Am I the only MJ fan who thinks that Michael’s solo career began with...

Nite Line

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,891
Points
113
....Off The Wall? Now I know that Michael released four solo albums with Motown before Off The Wall. But I see those albums as Jackson 5 albums rather than Michael Jackson albums. For me, Michael’s solo career began with Off The Wall, when he started to have creative control over his music. When he was able to make his own decisions regarding his music. When he was able to choose the people that he wanted to work with. All these things he couldn’t do at Motown and for that reason, I struggle to not count Off The Wall as the ‘official’ start of Michael’s solo career.

Any other Michael fans here who feel the same way?
 
Nite Line;4230609 said:
when he started to have creative control over his music. When he was able to make his own decisions regarding his music. When he was able to choose the people that he wanted to work with.
So Whitney Houston never made any albums since Clive Davis generally picked the songs and/or producers on her records? :rofl:
 
I agree. I consider his earlier solo albums as side projects whereas the Jackson 5 was still the primary focus of his career.

Off the Wall was the beginning of him really coming into his own as the King of popular music and even though he still threw his brothers a bone in the 80s, he had become a solo act through and through by then due to the level of artistry he had achieved creatively through Off the Wall and Thriller.
 
I think of "Off the Wall" as the beginning of Michael's solo career as an adult, but I don't ever discount his other four solo albums created before then. His life as an entertainer began when he was a member of the Jackson 5, but he could still be an individual artist, as well; therefore all solo efforts created during that time should be counted, as far as I'm concerned, regardless of whether MJ had creative control, picked the songs, picked with whom he worked, etc. Considering the beautiful excellence Michael gave us as a VOCALIST on the four solo Motown albums, I think it does him a disservice to sweep them under the rug when analysing the entirety of his solo career.
 
I've always preferred and 99% of the time listen to Michael from OTW - Invincible. Always have. I agree completely with OP, MJ really starts for me at Off the Wall, although there are some absolute gems before it.
 
To me, everything that Michael became, all of his trademarks, hiccups, her-hee and hoo's, aggressive belting style, beat boxing, staccato singing, started with Destiny
 
Personally I say Off The Wall because that's the first time the world saw Michael Jackson the man, the superstar and not the child star
 
Many people consider OTW as his first true solo album.. most!
 
I dont consider OTW as the beginning of his solo career, his previous records are overzealously underrated...., he was just a teen, but with an amazing voice and generally most people dont know to identify MJs young voice and know just his OTW+ voice.

I love many older tracks and his teen voice.
 
I dont consider OTW as the beginning of his solo career, his previous records are overzealously underrated...., he was just a teen, but with an amazing voice and generally most people dont know to identify MJs young voice and know just his OTW+ voice.

I love many older tracks and his teen voice.

I never discounted his Motown records. I believe that they are some absolute gems on those records. It's just that I consider them more as Jackson 5 records, rather than Michael Jackson records.
 
I think of "Off the Wall" as the beginning of Michael's solo career as an adult, but I don't ever discount his other four solo albums created before then. His life as an entertainer began when he was a member of the Jackson 5, but he could still be an individual artist, as well; therefore all solo efforts created during that time should be counted, as far as I'm concerned, regardless of whether MJ had creative control, picked the songs, picked with whom he worked, etc. Considering the beautiful excellence Michael gave us as a VOCALIST on the four solo Motown albums, I think it does him a disservice to sweep them under the rug when analysing the entirety of his solo career.
Whenever I see people or the media say Off The Wall is Mike's first record, it seems to me that they like the pop crossover albums and not R&B or soul. Same for the general public not knowing the Gamble & Huff albums The Jacksons did. The rock press like Rolling Stone & Creem usually ignore that rock n roll developed from gospel & R&B artists, so rock became "white music" and most of the biggest selling artists in history are white rock bands/singers. Mike is called "King Of Pop" because a lot of white people bought his records, which is pretty much what "pop" is, short for "popular music" for the mainstream, and "mainstream" is code for white in the USA. White people called Benny Goodman the King Of Swing and Elvis Presley the King Of Rock n Roll and Eminem the King Of Rap. It was the boomer rock press who also made the idea of self-writing important, when it wasn't pre-Beatles & British Invasion. That's mainly why Bob Dylan is a big deal to the original Rolling Stone magazine boomer audience, less so because of his singing. Very few acts wrote their own material before that and even less produced their own music. People didn't care if Dean Martin or Bing Crosby wrote songs. There were songwriters who wrote, producers who produced, and singers & bands performed the music. The rock press also write about 1960s Motown because several of the acts crossed over to the mainstream like The Supremes & Tempatations. Less coverage was given to R&B labels such as Chess, Checker, Malaco & Stax which primarily had a black audience.
 
Hmmm...I see most people always start with Off the Wall. In my case, I heard most of his teen albums when I was younger and I've been always wondering why his other solo albums were almost not mentioned when mentioning his solo career. But I guess, the brand Michael Jackson was born through Off the Wall instead of the Michael Jackson from Jackson 5.
 
OTW was the start for me. All his Motown "solo" stuff featured the brothers on background. To me, just J5 stuff.
 
Motown

OTW was the start for me. All his Motown "solo" stuff featured the brothers on background. To me, just J5 stuff.
Your hearing must not be that good if you think this is the brothers singing. :laughing:
That said, some of the songs on Mike's, Jermaine's, & Jackie's solo albums during this period do have the other brothers on them.
 
To me even though he did mini solo stuff as a child his career really started when he done and released off the wall album .
 
Michael's pre-Off the Wall catalog just doesn't interest me whatsoever, with scattered exceptions (e.g., parts of Destiny, most of Triumph). I understand its necessity when discussing his overall career, but the music just bores me more often than not. I haven't had a Jackson 5 or Jacksons album on my phone in eons.

Hell, I don't even care for Off the Wall all that much. Thriller is the beginning, far as I'm concerned.
 
Michael's pre-Off the Wall catalog just doesn't interest me whatsoever, with scattered exceptions (e.g., parts of Destiny, most of Triumph). I understand its necessity when discussing his overall career, but the music just bores me more often than not. I haven't had a Jackson 5 or Jacksons album on my phone in eons.

Hell, I don't even care for Off the Wall all that much. Thriller is the beginning, far as I'm concerned.

I pretty much feel the same, I do enjoy Off The Wall, though.
 
I dont consider OTW as the beginning of his solo career, his previous records are overzealously underrated...., he was just a teen, but with an amazing voice and generally most people dont know to identify MJs young voice and know just his OTW+ voice.

I love many older tracks and his teen voice.

And is such a shame!!
 
I think of it this way..

Before off the wall he was a Jackson 5/Jackson member that did solo work.. with Off The Wall he became a solo artist and participated with the Jacksons..

Idk if that explanation gives the idea, but he ventured out before and he was out and looking in for OTW
 
Before off the wall he was a Jackson 5/Jackson member that did solo work.. with Off The Wall he became a solo artist and participated with the Jacksons..
Phil Collins was both in Genesis and recorded solo albums up until around 1993. Both were successful. The other 2 members of Genesis also released solo projects during this time. Mike Rutherford had Mike + The Mechanics and Tony Banks did primarily instrumental albums and film scores. There were former members like Peter Gabriel, Anthony Phillips, & Steve Hackett who had albums then too.
 
Off the Wall is Michael's first completely solo album, in my book. While he did earlier albums in his teen years, they were very much under the control of Joe Jackson and Berry Gordy. Michael gained full control of his music with Off the Wall, and proved he could do more than just lead his brothers.
 
Off The Wall is the first MJ solo album really. - All the Motown albums are great, but really it's still heavily J5 inspired - MJ did not write the songs himself.

OTW - MJ was very much involved in producing and writing the songs - he went knew directions that he would never have been allowed in Motown.

SO to sum up - Yes, I do think MJ really started his solo career with OTW.
 
self-songwriting

I don't understand the logic that if someone doesn't write their own songs, then it doesn't count. Most recording artists didn't write songs in the entire history of the record business. Frank Sinatra & Johnny Mathis didn't. It was the hippy era rock press like Rolling Stone that promoted the idea of self writing as being important. That's why Bob Dylan & Lennon/McCartney are considered big deals. Before that, most pop music was by non-performing songwriters who wrote the songs, singers who sang the songs, and producers that produced. That's where the "standards" & "American Songbook" came from. Many artists had recorded the same songs. Very few popular singers/bands pre-Bob Dylan/British invasion self-wrote, especially in mainstream Top 40 pop.

The idea that self-writing makes the songs about important personal feelings isn't necessarily true either. KC from KC & The Sunshine Band wrote most of their stuff, but their songs were mainly about partying & having fun. Rock Lobster & Love Shack by the B-52s are not about any of the band members lives. Same with Weird Al. He makes comedy songs. Many prog rock & metal songs are about Dungeons & Dragons style topics. Self-writing mostly matters in getting paid more money if the song becomes popular, others remaking/sampling the song, or the song being used in commercials/TV/movies/video games. That is if they didn't sign their publishing away. That's how The Beatles lost their publishing to Lew Grade, and the Rolling Stones early songs to
Allen Klein by signing bad record contracts. But someone who doesn't write and sells a lot like Whitney Houston can make more money from record sales than someone who self-writes but doesn't sell much like a local bar band.

There's also the case that just because someone has a songwriting credits, doesn't mean they had anything to do with the creation of a song.
Anybody can get a songwriting credit if they get registered at the copyright office. Some bands give everyone in the group credit, whether an individual member helped to write or not. A lot of Lennon/McCartney songs were written separately, but they made a deal to give each other credit. Elvis Presley didn't write anything at all, but Colonel Parker had it set up that Elvis got a writing credit or the song went into Elvis' publishing company. Dolly Parton was one who refused to do this. Some record label heads, managers, mafia guys, radio disc jockeys, etc. put their names on songs to get royalties. Some songwriters gave family members or friends credits to help them out financially.

The rock press also promoted the idea of an album as being a thing in itself like a story or something, rather than just a collection of songs, such as The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper (which almost always ranks at the top of best albums lists), Dark Side Of The Moon by Pink Floyd and Tommy by The Who.
 
Nite Line;4230609 said:
....Off The Wall? Now I know that Michael released four solo albums with Motown before Off The Wall. But I see those albums as Jackson 5 albums rather than Michael Jackson albums. For me, Michael’s solo career began with Off The Wall, when he started to have creative control over his music. When he was able to make his own decisions regarding his music. When he was able to choose the people that he wanted to work with. All these things he couldn’t do at Motown and for that reason, I struggle to not count Off The Wall as the ‘official’ start of Michael’s solo career.

Any other Michael fans here who feel the same way?

MJ solo career starts with OTW for me as well but I must admit that I never play that album...never been a huge fan of the songs on it.
And I never play The Jacksons/Jackson 5 stuff either except for "Can You Feel It".....that one I love,especially the long version.
Thriller,Bad,Dangerous and History is the only albums I really love&play + the bonus songs from this period released over the years.
And I love 4-5 songs on the Michael album and a few on the Xcsape release......hoping for more releases like these but it seems unlikely at the moment :(
 
Re: self-songwriting

I don't understand the logic that if someone doesn't write their own songs, then it doesn't count. Most recording artists didn't write songs in the entire history of the record business. Frank Sinatra & Johnny Mathis didn't. It was the hippy era rock press like Rolling Stone that promoted the idea of self writing as being important. That's why Bob Dylan & Lennon/McCartney are considered big deals. Before that, most pop music was by non-performing songwriters who wrote the songs, singers who sang the songs, and producers that produced. That's where the "standards" & "American Songbook" came from. Many artists had recorded the same songs. Very few popular singers/bands pre-Bob Dylan/British invasion self-wrote, especially in mainstream Top 40 pop.

The idea that self-writing makes the songs about important personal feelings isn't necessarily true either. KC from KC & The Sunshine Band wrote most of their stuff, but their songs were mainly about partying & having fun. Rock Lobster & Love Shack by the B-52s are not about any of the band members lives. Same with Weird Al. He makes comedy songs. Many prog rock & metal songs are about Dungeons & Dragons style topics. Self-writing mostly matters in getting paid more money if the song becomes popular, others remaking/sampling the song, or the song being used in commercials/TV/movies/video games. That is if they didn't sign their publishing away. That's how The Beatles lost their publishing to Lew Grade, and the Rolling Stones early songs to
Allen Klein by signing bad record contracts. But someone who doesn't write and sells a lot like Whitney Houston can make more money from record sales than someone who self-writes but doesn't sell much like a local bar band.

There's also the case that just because someone has a songwriting credits, doesn't mean they had anything to do with the creation of a song.
Anybody can get a songwriting credit if they get registered at the copyright office. Some bands give everyone in the group credit, whether an individual member helped to write or not. A lot of Lennon/McCartney songs were written separately, but they made a deal to give each other credit. Elvis Presley didn't write anything at all, but Colonel Parker had it set up that Elvis got a writing credit or the song went into Elvis' publishing company. Dolly Parton was one who refused to do this. Some record label heads, managers, mafia guys, radio disc jockeys, etc. put their names on songs to get royalties. Some songwriters gave family members or friends credits to help them out financially.

The rock press also promoted the idea of an album as being a thing in itself like a story or something, rather than just a collection of songs, such as The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper (which almost always ranks at the top of best albums lists), Dark Side Of The Moon by Pink Floyd and Tommy by The Who.

This is a fantastic post. I often get told that Prince was better than Michael because he did it all himself. In my eyes, getting help to flesh out ideas doesn't make the music worse.

I'd rather MJs output with help than the 40 dud albums Prince released 'all by himself'.
 
I never said it made MJ a bigger or better musician - I just stated the obvious - that on OTW MJ started to get more involment with the music.

MJ wrote was it 3 songs on OTW? - still only 1/4 of the album - I just like to hear the music MJ wrote and made himself - the demos show how ready the song was before anyone else got involved. I think the 3 songs MJ wrote made the direction for the album - so the songs he found from others had to fit MJ's own songs and the direction he wanted. - That's interesting - also to see how it changed from OTW to Thriller to BAD and so on.

I really like Frank Sinatra - he had an amazing voice - gave great concerts - but he never made his own songs, he just recorded them - and did so splendid.
BUT - imagine if Mr. Blue Eyes had written all the songs himself - that would make him a bigger genius IMO.

Elvis is the most overrated artist the world has ever seen…
 
Well lets not forget Michael only wrote 2 songs on Invincible, so with that logic wouldn't his solo career end after HIStory? ... Just sayin'
 
Re: self-songwriting

This is a fantastic post. I often get told that Prince was better than Michael because he did it all himself. In my eyes, getting help to flesh out ideas doesn't make the music worse.

I'd rather MJs output with help than the 40 dud albums Prince released 'all by himself'.

Tell me about it. Prince fans love to claim that Prince was better than MJ, because Prince played instruments and MJ didn't. Obviously that's not true because MJ did play instruments, just not on stage. And like you said, most of Prince's albums are absolute duds. He may have been a one man band, but he mostly released absolute stinkers after the 80s, whereas MJ maintained a high standard. I too rather MJ's output with the help of others than the majority dud albums Prince released by himself.
 
Well lets not forget Michael only wrote 2 songs on Invincible, so with that logic wouldn't his solo career end after HIStory? ... Just sayin'


I guess somewhat that is true but then the moment when he did that 2009 annocement it did bring his career up even if it was just for a moment
 
Michael's solo career pre 'off the wall' was part time, with j5 being his 'main gig'. the roles reversed once 'off the wall' was released. yet he still had well known hits prior to that which are still played to this day - such as; 'ben', 'one day in your life', 'rockin robin', 'farewell my summer love'... etc. even j5 songs like 'who's loving you' are wrongly attributed to michael alone, so people already knew who he was as a star.

although Michael was album orientated, I personally don't view him, or any other artist in that way. it's all about the hits for me. those are what tend to be the most memorable, have the most replay value, and actually shape the legacy for me.


the quality of the song matters to me more than who happened to write it. Michael breathed life into everything he sang and made me believe. many songwriters and musicians cannot sing. they may be able to carry a tune, but do they have the range, control, power, or timbre that is pleasant sounding? without voice, these songs cease to exist, and are mere instrumentals.

that being said, the fact that michael could write was impressive, considering that it wasn't something he initially did. it came from the imagination and being able to articulate his ideas the best way he knew how (which was an artform in itself). his process, and various forms of expression, were not technical. they were emotionally driven. that's what makes somebody an artist; the ability to convey feeling. actors often don't write their dialogues or scenes, but where would these movies be without them?

I celebrate Michael's uniqueness. I don't judge him based on the standards set by the (rock) establishment, or compare him to other artists. I love that he was a showman who used imagery, as well as sound, to create an experience. clearly millions felt the same way, as his accomplishments speak for themself. no sense in backtracking now.
 
Back
Top