Most likely estate releases over the next year?

[MJInnocent]

It kind of is. Compare the original and album versions. If you change how the original song sounds like it's a remix. They are remixes in the same way like how BOTDF Refugee Camp mix is remix.

I disagree,the original tracks weren't finished,the "new tracks" aren't remixes of those,they are produced how the producers thought Michael may have wanted them....and I think they done a great job in that respect.

 

[Galactus123]

Is it that hard to understand what a remix is? Once again:

A remix is a piece of media which has been altered from its original state by adding, removing, and/or changing pieces of the item.

Please read the bolded/underlined/italicized portion of the above quote. Read it until you can recite it from memory. Done? Alright, great.

You don't seem to grasp the concept though. A song doesn't need to be transitioned into house/dance club music to be considered a remix. As the definition above once again outlines, it simply has to be altered from its original state...as every single song on XSCAPE was.

In the case of the Blood on the Dance Floor tracks, this is what happened: producers were called in and given the multitrack stems of various songs Michael recorded. Those producers were given free reign to make their own version of the song, often without consulting to the original recording. These new versions, called REMIXES, were then included on the album.

In the case of the XSCAPE tracks, this is what happened: producers were called in and given the multitrack stems of various songs Michael recorded. Those producers were given free reign to make their own version...wait...this seems familiar. Why? BECAUSE IT IS. IT'S THE SAME THING.

We aren't insulting the songs by referring to them as remixes; I've already stated on numerous threads that I find the modern versions of Love Never Felt So Good/A Place With No Name/Chicago/Xscape to absolutely destroy the originals. But you need to grasp the fact that they are remixes. Not "reimaginings," not "contemporizations," just flat-out remixes.

If you can't grasp that at this point, I just don't know.

I couldn't have said it better.

 

[innuendo141]

You can belittle them as much as you want by calling them remixes, but that changes nothing.
And please go listen to BOTDF remixes. They sound like a remixes because they are remixes. House/Dance Club remixes. Xscape album sounds like something that is follow up to Invincible. Something fresh, of course with its producers flavours and signature sounds, but with Michael's touch. Michael often incorporated producers styles in his music (Teddy Riley on Dangerous, Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis on HIStory, Rodney Jerkins on Invincible, Bill Bottrell on Give In To Me & Black Or White...). Again I'm not saying (no one is!) that this is how MJ's new album would sound like in 2014 but as an approximation it sounds damn good and nothing like a remix.

A remix to me is taking a song and trying to make it sound like what the original wasn't. The 2014 versions of the songs don't sound like MJ songs to me, far from it most of them, so I guess that makes them a remix to me too.

 

[tricia70]

I don't mean to brew up any old arguments, but allow me to provide you with the definition of "remix":



Every single song on XSCAPE was altered in a significant way. They do not resemble their original counterparts whatsoever. L.A. Reid jumped in and called the process "contemporizing" because it sounded less offensive. But let's be honest here: everything on XSCAPE is a remix.

Let me throw in my own argument on this one. To me, when I hear that an album is a remix (which many artists had done for years and finally Michael decided to do one with BOTDF), I see it as songs that have been altered to create a dance/house club mix to be played in clubs. A remix seems to me has always in my head translated that way.

In Xscape for example, LNFSG has the solo version (regular song) and then they have the "remix" (properly termed imo since it is a more dance/house club number with JT. It is clearly more upbeat and more clubby if you may. So, the songs that they "finished" with new producers and "polished" with a more current or modern instrumentation (I guess contemporizing would be the term penned by Reid) are songs that are meant for a proper album. I don't view them as remixes because the term to me does not apply to these 8 songs. These 8 songs are not club/house numbers. I hope someone understands what I am trying to convey here. Yes the definition of "remix" is what they did to these 8 songs, but there is a difference and I believe that is why Reid penned the name "contemporized" to differentiate between a "remix" and what he executive produced. So that is my two cents. :cheeky:

 

[AlwaysThere]

Let me throw in my own argument on this one. To me, when I hear that an album is a remix (which many artists had done for years and finally Michael decided to do one with BOTDF), I see it as songs that have been altered to create a dance/house club mix to be played in clubs. A remix seems to me has always in my head translated that way.

In Xscape for example, LNFSG has the solo version (regular song) and then they have the "remix" (properly termed imo since it is a more dance/house club number with JT. It is clearly more upbeat and more clubby if you may. So, the songs that they "finished" with new producers and "polished" with a more current or modern instrumentation (I guess contemporizing would be the term penned by Reid) are songs that are meant for a proper album. I don't view them as remixes because the term to me does not apply to these 8 songs. These 8 songs are not club/house numbers. I hope someone understands what I am trying to convey here. Yes the definition of "remix" is what they did to these 8 songs, but there is a difference and I believe that is why Reid penned the name "contemporized" to differentiate between a "remix" and what he executive produced. So that is my two cents. :cheeky:

I can see where you're coming from! Thinking about it, most of the "remixes" that'll pop up on the radio from time to time are club/EDM/house styled music.

I wouldn't necessarily lock it down to one specific genre, though. I've seen my fair share of remixes with subtitles like "'90s Remix," "Hip-Hop Remix," "Rock Remix," etc. Club/EDM is definitely the prevalent genre, but not the exclusive one.

 

[barbee0715]

I agree with that description-LNFSG with Justin is a remix as opposed to the songs on Xscape being finished songs. Michael himself talks about remixing versions of the songs on Off the Wall and Thriller with Greg P. and co. for disco clubs, radio play, etc. in Moonwalk. Of course, there are remixes that have to be done for the video shoots as well.
I think I read recently that Brad said in one of his facebook posts about his seminars that he was left behind on the BAD tour to work on the BAD remixes that were going to be sent to the clubs-at that time, they were usually just really extended versions of the songs with even more dance breaks.

 

[HIStory]

Let me throw in my own argument on this one. To me, when I hear that an album is a remix (which many artists had done for years and finally Michael decided to do one with BOTDF), I see it as songs that have been altered to create a dance/house club mix to be played in clubs. A remix seems to me has always in my head translated that way.

In Xscape for example, LNFSG has the solo version (regular song) and then they have the "remix" (properly termed imo since it is a more dance/house club number with JT. It is clearly more upbeat and more clubby if you may. So, the songs that they "finished" with new producers and "polished" with a more current or modern instrumentation (I guess contemporizing would be the term penned by Reid) are songs that are meant for a proper album. I don't view them as remixes because the term to me does not apply to these 8 songs. These 8 songs are not club/house numbers. I hope someone understands what I am trying to convey here. Yes the definition of "remix" is what they did to these 8 songs, but there is a difference and I believe that is why Reid penned the name "contemporized" to differentiate between a "remix" and what he executive produced. So that is my two cents. :cheeky:

While most remixes are done for clubs it does not mean that is the definition of a remix and only club/house mixes are remixes. A non-club/non-house remix can be just as much a remix as a club remix. Most of those songs were stripped of their original instrumentation as intended by Michael and replaced with what that producer thought would sound hip today. Whether that is a club/house sound or not is besides the point IMO. It wasn't simply a case of updating instruments that sound outdated on the demos. No, that wasn't just that. They changed the instrumentation and they even admitted that they did not care much about the original intentions and instrumentations of MJ, they just took his vocals and built whatever they felt like around it.

 

[SoCav]

In my opinion you could have argued that 'contemporizations' are a specific subtype of remixes, with a nuanced difference to other remixes, if they had followed what that word seems to suggest: work with the material Michael left behind, but update the production to today's standards. E.g., play the exact same hook but replace the 80s DX rhodes piano sound with something that sounds less like it was created in the 80s. Even in that case, the end result is of course still just a remixed demo, but the approach would be different from the usual remix because producers would not be given free rein to create whatever they want, but instead work with what Michael left behind.

But of course, that's not what happened, because the producers ended up creating their own vision of the tracks - like any other remixer - without taking Michael's ideas into account, and in many cases did not even listen to the latter and just worked around the acapella. I don't think you can call what they did on Xscape 'finishing' the songs or something to that extent either, because that implies that they started working on the song from the point of completion Michael left it at, and completed it from there whilst trying to stay true to his vision. Instead, they started from scratch and just created their own ideas.

 

[SuperLee]

Dangerous 25 minus the daft pit bull type remixes!
Just outtakes and unreleased material that was recorded for the Dangerous sessions.
That would make me happy for the year 2015

 

[Albion]

Surely Dangerous 25 will be in 2016 as the album came out in 1991. Given the success of the MJ / JT version of LNFSG I can see the estate progressing with the much speculated "Duets" album. After all the primary purpose of the estate appears to be generating revenue. Personally I'd rather they didn't go down this route but I fear it's inevitable. I doubt it will be the next release but you never know. Or they could shock everybody with Xscape 2 of 2 the same as JT did with the 20/20 experience.

 

[analogue]

Surely Dangerous 25 will be in 2016 as the album came out in 1991. Given the success of the MJ / JT version of LNFSG I can see the estate progressing with the much speculated "Duets" album. After all the primary purpose of the estate appears to be generating revenue. Personally I'd rather they didn't go down this route but I fear it's inevitable. I doubt it will be the next release but you never know. Or they could shock everybody with Xscape 2 of 2 the same as JT did with the 20/20 experience.

I wouldn't mind one duet per album, but an entire album filled with fake duets is something I really don't want

 

[Albion]

I wouldn't mind one duet per album, but an entire album filled with fake duets is something I really don't want

I guess I could live with that. I'd quite like to hear Hot Fun In The Summertime as that is meant to be a multi vocalist song. But if I'm honest I know I'll buy whatever is released.

 

[PopOfKing]

Surely Dangerous 25 will be in 2016 as the album came out in 1991. Given the success of the MJ / JT version of LNFSG I can see the estate progressing with the much speculated "Duets" album. After all the primary purpose of the estate appears to be generating revenue. Personally I'd rather they didn't go down this route but I fear it's inevitable. I doubt it will be the next release but you never know. Or they could shock everybody with Xscape 2 of 2 the same as JT did with the 20/20 experience.

Though I loathe these duet albums (especially posthumous ones) I think it would be a smart commercial move to create a MJ Duets album. I hope against it though. Artistically they are usually crap.

I expect nothing in 2015 and Dangerous 25 in 2016

 

[Zakk]

I expect their to be two projects next year, and it looks likely that their will be with the confirmation of the 'Off The Wall' documentary on set photo with Spike Lee and that Brazilian dude! plus, it seems we will be getting Thriller 3D, with presumably the making of also! and perhaps some other special features xD It does seem likely that their will only a documentary, and no deluxe edition.. although it would be pretty cool.. perhaps they could create a one disc Blu-Ray featuring the live performances of song's from the album, performed on the Destiny/Triumph Tour and the rest of the disc is filled with the 3 short films and behind the scenes?

 

[AlwaysThere]

Next year is Off the Wall's thirty-sixth anniversary...not necessarily a milestone people typically want to commemorate. I don't think the documentary will be part of a giant project as much as it will be a one-off type of thing. I can't imagine the Estate would want to release new music so soon, after all.

I'm still back and forth about the whole idea of a Dangerous25. No one official has made any confirmation, so I won't get too worked up.

 

[Zakk]

Next year is Off the Wall's thirty-sixth anniversary...not necessarily a milestone people typically want to commemorate. I don't think the documentary will be part of a giant project as much as it will be a one-off type of thing. I can't imagine the Estate would want to release new music so soon, after all.

I'm still back and forth about the whole idea of a Dangerous25. No one official has made any confirmation, so I won't get too worked up.

Thriller 25th anniversary was released in 2008, so why can't Off The Wall be a year late also? exactly. I respect your opinions on releasing new song's, not releasing concerts and all that but i completely disagree with you! The estate have everything worked out, no one can decide what they release.. but i would like a certain more attention to detail from them.

 

[mjawb2009]

When will we most likely see more TII footage? I'm thinking the 10th anniversary.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Thriller 25th anniversary was released in 2008, so why can't Off The Wall be a year late also? exactly. I respect your opinions on releasing new song's, not releasing concerts and all that but i completely disagree with you! The estate have everything worked out, no one can decide what they release.. but i would like a certain more attention to detail from them.

For the thirty-sixth anniversary? Such a random year to celebrate. Odds are if there's any OTW re-release next year, it (a) won't include any new songs, and (b) won't be touted as an anniversary compilation.

The Estate doesn't need to release any new music; they just released XSCAPE seven months ago. There needs to be a period of rest between releases of such a nature. I wouldn't be against demos (Rock With You) or outtakes we already know of (Sunset Driver), but anything unreleased should be held back for the time being.

When will we most likely see more TII footage? I'm thinking the 10th anniversary.

That's probably the safest bet. Still dying to see the run through of Stranger in Moscow.

 

[Zakk]

When will we most likely see more TII footage? I'm thinking the 10th anniversary.

I spoke with KOPV (a fan who listened in to some of the rehearsals at the forum) and he told me that their are 6 performances, that have yet to be seen! These song's are: 'Stranger In Moscow'/'Dangerous'/'Dirty Diana'/'Heal The World'/'You Are Not Alone' & 'Will You Be There' it would be a good business move from the estate if they were to make a directors cut of the original movie, featuring new camera angles and different rehearsal dates, alternate behind the scenes etc.! Plus of course, the unseen performances.

 

[innuendo141]

I spoke with KOPV (a fan who listened in to some of the rehearsals at the forum) and he told me that their are 6 performances, that have yet to be seen! These song's are: 'Stranger In Moscow'/'Dangerous'/'Dirty Diana'/'Heal The World'/'You Are Not Alone' & 'Will You Be There' it would be a good business move from the estate if they were to make a directors cut of the original movie, featuring new camera angles and different rehearsal dates, alternate behind the scenes etc.! Plus of course, the unseen performances.

Apparently some of those were just band performances without Michael present. I don't think Michael rehearsed Dirty Diana properly, or YANA or WYBT but I could be wrong, but I dont't think I am. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong

 

[Zakk]

Apparently some of those were just band performances without Michael present. I don't think Michael rehearsed Dirty Diana properly, or YANA or WYBT but I could be wrong, but I dont't think I am. Someone might correct me if I'm wrong

He definitely rehearsed Dirty Diana with live vocals, as KOPV heard it himself! same with 'Will You Be There' as for You Are Not Alone, he spoke with other people who listened in and they said they heard it

 

[Galactus123]

He definitely rehearsed Dirty Diana with live vocals, as KOPV heard it himself! same with 'Will You Be There' as for You Are Not Alone, he spoke with other people who listened in and they said they heard it

Could they been album vocals without Michael being there? There was some video recorded outside of the Forum and you could hear Dirty Diana with album vocals. You could also hear other songs like Billie Jean and Will You Be There.

 

[Zakk]

Could they been album vocals without Michael being there? There was some video recorded outside of the forum and you could hear Dirty Diana with album vocals. You could also hear other songs like Billie Jean and Will You Be There.

I've already quoted what KOPV said about this, several times.

 

[Virre]

But people who actually worked with Michael beside him during those weeks say he didn´t rehears them.

 

[Zakk]

But people who actually worked with Michael beside him during those weeks say he didn´t rehears them.

He rehearsed Dirty Diana, just not the full rehearsal with the illusion and everything but he performed it at the forum. He also sang Will You Be There with live vocals plus rehearsed the other song's i mentioned. If you want to know more, send a message to KOPV or find where he said it.

 

[innuendo141]

Could they been album vocals without Michael being there? There was some video recorded outside of the Forum and you could hear Dirty Diana with album vocals. You could also hear other songs like Billie Jean and Will You Be There.

This is what I'd believed all along- I'm sure I heard recordings that had album vocals. Not sure

 

[OnirMJ]

You really have a hard time understanding the simple concept of a remix huh?

No. But you are, obviously.

 

[OnirMJ]

You don't seem to grasp the concept though. A song doesn't need to be transitioned into house/dance club music to be considered a remix. As the definition above once again outlines, it simply has to be altered from its original state...as every single song on XSCAPE was.

I never said it has to be turned into house/dance club music. I just said that BOTDF remixes are turned into that.

Every single song on XSCAPE was UNFINISHED and UNRELEASED - STOP comparing them with fully completed, mixed, mastered and released recordings! These songs are obviously not remixes, but completely new songs created around MJ vocals. That was the goal and they succeeded in their mission - because the songs don't sound like remixes but like MJ/Timbaland or MJ/Darkchild or MJ/StarGate collaborations.

But you need to grasp the fact that they are remixes. Not "reimaginings," not "contemporizations," just flat-out remixes.

If you can't grasp that at this point, I just don't know.

And you need to grasp the fact that they are not. If you can't grasp that at this point, I just don't know.

 

[OnirMJ]

In my opinion you could have argued that 'contemporizations' are a specific subtype of remixes, with a nuanced difference to other remixes, if they had followed what that word seems to suggest: work with the material Michael left behind, but update the production to today's standards. E.g., play the exact same hook but replace the 80s DX rhodes piano sound with something that sounds less like it was created in the 80s. Even in that case, the end result is of course still just a remixed demo, but the approach would be different from the usual remix because producers would not be given free rein to create whatever they want, but instead work with what Michael left behind.

But of course, that's not what happened, because the producers ended up creating their own vision of the tracks - like any other remixer - without taking Michael's ideas into account, and in many cases did not even listen to the latter and just worked around the acapella. I don't think you can call what they did on Xscape 'finishing' the songs or something to that extent either, because that implies that they started working on the song from the point of completion Michael left it at, and completed it from there whilst trying to stay true to his vision. Instead, they started from scratch and just created their own ideas.

And how do you know that MJ would keep that exact same instrumentation in the song? (Not that I'm saying that he would change it completely). But do you really think that Chicago 1945 re-created in 2000 with Rodney Jerkins sound anything like the original version from 1985? Would that be a remix also?? No - because it was an UNFINISHED and UNPUBLISHED song. How about Cheater (re-worked version from 2000)?? I'm willing to bet that those songs sound more like something from Invincible co-produced by Rodney than something from Bad.

My point is not just about genre and that those songs does not sound like remixes, but also the fact that those songs were not completed. LNFSG is a DEMO recording! Slave To The Rhythm and Chicago are in very early stages of production. Michael wanted to re-work Slave for Invincible with Rodney - do you think that it would sound exactly the same but with "exact same hook but replace the 80s DX rhodes piano sound with something that sounds less like it was created in the 80s"? I don't think so.

 

[innuendo141]

And how do you know that MJ would keep that exact same instrumentation in the song? (Not that I'm saying that he would change it completely). But do you really think that Chicago 1945 re-created in 2000 with Rodney Jerkins sound anything like the original version from 1985? Would that be a remix also?? No - because it was an UNFINISHED and UNPUBLISHED song. How about Cheater (re-worked version from 2000)?? I'm willing to bet that those songs sound more like something from Invincible co-produced by Rodney than something from Bad.

My point is not just about genre and that those songs does not sound like remixes, but also the fact that those songs were not completed. LNFSG is a DEMO recording! Slave To The Rhythm and Chicago are in very early stages of production. Michael wanted to re-work Slave for Invincible with Rodney - do you think that it would sound exactly the same but with "exact same hook but replace the 80s DX rhodes piano sound with something that sounds less like it was created in the 80s"? I don't think so.

Compare "For All Time" from the Dangerous sessions to Thriller 25. Much of a difference? No. It's true MJ could have completely changed a song, but I think it's more likely he would keep it much the same in order to keep the songs original ambiance/mood and emotion. The New Xscape mixes are completely plastic and hollow with no soul (to me) and I fail to see why Michael would all of a sudden drop his artistic dignity to want to sound like every other run of the mill 2014 song. I realise it's pointless debating with you but I find it hard not to respond when your comments seem to be so final and authoritative, letting no one else have an opinion on an album that Michael Jackson was not alive to see.

Michel wouldn't have bastardised his own work to make his songs sound "contemporised". He would have done so had he felt it happen organically while re working a song.he wouldnt have said "make it sound like today". He would have let the song talk to him, rather than ordering the song and the music where to go. Your arguments lack the understanding of the art of making am one what it is. A truly great song evolves organically, by going from a, to b, to c, and so forth. The songs on Xscape went from C to ZZ all the while forgetting the most important thing - do these sound like Michael Jackson songs? Sure, he is singing them, but they don't sound like Michael jackson songs to me. (Except LNFSG).

Thats my final 2 cents on Xscape. While I'm glad the album did really well, it has already fallen into the same category as Thrller 25 mixes. SKIP! (Well, not all songs)