Latest on MJJC

Why was everything out of place/wrong with Invincible?

Fuzball said:
Does anyone like 'shout' or 'one more chance'?
Click to expand...
“Shout” is one of MJ’s best post-Bad songs, and nobody will convince me otherwise. I wish the vocals were mixed louder, but overall it’s one of the most unique and unparalleled tracks in his catalog.

“One More Chance” is… fine. Leagues better than “Cry,” but that’s not saying much. It would’ve made a better fit on the album over some other songs.
 
Fuzball said:
Does anyone like 'shout' or 'one more chance'?
Click to expand...
One More Chance I like because, like Don’t Walk Away, it’s a well-written, well-structured song that avoids all gimmicks and all pretensions; it’s just a nice melody that doesn’t try to be anthemic like Cry. It would have fit right in on Destiny or Moving Violation. What does tamper my appreciation of OMC is that the female background vocals should have been done by MJ himself, like in the old days, and that the high note right before each chorus isn’t sung by MJ but taken straight from Kelly’s demo vocal. More instances of MJ phoning it in his later years.
 
All the other songs mentioned, Shout, 2000 Watts and Privacy, fail either by not being MJ enough (the first two) or by having an unworthy melody (Privacy).

The only way I can even explain the appearance of Privacy on the album is if MJ wrote the music. If it’s another case of Darkchild having provided the song with the melody (and maybe even the lyrics) already written, then it’s unbelievable that it was chosen for the album.
 
AlwaysThere said:
“Shout” is one of MJ’s best post-Bad songs, and nobody will convince me otherwise. I wish the vocals were mixed louder, but overall it’s one of the most unique and unparalleled tracks in his catalog.

“One More Chance” is… fine. Leagues better than “Cry,” but that’s not saying much. It would’ve made a better fit on the album over some other songs.
Click to expand...
Michael Jackson and his team just took the hook from The Isley Brothers' 'Shout' party song (1959).
kreen said:
All the other songs mentioned, Shout, 2000 Watts and Privacy, fail either by not being MJ enough (the first two) or by having an unworthy melody (Privacy).

The only way I can even explain the appearance of Privacy on the album is if MJ wrote the music. If it’s another case of Darkchild having provided the song with the melody (and maybe even the lyrics) already written, then it’s unbelievable that it was chosen for the album.
Click to expand...
They included 'Privacy' because they wanted lyrically the 'Invincible' album to have another 'Leave Me Alone' (like the 'BAD' album), or to have another 'Why You Wanna Trip On Me' (like the 'Dangerous' album), or to have another 'Tabloid Junkie' (like the 'HIStory' album), and so on.

It has been the same formula for years.

On the other hand, '2000 Watts' has been generally described as one of the highlights of the album, due to the fact that it is an unconventional song musically, vocally, but also lyrically because of its sexual metaphors and innuendos.
 
I know i am off topic guys,but where will the ,,MJ One,, birthday livestream take place?(i am sorry if the question sounds stupid)
On Twitter,Facebook or YT?(again i'm sorry if i sound dumb,i can be sometimes)
 
mj_frenzy said:
On the other hand, '2000 Watts' has been generally described as one of the highlights of the album, due to the fact that it is an unconventional song musically, vocally, but also lyrically because of its sexual metaphors and innuendos.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it doesn't feel or sound like an MJ song. They've even changed his voice electronically.
 
kreen said:
Yeah, but it doesn't feel or sound like an MJ song. They've even changed his voice electronically.
Click to expand...
You’ve been using the defense of “doesn’t feel or sound like an MJ song,” which I feel is a gross misunderstanding of what an MJ song even is. There’s no “one size fits all” template for an MJ song in the same way there is for, say, Prince. He was a chameleon; he hopped from one genre to another and could fit in anywhere. No two of his albums sound the same, which makes me question if there even IS such a thing as the “MJ sound.”

I think it’s valid to not like a song, or prefer MJ in a certain genre. But the idea that a song isn’t good because it doesn’t fit a mold feels pretty dismissive of the fact that MJ did everything, and did it well.
 
AlwaysThere said:
You’ve been using the defense of “doesn’t feel or sound like an MJ song,” which I feel is a gross misunderstanding of what an MJ song even is.
Click to expand...
What I mean by « an MJ song » here is a song that features his voice in a recognizable manner —so not 2000 Watts, where his voice is artificially lowered — and a song that features MJ’s usual stylistic trademarks, from the yelps to the hee-hees, from the hiccups to the shomeons, from the aooows to the gulps. So almost none of Invincible.
 
AlwaysThere said:
You’ve been using the defense of “doesn’t feel or sound like an MJ song,” which I feel is a gross misunderstanding of what an MJ song even is. There’s no “one size fits all” template for an MJ song in the same way there is for, say, Prince.
Click to expand...
Um what?Prince was a big chameleon himself,just like Michael.
And there is definetly a sound that you can call ,,the MJ sound,, (and same for Prince too)
Bad and Dangerous represent ,,the MJ sound,, the best in my opinion.
 
kreen said:
What I mean by « an MJ song » here is a song that features his voice in a recognizable manner —so not 2000 Watts, where his voice is artificially lowered — and a song that features MJ’s usual stylistic trademarks, from the yelps to the hee-hees, from the hiccups to the shomeons, from the aooows to the gulps. So almost none of Invincible.
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree.
Add to that also ,,a song where Michael does his own background vocals himself,, and that's what ,,a MJ song,, is for me too.
 
kreen said:
What I mean by « an MJ song » here is a song that features his voice in a recognizable manner —so not 2000 Watts, where his voice is artificially lowered — and a song that features MJ’s usual stylistic trademarks, from the yelps to the hee-hees, from the hiccups to the shomeons, from the aooows to the gulps. So almost none of Invincible.
Click to expand...
'2000 Watts' has certain of his usual vocal trademarks (such as, 'aooow').

But his voice is artificially altered also in other songs, like in 'Tabloid Junkie', or in 'Shout' where in both songs it is artificially pitched up slightly.

Of course, it has been said that in '2000 Watts' Michael Jackson actually sings with his real, low voice.

He also did it in the past, for example in lines of the 'Burn This Disco Out' song ("Keep the boogie alright … Everybody just get on down").

Also, Teddy Riley (who co-wrote and co-produced '2000 Watts') was asked about that, and he unequivocally stated that in '2000 Watts' Michael Jackson did sing that low and the only (vocal) effect was a Yamaha symphonic preset.
AlwaysThere said:
You’ve been using the defense of “doesn’t feel or sound like an MJ song,” which I feel is a gross misunderstanding of what an MJ song even is. There’s no “one size fits all” template for an MJ song in the same way there is for, say, Prince. He was a chameleon; he hopped from one genre to another and could fit in anywhere. No two of his albums sound the same, which makes me question if there even IS such a thing as the “MJ sound.”

I think it’s valid to not like a song, or prefer MJ in a certain genre. But the idea that a song isn’t good because it doesn’t fit a mold feels pretty dismissive of the fact that MJ did everything, and did it well.
Click to expand...
Certain music critics and even many of his (older) fans opined that the vocal style in the new jack swing songs did not suit him at all, and that he should have stayed away from it.
 
mj_frenzy said:
Even many of his (older) fans opined that the vocal style in the new jack swing songs did not suit him at all, and that he should have stayed away from it.
Click to expand...
And?Who cares?It's their opinions. There are just as many fans who actually like those New Jack Swing songs.
Not to mention Remember The Time was one of those tracks and it became a Jackson classic. His powerful vocals seem to fit that song.
Just saying
 
Many performers have had their voices altered on records long before 2000 Watts. Such as John Lennon on Beatles songs like Tomorrow Never Knows & Strawberry Fields Forever. George Martin has said that John was insecure about his voice and always wanted him (Martin) to do something to it. You can even count Alvin & The Chipmunks in the 1950s. George Michael, Stevie Wonder, Funkadelic, Prince and others have used sped up Chipmunk style vocals on some songs. Same on 1980s songs like Attack Of The Name Game by Stacy Lattisaw & Jam On It by Newcleus. Stevie is also one of the first (along with Joe Walsh) to use a talkbox in Top 40 popular music. Then later Peter Frampton & especially Roger Troutman really popularized it. Some disco songs had a vocoder, and it was on 1980s electrofunk & hip hop tracks by Midnight Star, Whodini, & Egyptian Lover.
 
mj_frenzy said:
Also, Teddy Riley (who co-wrote and co-produced '2000 Watts') was asked about that, and he unequivocally stated that in '2000 Watts' Michael Jackson did sing that low and the only (vocal) effect was a Yamaha symphonic preset.
Click to expand...
I know. He’s lying. If you pitch up the song, you can hear MJ’s real voice. It was pitched down for some reason.
 
@PurpleThriller, there is not a sound that you can call 'the Michael Jackson sound' because each one of his adult studio albums has a pre-dominant different sound from the others:

The 'Off The Wall' album has a mostly disco sound.

The 'Thriller' album has a mostly pop sound.

The 'BAD' album has a mostly funky sound (although @DuranDuran does not agree with that).

The 'Dangerous' album has a mostly new jack swing sound.

The 'HIStory' album has a mixture of different sounds.

The 'Invincible' album has a mostly RnB sound.
kreen said:
I know. He’s lying. If you pitch up the song, you can hear MJ’s real voice. It was pitched down for some reason.
Click to expand...
Still, this does not prove that his voice had been artificially pitched down or that he had sung with his real low voice, because in both cases if you pitch up the song you can hear his real voice.
 
mj_frenzy said:
Still, this does not prove that his voice had been artificially pitched down or that he had sung with his real low voice, because in both cases if you pitch up the song you can hear his real voice.
Click to expand...
The voice on 2000 Watts doesn't sound like other instances of MJ using his lower register. The lower pitch is used throughout in such a uniform way that it sounds like an effect was just applied to the vocals. It was probably another way the geniuses who called the shots on that album thought they could present MJ "in a new light" and appeal to the younger generation for whom the classic MJ style was their parents' sound.
 
kreen said:
The voice on 2000 Watts doesn't sound like other instances of MJ using his lower register. The lower pitch is used throughout in such a uniform way that it sounds like an effect was just applied to the vocals.
Click to expand...
His voice on '2000 Watts' sounds like other instances where Michael Jackson uses his lower register.

At one point in 'The Wiz' film he also sings briefly with a similar lower register.

Or, at the end of 'Man In The Mirror' (Grammy Awards 1988) he also sings briefly with a similar lower register.

Also, people who were close to him are aware of that real, low voice that he used to make on certain instances (like, on prank calls).
kreen said:
It was probably another way the geniuses who called the shots on that album thought they could present MJ "in a new light" and appeal to the younger generation for whom the classic MJ style was their parents' sound.
Click to expand...
Apparently it was Michael Jackson himself who thought that it was a good idea to record and include such a vocally unconventional song.

After all, it was his album.
 
mj_frenzy said:
The 'BAD' album has a mostly funky sound (although @DuranDuran does not agree with that).
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree, also. Bad is his most commercial, pop sounding album, more so than Thriller, more so than Off The Wall.
mj_frenzy said:
'2000 Watts' has certain of his usual vocal trademarks (such as, 'aooow').

But his voice is artificially altered also in other songs, like in 'Tabloid Junkie', or in 'Shout' where in both songs it is artificially pitched up slightly.
Click to expand...
I heard about Tabloid Junkie being slightly pitched up but never about Shout.
mj_frenzy said:
Of course, it has been said that in '2000 Watts' Michael Jackson actually sings with his real, low voice.

He also did it in the past, for example in lines of the 'Burn This Disco Out' song ("Keep the boogie alright … Everybody just get on down").
Click to expand...
Everytime I hear someone talk about Michael supposed “real, low voice” I cringe, especially when the given examples are from songs. As a singer, he used his phenomenal range in different ways which best suited the song he was singing.

Burn This Disco Out is not an example of Michael using his “real voice” because there was never a fake voice, it’s simply different parts of his range that he decides to use more or less on different occasions. In Burn This Disco Out, you can definitely hear that the lower notes, were not something which he felt very comfortable with because his speaking voice was indeed naturally high. In fact, he doesn’t sound very stable on the lower notes, neither in Burn This Disco Out nor in You Can’t Win…not even during the Grammys 1988 performance of Man In The Mirror.

That was simply not his strength, vocally, belts were.

I find this to be something of a myth in the fan community. Some fans believe that Michael’s voice was very very deep and that he was faking his higher voice, which we are all used to, that it was an act, when it clearly wasn’t. Even when he would cough, e.g. during the 93’ Mexico deposition, you can hear that his tone is bright and rather high, not baritonal.

When he wasn’t in the spotlight, and more relaxed, his tone seemed to be a slightly lower, but not that much lower than in interviews and not nearly as low as some people like to pretend. It was also in later years that his voice got deeper, so in 1983, he wouldn’t have been able to sing or speak as low as in 2009.

In conclusion, my point is that the idea that Michael had this Johnny Deppish, deep voice when at home with his family is ludicrous.
 
kreen said:
The voice on 2000 Watts doesn't sound like other instances of MJ using his lower register. The lower pitch is used throughout in such a uniform way that it sounds like an effect was just applied to the vocals. It was probably another way the geniuses who called the shots on that album thought they could present MJ "in a new light" and appeal to the younger generation for whom the classic MJ style was their parents' sound.
Click to expand...
(acappella 01:28)

"How can we preach, when all we make this world to be
Is a living hell torturing our minds?
We all must unite, to turn darkness to light
And the love in our hearts will shine"

This part shows MJ singing in his lower register, similar to parts in 2000 Watts. Also, don't forget MJ's voice acting as the Major in Ghosts.

I do agree however, in my opinion, that the vocals (or part of them) have been tampered with slightly. Obviously some sort of filter effect over the vocals, as well as maybe a lowered pitch/speed. Certain parts of the vocals just do not sound natural. I know Mikes lower register vocals, and some of them are just too much.

Just listen to the 2000 Watts acappella here on the word "Deaaal": (0:49)


An edit with a slightly higher pitch/speed to the song, makes it sound more natural and closer sounding to the vocals of Shout:


Now, could Michael actually go down low as in the released version of 2000 Watts? He probably could by exaggerating like we all can, but it would still not have that slightly "altered" sounding tone to it, and he might not have been able to sing a whole song like that, in my opinion of course

dethorro said:
I find this to be something of a myth in the fan community. Some fans believe that Michael’s voice was very very deep and that he was faking his higher voice, which we are all used to, that it was an act, when it clearly wasn’t. Even when he would cough, e.g. during the 93’ Mexico deposition, you can hear that his tone is bright and rather high, not baritonal.

When he wasn’t in the spotlight, and more relaxed, his tone seemed to be a slightly lower, but not that much lower than in interviews and not nearly as low as some people like to pretend. It was also in later years that his voice got deeper, so in 1983, he wouldn’t have been able to sing or speak as low as in 2009.

In conclusion, my point is that the idea that Michael had this Johnny Deppish, deep voice when at home with his family is ludicrous.
Click to expand...
It's easy. A males voice can vary so much throughout the day from right after waking up where it is really, really deep, until evening/night where it is lighter. A voice can also lighten a lot after exercising (dancing in Mikes case). It can lighten if someone is nervous or tense/shy. Mike obviously was very shy in his public appearances, most of the times, so it was obvious that he would adopt the light voice manner when in public.

It might have also been from his childhood where he would be quiet and hold his voice because of his fear against his father, and the only way he would "let out" his "inner" voice was through actually singing - or when he felt at most comfortable in private.

So many variables to the voice thing. I can have the deepest manliest voice ever some mornings, yet can sound like I am speaking from my throat in the evening after a gym session where I almost have to madidate/deep breath in order to lower my voice

My opinion on this is that Michael DID have a deep manly voice (similar to This Is It conference), it's just that as soon as he was not feeling 100% comfortable, he would switch to the light one. Also, an argument made is that he also used the lighter voice often in order to not strain his vocal chords. No idea if this is true or actually works though.
 
Last edited:
mj_frenzy said:
@PurpleThriller

The 'Off The Wall' album has a mostly disco sound.

The 'Thriller' album has a mostly pop sound.

The 'BAD' album has a mostly funky sound (although @DuranDuran does not agree with that).

The 'Dangerous' album has a mostly new jack swing sound.

The 'HIStory' album has a mixture of different sounds.

The 'Invincible' album has a mostly RnB sound.
Click to expand...
True, of course, but the reason why most fans think of the MJ discography as starting with Off the Wall (or Destiny), and not as starting from his solo album Got to be There, for instance, is because there is an MJ vocal style and MJ trademarks that start with OTW and reappear throughout his work, with changes but with continuity also. With Destiny and OTW, one also sees that MJ starts to be the one who picks the songs or writes them himself.

But with Invincible, one gets the impression that these "rules" that were present from the beginning either disappear completely (the MJ hiccups, yelps and aoows) or are significantly limited (less songwriting, less involvement from MJ into the production and the arrangement). It feels like a step back towards the impersonal, production-line releases of the Motown era.
 
dethorro said:
I strongly disagree, also. Bad is his most commercial, pop sounding album, more so than Thriller, more so than Off The Wall.

I heard about Tabloid Junkie being slightly pitched up but never about Shout.

Everytime I hear someone talk about Michael supposed “real, low voice” I cringe, especially when the given examples are from songs. As a singer, he used his phenomenal range in different ways which best suited the song he was singing.

Burn This Disco Out is not an example of Michael using his “real voice” because there was never a fake voice, it’s simply different parts of his range that he decides to use more or less on different occasions. In Burn This Disco Out, you can definitely hear that the lower notes, were not something which he felt very comfortable with because his speaking voice was indeed naturally high. In fact, he doesn’t sound very stable on the lower notes, neither in Burn This Disco Out nor in You Can’t Win…not even during the Grammys 1988 performance of Man In The Mirror.

That was simply not his strength, vocally, belts were.

I find this to be something of a myth in the fan community. Some fans believe that Michael’s voice was very very deep and that he was faking his higher voice, which we are all used to, that it was an act, when it clearly wasn’t. Even when he would cough, e.g. during the 93’ Mexico deposition, you can hear that his tone is bright and rather high, not baritonal.

When he wasn’t in the spotlight, and more relaxed, his tone seemed to be a slightly lower, but not that much lower than in interviews and not nearly as low as some people like to pretend. It was also in later years that his voice got deeper, so in 1983, he wouldn’t have been able to sing or speak as low as in 2009.

In conclusion, my point is that the idea that Michael had this Johnny Deppish, deep voice when at home with his family is ludicrous.
Click to expand...
His speaking voice was not naturally high, but deep.

He wanted his speaking voice to have a softer and more youthful tone publicly, that is why, he used to fake his higher speaking voice on many public occasions.

He even admitted that to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (in 2000-2001) for example, when he said to him that he faked his higher speaking voice while accepting all those awards at the Grammy Awards Ceremony in 1984.

One can hear his real, deep voice in the live 'In The Closet' segment (HIStory Tour), where he feels very comfortable with it.

The real, deep voice runs in the Jackson family's genes.

Like, Janet Jackson whose real voice is actually deep, but she prefers to fake her higher speaking and singing voice on many occasions.
Pentum said:
(acappella 01:28)

"How can we preach, when all we make this world to be
Is a living hell torturing our minds?
We all must unite, to turn darkness to light
And the love in our hearts will shine"

This part shows MJ singing in his lower register, similar to parts in 2000 Watts. Also, don't forget MJ's voice acting as the Major in Ghosts.

I do agree however, in my opinion, that the vocals (or part of them) have been tampered with slightly. Obviously some sort of filter effect over the vocals, as well as maybe a lowered pitch/speed. Certain parts of the vocals just do not sound natural. I know Mikes lower register vocals, and some of them are just too much.

Just listen to the 2000 Watts acappella here on the word "Deaaal": (0:49)


An edit with a slightly higher pitch/speed to the song, makes it sound more natural and closer sounding to the vocals of Shout:


Now, could Michael actually go down low as in the released version of 2000 Watts? He probably could by exaggerating like we all can, but it would still not have that slightly "altered" sounding tone to it, and he might not have been able to sing a whole song like that, in my opinion of course


It's easy. A males voice can vary so much throughout the day from right after waking up where it is really, really deep, until evening/night where it is lighter. A voice can also lighten a lot after exercising (dancing in Mikes case). It can lighten if someone is nervous or tense/shy. Mike obviously was very shy in his public appearances, most of the times, so it was obvious that he would adopt the light voice manner when in public.

It might have also been from his childhood where he would be quiet and hold his voice because of his fear against his father, and the only way he would "let out" his "inner" voice was through actually singing - or when he felt at most comfortable in private.

So many variables to the voice thing. I can have the deepest manliest voice ever some mornings, yet can sound like I am speaking from my throat in the evening after a gym session where I almost have to madidate/deep breath in order to lower my voice

My opinion on this is that Michael DID have a deep manly voice (similar to This Is It conference), it's just that as soon as he was not feeling 100% comfortable, he would switch to the light one. Also, an argument made is that he also used the lighter voice often in order to not strain his vocal chords. No idea if this is true or actually works though.
Click to expand...
It is true because it was confirmed by his long-time, personal vocal coach Seth Riggs.
kreen said:
True, of course, but the reason why most fans think of the MJ discography as starting with Off the Wall (or Destiny), and not as starting from his solo album Got to be There, for instance, is because there is an MJ vocal style and MJ trademarks that start with OTW and reappear throughout his work, with changes but with continuity also. With Destiny and OTW, one also sees that MJ starts to be the one who picks the songs or writes them himself.

But with Invincible, one gets the impression that these "rules" that were present from the beginning either disappear completely (the MJ hiccups, yelps and aoows) or are significantly limited (less songwriting, less involvement from MJ into the production and the arrangement). It feels like a step back towards the impersonal, production-line releases of the Motown era.
Click to expand...
It appears that Michael Jackson became insecure about his own song-writing and production abilities, especially after what happened with the 'HIStory' album in which he was hugely involved.

When top executives from the record company listened to the entire 'HIStory' album (second disc) during an exclusive sneak preview before its release, they did not like it at all.

They said nothing positive about it, they simply stood up, and they immediately left the room, as revealed by Bruce Swedien.

That was apparently a huge blow to Michael Jackson's self-confidence, which also seems to explain his minimal involvement in the subsequent, studio album ('Invincible').
 
Lol this thread again. It’s to the point that this has become a fetish of some kind. I get it, to me Invincible is my least favorite MJ solo album because of a multitude of reasons but some really take it too far, acting like this is the worst thing that ever happened to mankind. He released an album and tried something different and didn’t succeed (imo), well that’s the name of the game, especially if you have been consistently putting out classic records since the 70s. The funny thing is Invincible wouldn’t be this hot topic of discussion if he had released an album in 2003 or after trial.
 
mj_frenzy said:
It appears that Michael Jackson became insecure about his own song-writing and production abilities, especially after what happened with the 'HIStory' album in which he was hugely involved.

When top executives from the record company listened to the entire 'HIStory' album (second disc) during an exclusive sneak preview before its release, they did not like it at all.

They said nothing positive about it, they simply stood up, and they immediately left the room, as revealed by Bruce Swedien.

That was apparently a huge blow to Michael Jackson's self-confidence, which also seems to explain his minimal involvement in the subsequent, studio album ('Invincible').
Click to expand...
Bur they were wrong! weren't they? The album was successful and Michael would have known that, not to mention the HIStory tour. So it does not seem plausible that Michael lost his confidence due to a bunch of corporate people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top