Triumph 40th Anniversary Edition - should this happen, your thoughts?

Re: Motown

Because Motown does that with a lot of their classic era artists. They release endless compilations with the same songs on them too. Motown has pretty much been a catalog label since the 1980s. Their last really popular act was probably Boyz II Men in the early 1990s. Also Motown had their 1960s and early 1970s acts constantly recording, so there was a lot of excess material. They didn't just record songs for an album. Back then it was somewhat common to release non-album songs as singles or use extra songs as a B-side of a single.

In the early 2000s, Harry Weinger said there was close to 300 unreleased J5 songs including an instrumental solo album by Tito. I think there was some solo songs by Marlon too, but don't know if it is enough for an album. Mike said once he didn't remember recording some songs on one of his Motown solo albums because they were in the studio so often. That's a lot of songs, especially considering there may be multiple takes of some of them. I saw an interview with one of the Funk Brothers and he said that they sometimes just recorded instrumental tracks and had no idea of what the song was going to be called or who was going to sing on it until the record was released. Berry Gordy was said to want Motown to be run like an assembly line at the car factories in Detroit.

I don't think The Jacksons were as prolific as the J5. They probably just recorded enough songs for an album, maybe with a few songs left over.

My question was not, why are they so many J5 outtakes. But I appreciate the effort.

My question was why are there some for J5 and MJ but none for Jacksons. The Jacksons recorded just as many studio albums at Epic as Michael did solo.
 
Re: Motown

My question was not, why are they so many J5 outtakes. But I appreciate the effort.

My question was why are there some for J5 and MJ but none for Jacksons. The Jacksons recorded just as many studio albums at Epic as Michael did solo.

I'm not sure who actually owns any outtakes from the Jackson's albums. I'd assume most of them, Michael wrote. So I'd then assume the Estate would have to give the OK for anything to be released.

There might be one or two unreleased tracks from The Jacksons and Goin' Places. I could speculate on titles. Don't forget, the Jackson's were not in total control on those albums. Not until Destiny. The first two Philly albums came out quick.

Destiny and Triumph had several unreleased I believe. Victory had a bunch but MJ held on to the good stuff for what became BAD.
 
Re: Motown

My question was not, why are they so many J5 outtakes. But I appreciate the effort.

My question was why are there some for J5 and MJ but none for Jacksons. The Jacksons recorded just as many studio albums at Epic as Michael did solo.
Maybe Epic does not consider The Jacksons that marketable. How much attention do their albums that are already released get? Their records don't get mentioned in the mainstream media today like Mike's does. Like I said earlier, there stuff did not crossover to pop radio as much in the USA. Other than Shake Your Body, I never hear their songs on Top 40 oldies stations. I heard them more on R&B stations today. I did hear Can You Feel It on a TV commercial (I think Amazon). It wasn't their version though.

Questlove interviewed Randy & Tito (separate episodes) on his podcast. Questlove's show is about music, he doesn't ask questions about gossip like a Wendy Williams. Outside of Questlove, who asks the brothers about their music and not about Mike? Who else requests to interview Randy at all?
 
The Jacksons only have 3 songs played to this day on regular pop radio stations Shake your body, Can you feel it and blame it on the boogie. The J5 have just two with ABC and I want You Back.

I personally think that all songs that were written between 1975 and 1982 could just as well been released on a Jacksons album. The OFT and Thriller demo's clearly show many family members were involved in creating those classic tracks. Michael perhaps picked his personal favorites for his solo albums it's clear songs like heartbreak hotel or state of shock could have been released on solo albums as well.
Probably lots of those titles from the vaults were also in contention for Jacksons albums.

Just my guesses.
 
Last edited:
Did Jacksons ever record a song called Triumph? I only ask because it's the name of the album.
 
Well, there isn't a song named "Victory" on the Victory album either, so...
 
Rocketeer;4291552 said:
Well, there isn't a song named "Victory" on the Victory album either, so...

Yes, but a song called Victory does exist. It features guest vocals from Freddie Mercury. That’s why I was wondering that there might be an unreleased song called Triumph, as it’s the title of the album.
 
Nite Line;4291555 said:
Yes, but a song called Victory does exist. It features guest vocals from Freddie Mercury. That’s why I was wondering that there might be an unreleased song called Triumph, as it’s the title of the album.

He does mention during dress rehearsals "the next song we're supposed to do is Triumph...."
 
Only if there are no remixes or remakes.
The Thriller 25 ones were abominations and they sound horribly dated now!

Can't really see the point, its just buying the album again - its been remastered to death and we all know the out takes.
 
Only if there are no remixes or remakes.
The Thriller 25 ones were abominations and they sound horribly dated now!

Can't really see the point, its just buying the album again - its been remastered to death and we all know the out takes.

I would love a special edition of the Triumph album that features a bonus disc with instrumental versions of all songs, and may be some a cappella mixes as well. Plus a remastered 4K version of the beautiful Can You Feel It video ('The Triumph'). And may be some demos, if available.
 
Re: Motown

Maybe Epic does not consider The Jacksons that marketable.

But they did release remastered special editions of Triumph and Destiny with bonus tracks. Just sayin'.

In addition to Shake Your Body, Can You Feel It and Blame it On The Boogie - in the UK at least - Show You The Way To Go also continues to receive radio play. Walk Right Now I have heard on the radio from time to time but is certainly rarer.

Show You The Way To Go marks the first time Michael Jackson enjoyed the UK #1 spot in any capacity, whether single or album, as part of a group or solo.
 
The question you need to ask, sadly, and that executives will ask is- is it commercially viable, and will the public buy it? That's really the main deciding factor when those people look at remastered/anniversary/re-recorded editions, and that's from any artist. They don't really care about what the fans want in my opinion.
 
Re: Motown

But they did release remastered special editions of Triumph and Destiny with bonus tracks. Just sayin'.
Those bonus tracks were previously released on 12" singles though and they didn't even put the instrumental versions. That's just 2 albums, they didn't do anything with the rest of them. I think The Jacksons (1976) was re-released on vinyl, but there were no extra tracks. Most of Jermaine's albums are out of print. Jermaine's albums after Motown are owned by Sony today. Yet there's several deluxe CD sets of LaToya albums that came out in the last few years. LaToya's records get more attention from the labels than Jacksons albums and her music was never really popular when it originally came out, except maybe in Japan. Maybe because her voice is kinda similar to some female J-pop singers.

its just buying the album again

People buy Sgt. Pepper & Dark Side Of The Moon over & over when they are re-released. :rofl: In the case of Pink Floyd's album, some re-issues just have different packaging or something like a T-shirt or poster with it. The album is exactly the same, no extra tracks. People also buy mono reissues of Beatle albums & CD reproductions of their 45s & EPs. The USA versions of Beatles albums have also been remastered. The 1 compilation is one of the biggest selling albums of the 2000s and everything on it has been previously released.
 
Re: Motown

Those bonus tracks were previously released on 12" singles though and they didn't even put the instrumental versions. That's just 2 albums, they didn't do anything with the rest of them.

Well, they did remaster all Jacksons albums (released in 2009 on cd in Japan & worldwide digital only in 24/96).
 
will the public buy it?
A lot of the music audience today don't buy new albums by currently hot artists. They stream music. Many people don't even own something to play CDs on and they aren't putting CD/tape players in new cars as a default. The RIAA now counts a certain amount of streams as a sale of an album and Billboard uses streams as part of their chart criteria
 
Re: Motown

Those bonus tracks were previously released on 12" singles though and they didn't even put the instrumental versions. That's just 2 albums, they didn't do anything with the rest of them.#


So what?
 
brothers

Those came out in 2008. They must not have sold that well if nothing has been done in 12 years. But Epic releases Mike compilations such as Scream. Japan reissues albums by lesser known American acts that are out of print in the USA including 1970s funk bands and R&B singers. So I would not really count the Japanese as a gauge for what happens elsewhere. Look at The Beatles, they get stuff released regularly, and not only their records. They have movies based on their music (Across The Universe, Yesterday), documentaries, board games, dolls, toys, video games, books, etc. There's even a documentaries about Stuart Sutcliffe & Brian Epstein and a biopic about John Lennon as a teenager. They still get written about in magazines and talked about on TV. That's free publicity. That would not happen if The Beatles didn't continue to be really popular in the mainstream. It's called the record business for a reason. It's not like Herman's Hermits or Freddie & The Dreamers get the same amount of publicity as the Fabs do today. Elvis Presley has a bunch of movies that are shown all the time on TV. Since most of them are musicals of some sort, that keeps his name and music out there. Some people just have more of a public demand than others.

It probably doesn't help that The Jacksons haven't had a record out since 1989. They weren't performing either until a few years ago. So they have been out of the public eye all that time. Most of their concerts have happened outside of the US though. It also doesn't help that people upload Jacksons/J5 songs on Youtube as "Michael Jackson".
 
Re: brothers

Those came out in 2008. They must not have sold that well if nothing has been done in 12 years. But Epic releases Mike compilations such as Scream. Japan reissues albums by lesser known American acts that are out of print in the USA including 1970s funk bands and R&B singers. So I would not really count the Japanese as a gauge for what happens elsewhere. Look at The Beatles, they get stuff released regularly, and not only their records. They have movies based on their music (Across The Universe, Yesterday), documentaries, board games, dolls, toys, video games, books, etc. There's even a documentaries about Stuart Sutcliffe & Brian Epstein and a biopic about John Lennon as a teenager. They still get written about in magazines and talked about on TV. That's free publicity. That would not happen if The Beatles didn't continue to be really popular in the mainstream. It's called the record business for a reason. It's not like Herman's Hermits or Freddie & The Dreamers get the same amount of publicity as the Fabs do today. Elvis Presley has a bunch of movies that are shown all the time on TV. Since most of them are musicals of some sort, that keeps his name and music out there. Some people just have more of a public demand than others.

It probably doesn't help that The Jacksons haven't had a record out since 1989. They weren't performing either until a few years ago. So they have been out of the public eye all that time. Most of their concerts have happened outside of the US though. It also doesn't help that people upload Jacksons/J5 songs on Youtube as "Michael Jackson".

But the fact remains, they released anniversary remastered special editions of the two most significant Jacksons albums WITH bonus tracks despite according to you being unmarketable.

This "no one would buy it" argument that gets trotted out everytime anything worthwhile is suggested or even asked about, is boring quite frankly. If The Jacksons existed in a vacuum as a standalone act, I might understand your point, but we're talking here about music made by Michael Jackson, the world's greatest entertainer, in a period of time that is almost universally considered to be his most creative period. He's year after year the highest earning dead celebrity! We're not talking about some obscure artist here with next to no audience.
 
There's really some great remixes from Triumph on YouTube. Some include multi-tracks and unheard vocals from songs. That's really the best that we'll ever get.
 
Re: brothers

But the fact remains, they released anniversary remastered special editions of the two most significant Jacksons albums WITH bonus tracks despite according to you being unmarketable.

This "no one would buy it" argument that gets trotted out everytime anything worthwhile is suggested or even asked about, is boring quite frankly. If The Jacksons existed in a vacuum as a standalone act, I might understand your point, but we're talking here about music made by Michael Jackson, the world's greatest entertainer, in a period of time that is almost universally considered to be his most creative period. He's year after year the highest earning dead celebrity! We're not talking about some obscure artist here with next to no audience.
Just because The Beatles continue to sell does not necessarily mean that a lot of people are still buying Wings or Ringo Starr solo albums. :laughing: The 2300 Jackson Street part of the site is mostly ignored, except for people posting pictures of Paris. People on this site have said they are not interested in the brothers music. So what makes you think the general public is? If there was interest, then something would have been done already. A few years ago Sony released deluxe versions of George Michael albums. They didn't do that for Wham!. So just because there's interest in Michael does not mean there is the same amount of interest in The Jacksons. If there was, Sony would have done something with their music just like they did with George Michael & Bruce Springsteen. There's never been a home video release for The Jacksons or J5, even in the VHS days.
 
I just want the Triumph tour LA to be released because we all know that it exists in HQ.
 
I just want the Triumph tour LA to be released because we all know that it exists in HQ.
To be honest, I'd rather watch one that contains a performance of "Walk Right Now" rather than LA again, even in HQ
 
Re: brothers

Just because The Beatles continue to sell does not necessarily mean that a lot of people are still buying Wings or Ringo Starr solo albums. :laughing: The 2300 Jackson Street part of the site is mostly ignored, except for people posting pictures of Paris. People on this site have said they are not interested in the brothers music. So what makes you think the general public is? If there was interest, then something would have been done already. A few years ago Sony released deluxe versions of George Michael albums. They didn't do that for Wham!. So just because there's interest in Michael does not mean there is the same amount of interest in The Jacksons. If there was, Sony would have done something with their music just like they did with George Michael & Bruce Springsteen. There's never been a home video release for The Jacksons or J5, even in the VHS days.

That you compare Michael Jackson's place in the Jacksons to Ringo in the Beatles is by itself alarming.

I didn't say there would be the "same amount" of interest in Jacksons unreleased music as Michael's.

There was a planned Victory concert release...it would have sold.

As far as I can see, this "general public" nonsense is nothing more than a excuse to cover for the Estate and is actually lazy from the fans in 2020.
 
record labels

As far as I can see, this "general public" nonsense is nothing more than a excuse to cover for the Estate and is actually lazy from the fans in 2020.
I have no interest in the estate and said nothing about it. I clearly said Epic/Sony. Also The Beatles, Bruce Springsteen, & George Michael are white. That's why I named them. The Jacksons are black. Most of George's & Bruce's music was on Sony, the same company as The Jacksons. Black artists have always been given less attention by the record labels in the USA than white ones and also less media attention than white artists. From the fact that black artists had to "cross over" to Top 40 radio or make music designed to make it easier to do this. You can find several Elvis Presley box sets of alternate takes and studio chatter, but most of the records of Fats Domino, Little Richard, & Jackie Wilson are out of print. Rock n roll was created by black people, but a lot of people today think it is white music because the white rock artists sold more than the black ones. They got the radio play. Most of the top 50 of the biggest selling artists are white male rock bands/singers. Other than Jimi Hendrix and maybe B.B. King, black guitarists are hardly ever put on best guitarist lists like a Eddie Van Halen or Eric Clapton. People like Ernie Isley, Eddie Hazel, or Jesse Johnson don't get the same publicity or attention.
 
Re: record labels

I have no interest in the estate and said nothing about it. I clearly said Epic/Sony.

I'm well aware of what you said. But you're raising the point about commercial viability when you slap down any unreleased song by the Jacksons. Which is mirrored in the ongoing discussions surrounding the commercial viability of quality posthumous (and indeed unreleased music) releases under Michael Jackson's solo name. I have already made the point that the massive audience for Michael Jackson would be ported to a degree to a Jacksons release going forward. So it's relevant. And whether you're interested in the Estate or not, they are in partnership with Sony in the distribution of said material. That is why I have stated I believe the automatic slap down by fans to any suggestion of any creative project surrounding precious unreleased recordings by Michael Jackson (in any form) of 'well it wouldn't be a phenomenon to the general public' or 'the Estate are a BUSINESS' is lazy and a cover for their terrible track record.

I mean either these recordings are made available or they are kept locked away forever - the way some fans go on it's almost as if they're determined for the latter to happen (and not for the right reasons). Fans are too caught up in thinking the only way this material can be studied and appreciated is some elaborate physical box set release that HAS to go to number one all over the world. Anyway, I digress.

The rest of your post went off on another historical ramble...although I do agree with every word on this occasion. But again I'd remind you, as black as Michael Jackson was, he reached commercial heights nobody of white skin has ever reached.

Let's move on.
 
Back
Top