis. Are they from the same generation?

 

I mean Beyoncé's voice sang just as many Hot 100 #1s in the 1990s as Britney and J.Lo did.

 

If it makes people feel better to say Beyoncé should not be on this list, can we at least acknowledge the very asterisk that is the fact that Beyoncé absolutely was part of the 1990s music scene, even if part of a group?

 

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by swissman

[swissman]

Anyway I am kinda done talking about this now but I just want to say....

 

Of course there is the way to look at it purely from the angle of differentiating the lead singer from the group, but there is also the other way to see artists from within a group, such as Diana Ross, Freddie Mercury, Annie Lennox, Debbie Harry, George Michael, Mick Jagger, Jon Bon Jovi, etc. etc. etc.

 

[Saddy]

7 minutes ago, swissman said:

If it makes people feel better to say Beyoncé should not be on this list, can we at least acknowledge the very asterisk that is the fact that Beyoncé absolutely was part of the 1990s music scene, even if part of a group?

Yes, she was but we're talking about soloists who debuted as soloists before the 2000s. The list contains the names of soloist artists and not ex-band artists  

[SavagePapi]

15 minutes ago, swissman said:

Well would absolutely subscribe to that same logic. Why wouldn't I? They're not even the lead singer/creative force/face of the group.

 

Where did I dispute their inclusion on this list though?
 

I merely stated that they all sneaked in to the pre-2000s category very close to the cutoff and so comparing them to Shakira, let alone Madonna is just as "unorganized" as comparing them to Beyoncé.

 

Anyway, we should remember that "2000" is just an arbitrary number. When a decade happens, it's not as if everything starts over and resets.

 

If this list intends to prove something by grouping artists of a certain era together they should specify the reason to even compare/group these artists together such as "Pre-Digital" or "Pre-Streaming"  or whatever.

 

 

 

 

This list is fan-made though. And I think you are missing the point. You know exactly what we're talking about. Beyonce is not a 90s artist so she should not be included on these lists. 

 

Was 'Beyonce' as an artist listed on any 90s Billboard's Year-End chart, or even worldwide? Was she listed on any 90s Billboard Decade-End charts? The answer is no. Britney, Jennifer Lopez & X-Tina HAVE despite debuting in 1998 & 1999. All have had #1 singles as artists, and a few hits under their belt during the last couple years of the decade.

 

Again, Beyonce is not a 90s artist, her group Destiny's Child was. This "fan-made" list is incorrect and made up to be bias and move others away from being listed. Billboard, Spotify, Rolling Stone would never include Beyonce in their "Pre-2000s", "90s Artists" or "90s Songs" lists unless it was the group, "Destiny's Child". Beyonce would not be billed.

 

Should Michael Jackson be included in 'Pre-1970s Spotify lists' when he debuted as solo artist in 1972, but was part of the Jackson 5 beforehand? That makes zero sense. You know better.

[Madonno]

The encyclopedias written here... Just for try to fit certain artist in the list.. GOD lord have mercy on us 

 

With that kind of logic, Madonna's career started in the 70s.

 

Anyway, is amazing to witness how Madonna keep increasing

Edited April 18, 2022 by Madonno

[Trash]

Not he Beyoncé discussion AGAIN, just either let her stay in these lists or not, don't you guys get tired of having this discussion every time this thread gets made/bumped?. 

Maybe count DC instead of Bey as solo, idk.

[Chris]

Can we NOT argue about Beyonce every single day on this forum?

 

Give it a rest, you gayrods.

 

God damn.