Should the next official album be a Duets album?

[Themidwestcowboy]

Should the next official album be a Duets album?

I have given this a lot of thought as of lately, ever since I saw the tweet of a supposedly unreleased song from Whitney and Mike and I, for one, would approve of such a release only if it is done in a tasteful and respectful manner that retains the integrity of the artist.

I'm talking about reaching out to people who worked with MJ, or has been influenced by him in any way, or has been close to working with him and last but not least has a wholesome respect for MJ. I think the toughest challenge will be how to have a healthy balance between going for modern and old/legendary artists. If it was up to me I would have paired MJ with all the great and still living Motown acts and call it a day but as any business the appeal to appeal to today's market is a priority of the estate and Sony and I understand that, I really do, but finding the balance, not selling out to fads and keeping the artist integrity in tact (this also goes for contemporizing songs), is just as important.

They can get people like

Beyoncé

Jennifer Hudson

Whitney Huston (if the songs really exist)

Daft Punk

Bruno Mars

Pharrell Williams

Lady Gaga

Freddie Mercury (State Of shock or/and victory)

Prince (think about it, the gloved one and the purple one finally appearing on a song together. Prince could also do a guitar solo or whatever. It has been overdue for decades now)

Stevie Wonder

Jay-Z

Justin Timberlake


I'm probably missing out on a lot of other artists but you get the picture. At first I was opposed to this idea but now I actually like that idea.

 

[Dilan]

do you really think prince would do an artificial duet? lol

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

do you really think prince would do an artificial duet? lol

Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. I would love for that to happen though. Let's not turn this into a Prince thread and keep to the subject. What do you think about a duets album?

 

[Doggone]

I'm in for a duet album. But not all songs should be a duet. Just 1 or 2 songs, not more. It's still a MICHAEL JACKSON album. Not a ''Michael Jackson ft. another artist'' album.

 

[Zack44]

If the estate runs out of ideas or material to work with, then maybe, MAYBE, they could consider a possibility of a duets album. In my opinion, they should ONLY recruit artists who either knew or worked with Michael in his lifetime, such as Usher, Beyonce, Freddie Mercury, Akon, etc. and not just today's popular artists who MJ never knew like Bieber, Lady Gaga, Pitbull, etc. because that just seems disrespectful and would only rely on their modern, short-lived popularity to give MJ another moment in the spotlight. Having him duet with people he knew would make the songs seem more real/heartfelt and not just seem like a lame cash-in.

 

[AlwaysThere]

The estate will not do a duets album right.

They'll aim for relevancy and popularity rather than quality. We'll see Justin Bieber and Beyonce and Jason Derulo features.

 

[HIStory]

I don't like artificial duets with people MJ did not choose to duet with in his life. But considering the fact that Love Never Felt So Good was the only hit from Xscape and it needed Timberlake to be a hit it is clear that the general public will be unlikely to care if there aren't current artists on the record, so I'm expecting the Estate and Sony do more of that. (Which is a shame, but apparently they aim for commercial success, not artistic authenticity.)


The only duets I am OK with are those which MJ did during his life. So the Freddie Mercury duets or (if there is one) the Whitney Houston duet. But to put the latest hip artist (who MJ had nothing to do with) on Michael's record just for commercial success is not something I'd like to see - especially not for a full album. Like Zack44 said only MAYBE if there's really no more material and what is left is so incomplete.


Having said that I'd always wondered what Daft Punk would do with something like Sunset Driver.

 

[mj_frenzy]

The estate will not do a duets album right.

They'll aim for relevancy and popularity rather than quality. We'll see Justin Bieber and Beyonce and Jason Derulo features.

This is true.

I don't like artificial duets with people MJ did not choose to duet with in his life. But considering the fact that Love Never Felt So Good was the only hit from Xscape and it needed Timberlake to be a hit it is clear that the general public will be unlikely to care if there aren't current artists on the record, so I'm expecting the Estate and Sony do more of that. (Which is a shame, but apparently they aim for commercial success, not artistic authenticity.)

The only duets I am OK with are those which MJ did during his life. So the Freddie Mercury duets or (if there is one) the Whitney Houston duet. But to put the latest hip artist (who MJ had nothing to do with) on Michael's record just for commercial success is not something I'd like to see - especially not for a full album. Like Zack44 said only MAYBE if there's really no more material and what is left is so incomplete.

Having said that I'd always wondered what Daft Punk would do with something like Sunset Driver.

I agree about the artificial duets, but I think there must be more real duets.

For example, ‘Ekam Satyam’ (‘The One Truth&#8217 must be pretty finished because it was meant for the ‘MJ & Friends’ concerts but unfortunately it was shelved. That is the type of duets that personally I would love to hear.

 

[HIStoric]

Honestly I couldn't really give a shit if MJ worked with them or not in his life. I always saw people saying that the producers who work on posthumous songs should be ones MJ worked with while he was still alive and, more often than not, I've enjoyed the songs made by producers he didn't personally work with far more (of course, there is a few exceptions but in general that's what I've personally felt).

All the more props if MJ had the desire to work with them but never got around to it, but as long as they were influenced by him and are highly regarded both commercially and artistically, I'm pretty happy. Many of the artists midwestcowboy gave are perfect candidates I think. I don't feel that just because they have MJ duet with a current artist means all artistic authenticity goes out the window, it can still be done respectably and I feel the JT duet was done well in that regard. I'm not denying that it was obviously done to increase the commercial value of Xscape, but just that doesn't necessarily mean it sacrificed artistic quality.

Now the Pitbull remix on the other hand? Ok no it's not a 'duet' but I'm going to talk about it since it was an MJ remix feat. Pitbull. I don't think I've ever seen Pitbull reference MJ as a huge influence (a very quick Google reveals little-nothing) and on top of that, the remix just wasn't very good. I've never really seen him highly regarded both commercially or artistically and while it wasn't a duet exactly, I think it's a perfect example of a "duet" that didn't work out and it's one I forgot about until just now as I didn't even rip that off the CD.

So if the Estate stick to respected artists who have made MJ's influence on them known, I'm all the more keen. Especially if they got in producers like Daft Punk (having read Respect's post). Would I be down for a whole duets album? mmmmmm I'm really not too sure? I would have to see who was dueting with him first but I'm definitely keen for another great duet on the next posthumous album.

I can totally see the internet shutting down if Beyonce made an incredible duet with MJ.

 

[HIStory]

All the more props if MJ had the desire to work with them but never got around to it, but as long as they were influenced by him and are highly regarded both commercially and artistically, I'm pretty happy. Many of the artists midwestcowboy gave are perfect candidates I think. I don't feel that just because they have MJ duet with a current artist means all artistic authenticity goes out the window, it can still be done respectably and I feel the JT duet was done well in that regard. I'm not denying that it was obviously done to increase the commercial value of Xscape, but just that doesn't necessarily mean it sacrificed artistic quality.

If they are going down that route they will always have to release the original, only-MJ version. ALWAYS! I don't want to miss half of the song as sung by MJ just to give room for someone else on MJ's record! Just out of commercial interest, nothing else. Sorry, but I am not interested in Beyonce, Lady Gaga etc. singing - if I were I'd buy their album. I am interested in MJ singing on a record that is sold under his name.

And to be honest I cannot see people making Justin Bieber or Beyonce or whatever duets out of formerly unreleased Beatles tracks. They just don't do that to the Beatles and that's because they respect their legacy. I want people to have the same respect for Michael's legacy. (In case of Elvis or Nat King Cole we did see posthumus duets, but on both occasions they were with their daughters, so that's a bit different IMO than the random hip of the moment artist.)

 

[HIStoric]

If they are going down that route they will always have to release the original, only-MJ version. ALWAYS! I don't want to miss half of the song as sung by MJ just to give room for someone else on MJ's record! Just out of commercial interest, nothing else. Sorry, but I am not interested in Beyonce, Lady Gaga etc. singing - if I were I'd buy their album. I am interested in MJ singing on a record that is sold under his name.

And to be honest I cannot see people making Justin Bieber or Beyonce or whatever duets out of formerly unreleased Beatles tracks. They just don't do that to the Beatles and that's because they respect their legacy. I want people to have the same respect for Michael's legacy. (In case of Elvis or Nat King Cole we did see posthumus duets, but on both occasions they were with their daughters, so that's a bit different IMO than the random hip of the moment artist.)

Yeah, so if they do a duets album they can just do what they did with Xscape? Have Disc 1 have the duets and Disc 2 the originals with MJ-only vocals? I agree that if MJ's vocals are complete on a song, a version where only MJ provide the vocals is essential. LNFSG did it great, give us two versions like normal but also give us JT's version in addition. Songs like People of the World would be perfect for duets because MJ only really sings the chorus, leaving space for someone else to fill in lyrics he wrote.

I would be a lot more against Apple Records making duets out of unreleased Beatles songs than the Estate making duets out of unreleased MJ songs.

For starters, using your example, Bieber and Beyonce's style is much closer to Michael Jackson than it is to The Beatles. I can absolutely see Beyonce having a duet with Michael Jackson whereas The Beatles? Not really. To be honest, it feels much weirder in general for a random solo artist to be slapped on top of a band's performance than it is for a solo artist to be slapped on top of another solo artist as well? It just doesn't really fit in with the style of The Beatles specifically, like think about it, how often did The Beatles release a track that featured other prominent artists/bands? Whereas you look at Michael Jackson, an artist who worked on duets with many other solo artists in his life and, towards the end of his life, expressed much interest in working with many then 'hip of the moment artists' - Fergie, will.i.am, Akon to name a few. It artistically fits more within MJ's realm than The Beatles as MJ actively searched out working with other prominent artists throughout his career.

On the whole, I personally feel it has to do with how the artist approached prominent duets in their active lifetime. If there was another huge respected band like The Beatles who often changed members or made records that featured other prominent artists, I wouldn't really be as much against this idea as I am with The Beatles specifically. There are other more specific things I could say in relation to The Beatles and this argument but for post length's sake, I've cut it out.

It's a delicate issue I feel and one the Estate would have to be careful with. I don't just want any other artist to work with Michael, they'd have to be highly respected both commercially and artistically as well as influenced by MJ. Thinking about the duets album idea moreso, I'm kinda backing away from it on the whole as it does feel too 'commercially'/cheap but I stand by what I say above for the occasional 'duet'.

In regards to Elvis, I know Susan Boyle did a posthumous duet with him a few years ago (which was actually rather nice). His estate seem to let the very odd artist have a posthumous duet with him and I remember Boyle won over his Estate by going on about how much Elvis meant to her. In addition to Boyle, I know he 'appeared' on American Idol in a 'duet' with Celine Dion. Don't really know any others, haven't cared to look into it.

 

[Dilan]

If they are going down that route they will always have to release the original, only-MJ version. ALWAYS! I don't want to miss half of the song as sung by MJ just to give room for someone else on MJ's record! Just out of commercial interest, nothing else. Sorry, but I am not interested in Beyonce, Lady Gaga etc. singing - if I were I'd buy their album. I am interested in MJ singing on a record that is sold under his name.

And to be honest I cannot see people making Justin Bieber or Beyonce or whatever duets out of formerly unreleased Beatles tracks. They just don't do that to the Beatles and that's because they respect their legacy. I want people to have the same respect for Michael's legacy. (In case of Elvis or Nat King Cole we did see posthumus duets, but on both occasions they were with their daughters, so that's a bit different IMO than the random hip of the moment artist.)

there is only one unreleased beatles song anyway and its mostly instrumental so they couldn't make a fake duet

 

[HIStory]

For starters, using your example, Bieber and Beyonce's style is much closer to Michael Jackson than it is to The Beatles. I can absolutely see Beyonce having a duet with Michael Jackson whereas The Beatles? Not really. To be honest, it feels much weirder in general for a random solo artist to be slapped on top of a band's performance than it is for a solo artist to be slapped on top of another solo artist as well? It just doesn't really fit in with the style of The Beatles specifically, like think about it, how often did The Beatles release a track that featured other prominent artists/bands? Whereas you look at Michael Jackson, an artist who worked on duets with many other solo artists in his life and, towards the end of his life, expressed much interest in working with many then 'hip of the moment artists' - Fergie, will.i.am, Akon to name a few. It artistically fits more within MJ's realm than The Beatles as MJ actively searched out working with other prominent artists throughout his career.

Obviously Bieber and Beyonce were just examples. But the same way I cannot see artists that are closer in style to the Beatles being put on unreleased Beatles tracks to "duet" with the Beatles either. The Beatles fandom would riot IMO. And I don't think it's just because the Beatles did not duet with others while they were active. There is just that type of respect for their artistic legacy and I wish people had that for Michael's legacy too. I can see why some fans are pushing for it for commercial reasons, but personally I have absolutely no interest in artificial duets, to be honest, and the idea cannot get me excited at all. Artistically they feel fake to me.

And while Michael did a couple of duets in his lifetime but he was not that big dueting artist either. Fergie? Well, the bodyguards said in their book that MJ was pushed into those re-makes on Thriller 25 but he did not like the idea artistically. And to be honest the Thriller remakes are crap and already dated (who listens to Beat It 2008 instead of Beat It 1982?) which proves exactly the point that all these modern re-makes with currently hip artist MAY get you temporary chart success but from an artistic POV they tend to be cheap throwaways.

I think Michael was looking for ways to get back to the mainstream at the end of his life and that's why he collaborated or "expressed interest in" collaborating with some of those acts. I never liked will.I.am's or Akon's music and I think Michael was way above that artistically but he might have lost confidence in his ability to generate interest on his own and maybe that's why he felt the need to involve whoever was currently hot on the charts, I don't know. But I never understood what he saw in will.I.am. In any case, again the Akon duet is a thing that MJ did during his lifetime so its release is OK to me (although it felt like Akon made it Akon feat. MJ). If there is a will.I.Am-MJ duet somewhere in the vault - again, if that's something MJ intended to do then it's OK to release that. But putting artists on his record with whom he never worked and some never even knew (eg. Bieber, Bruno Mars) and to make duets of songs which weren't intended to be duets - that's a different thing.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I'd rather not see a duet album tbh. If the songs are half finished then release them on some kind of fan aimed box set.I hate it when they tack on modern artists just for the sake of sales and making Michael seem modern. And that's exactly what they'll do.

 

[SoCav]

Obviously Bieber and Beyonce were just examples. But the same way I cannot see artists that are closer in style to the Beatles being put on unreleased Beatles tracks to "duet" with the Beatles either. The Beatles fandom would riot IMO. And I don't think it's just because the Beatles did not duet with others while they were active. There is just that type of respect for their artistic legacy and I wish people had that for Michael's legacy too. I can see why some fans are pushing for it for commercial reasons, but personally I have absolutely no interest in artificial duets, to be honest, and the idea cannot get me excited at all. Artistically they feel fake to me.

And so would the fanbases of other massively successful, legendary artists. Elvis, Hendrix, The Stones, Prince, Dylan, Springsteen, James Brown. These were/are not niche artists with a small, extremely dedicated following. They all had major popular success at least at some point in time. For one reason or another, perhaps because Michael appeals to fans for many different reasons besides music (his dancing, his videos, his personality, etc) or because his success was so widespread, the fanbase overall is less defensive about his work compared to some of these other fanbases.

 

[Galactus123]

Only if the original Michael only versions will also be released. I wouldn't like if the only available version of song would the the duet.

 

[musicisme]

No way , l won't take it , l would love to have only original !

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

I don't like artificially created duets either. If the songs weren't meant to be performed as duets, they will always sound forced and unnatural and I wouldn't want to have less Michael vocals to force a collaboration it wasn't even meant to be. That fake "duet" with JT, I saw it was cheap shot to get Michael in the charts and generate more sales for Xscape IMO, I hope the Estate don't take that route but judging by their moves, they're oriented to commercial success rather that artistic integrity.

 

[Smoore]

Personally, I think a live album should be released.. The shelved Brunei project is a great start to look at. Maybe not releasable due to the backing tracks being so high in the mix, but another multi-tracked concert. Ex: Bad Tour, Dangerous tour. I would love for a proper mix of a Dangerous concert, let alone a proper mix of the Bad concerts. The Dangerous tour DVD's audio is terrible, and so is the BBC version of the concert. I can barely hear the bass in Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'.

 

[Hess]

Are we talking about never before released songs - or make classic MJ songs into duets og MJ duets into new duets with a new singer?

TGIS with Bruno Mars fx ? And I just can't stop loving you with Beyonce?

Or make BAD, Billie Jean, Scream, Who Is It, Whatever Happens etc. into duets?

Or only never before released songs - as duets?


I think Hold My Hand could be better with a female duet partner. - etc. Beyonce or even Lady Gaga. (I never liked her much - but then I heard her Jazz music with Tony Bennett - and her voice is actually great !! )

 

[ChrisC]

If there's unfinished material I think I approve of the idea of finishing it by creating duets.

But otherwise, no.

And I don't think another album of unreleased material is the right way to go so soon after Xscape.

Sure has got me thinking lately though, is there really going to be no new release this year?

 

[morinen]

And so would the fanbases of other massively successful, legendary artists. Elvis, Hendrix, The Stones, Prince, Dylan, Springsteen, James Brown. These were/are not niche artists with a small, extremely dedicated following. They all had major popular success at least at some point in time. For one reason or another, perhaps because Michael appeals to fans for many different reasons besides music (his dancing, his videos, his personality, etc) or because his success was so widespread, the fanbase overall is less defensive about his work compared to some of these other fanbases.

I think you are spot on: Those musicians are just musicians, so their fans stay focused on their music. Michael was so huge in all aspects that for many fans the music is secondary and they don't even know it that well or care that much.

Also I think what happened in 2010 discouraged many: the fandom put so much energy and emotion into that fight, with petitions signed by thousands of people and dozens of fan clubs, - and still lost it. Many fans are emotionally exhausted. And 2010 set the standard so low, that now people will embrace literally everything because it's better.

 

[DuranDuran]

(In case of Elvis or Nat King Cole we did see posthumus duets, but on both occasions they were with their daughters, so that's a bit different IMO than the random hip of the moment artist.)

Actually both have duet albums. In Nat's case it's a remix album. I have it. And there's an Elvis Christmas duets CD.

 

[michaelsson]

ummmm no.

 

[barbee0715]

Actually both have duet albums. In Nat's case it's a remix album. I have it. And there's an Elvis Christmas duets CD.

Wow. Never even realized these existed-what are these like in comparison to the Thriller remix album (which I dislike intensely)?

I liked Justin's duet with Michael on LNFSG. I thought it turned out really well, and if it got a new young generation of future music buying fans digging into Michael's old catalog, then I'm all for it. Big stars today are doing more and more duet albums, and maybe for that reason-Barbra Streisand and Lionel Richie, just this year. Young stars are doing it too-everything seems to be a duet these days-I guess to entice a different fan group.

I'm for it, especially with the group of artists that was listed in the first post-except Jay Z and Justin-I just want the songs to sound more organic if they use unfinished demos-make them sound like Michael left them-just complete them.



Edited to add: I just went over to YouTube to find "Lush Life" produced by Cee Lo Green-well, didn't care for it too much-I never would have guessed that was "Lush Life" had I not known already, but then, that happens to be one of my favorite songs already.

 

[Prince Of Pop]

No. Any unreleased material should be left the way they were. Do not add other artists to it, or remake classics into duets. Thriller 25 remixes were a joke, and MJ was here for it. The only one worth a damn was Love Never Felt so Good, and even the solo version kicked its ass IMO.

 

[HIStory]

I think you are spot on: Those musicians are just musicians, so their fans stay focused on their music. Michael was so huge in all aspects that for many fans the music is secondary and they don't even know it that well or care that much.

I also think there is a division in the fan base about what is important: commercial success or artistic authenticity. Ideally the two would go hand in hand, but unfortunately this is not an ideal world and often you need stunts to sell a product.

I often see these two views clash on fan boards. There are those fans for whom commercial success is everything and for those nothing seems to be artistically unaccaptable to achieve that. And there are those who are totally purists, who do not accept any stunt, just put out the stuff as MJ left it and that's it and if it does not sell it doesn't, who cares, MJ has nothing to prove any more, but we get authentic Michael Jackson. And there are people in between who are willing to compromise about some things. I think the Xscape way - 1 CD with "contemporarized" songs, 1 CD with the originals - was an attempt at such a compromise and in lieu of a better idea between those two views I think it's the best way for the future as well. The originals will always have to be released, as far as I am concerned. Always!

I think with artists like Prince, Dylan, Springsteen, James Brown, Hendrix their fan bases are not so pre-occupied with commercial success as the MJ fandom, so I guess for them it's easier to accept niche releases that do not climb high on the charts. As for the interests of Sony and the Estate. I get it that they are companies who want profit. (Well, the Estate is not really a company they may want profit, but they also need to take care of MJ's artistic legacy with respect.) But I think if it's worth for other artists to release products that are not aimed to be big sellers and are more aimed to perserve an artist's legacy in an authentic way then I cannot believe it's not worth for MJ from time to time to release such products. I think there could be a good balance between products aimed at perserving and promoting Michael's authentic art and products aimed more at the general public and commercial success.

On the other hand, one could argue that even if some of us have weird feelings about an artificial duet like LNFSG it undoubtedly does a lot for young people to pick up on the name Michael Jackson.

 

[DuranDuran]

Wow. Never even realized these existed-what are these like in comparison to the Thriller remix album (which I dislike intensely)?

I've never heard that. Verve, the jazz label, has a series of remix albums of different acts called Verve Remixed. Some of them have a companion CD (sold separately) of the original versions. Some are individual artists like Billie Holiday and others are various. Motown has a remix series too with various acts. Blue Note, another jazz label, has a remix album and another that features the original versions of songs that have been sampled. Elvis had hits with remixed songs like A Little Less Conversation & Rubberneckin'. The Beatles released Love, which is basically remixes, actually maybe more mashups of their own songs. It's not remixes done in a modern style like many of the others.

 

[morinen]

On the other hand, one could argue that even if some of us have weird feelings about an artificial duet like LNFSG it undoubtedly does a lot for young people to pick up on the name Michael Jackson.

You're right, but see, that's again "fame for profit," and how valuable is such fame history-wise? You can remix Mozart with Justin Timberlake, and make it climb high on the charts and make young generation notice it and love it. But for 99% of them that'll be just this one song that they love, and it'll never lead them to learn about Mozart's career or appreciate his art in depth. If anything, it'll hook them on Timberlake. It's shallow interest as far as classics is concerned. At the same time, there is always a stratum which will appreciate Mozart even if you don't remix him with modern artists. And it is that stratum that will maintain his legacy as a classical composer. Similarly, with Michael - you don't need to remix him with modern artists to make his art last, he will find his audience always - the people who will discover and appreciate him for what he was. It's all calculated PR talk that remixes and duets make him appealing to new generation; in reality there is only one purpose of making them - revenue. Plain and simple.

I, too, see this dispute about purity vs. commercial success among fans, and I see where the latter position comes from - from fans trying to respect and continue Michael's strive to always be number one. The thing is, commercial success is forgotten a year later - unless you break the world record as he did with Thriller, but none of the posthumous releases will even approach Michael's official albums in quality and sales numbers. Their "success" is very on par with other artists on the charts. So what's the point? It's vanity. The public doesn't even care whether his posthumous albums are successful or not - all the hype about the estate's posthumous success is mostly built by the estate itself and the journalists they work with. The public doesn't care, Michael is not here to care (and if he was he wouldn't have released any of this artifice in the first place), so why do fans care? I see why the estate or family would care - it's their income, but why do fans care?

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]