Latest on MJJC

Would you say the HIStory album is a masterpiece of artistry (even by MJ’s standards) or an attempt to be “trendy”?

R1chard said:
But yeah, I'm not saying every song has to be universally relatable (which is something that can be a weakness in itself - see Bon Jovi).
Click to expand...
I doubt there's anybody, including the original artists, that has much experience with a disco duck, a rock lobster, raining men, or a purple people eater. 🤣 But many people listen to and/or sing those songs. I think the song on Youtube with the most amount of views is Baby Shark, like over 11 billion or something. There's many people who listen to music in languages they don't speak or understand. La Bamba by Los Lobos was #1 on the Hot 100 in the USA, one of the few songs that is not in English to be a big hit on Top 40 radio. What about instrumental songs or artists? Do you think most of the people who listen to death metal, horrorcore, goth, showtunes, & gangsta rap do the things the songs are about? Did Johnny Cash really "shoot a man just to watch him die"? Since his name is Johnny, his father couldn't have named him "Sue" either. Unless he changed it later, lol. I've heard Paul McCartney sing "Hey Hey We're The Monkees". He was never a member, but Ringo did make a pizza commercial with them in the 1980s.

People also put meanings into songs that are not there, like Charles Manson thinking songs on The Beatles' white album are about a race war. Or listeners playing Beatles records backwards to get clues about Paul McCartney getting killed in a car accident and replaced with a lookalike. Are you aware of the Kidz Bop series of albums? I don't think that the children singing the songs or the ones listening to the CDs are relating to what the songs are about. Many people listen to music for entertainment, that's all. That might be one reason tribute bands & Elvis Presley impersonators are popular. Some people even get married by an Elvis impersonator instead of a preacher.
 
He was due another album but i think a bit of both. I liked History . Despite songs like This Time Around and a few other songs that were difficult to even make out vocally. Then suddenly he would have songs that were very clear. Scream imo was one of the worst songs he ever did. You are Not Alone , a nice song but a cringe video and now we know R Kelly wrote it makes it even worse. Also putting old songs that he wrote 10 years plus before on it maybe not a good idea. The tour well , we know how terrible that was. The album had some great songs and terrible songs . Similar to Dangerous but it was not quite as good. However the damage was already done by then . Tabloid Junkie however was my favorite song despite the whispered verses .
 
I like the album and I think it's a masterpiece. Is it his best? No. But that doesn't mean that it can't be good. I personally like that he included some ballads like, Childhood, Smile, Little Susie, etc. And he also sprinkled in some songs that are the complete opposite. This Time Around. D.S., Tabloid Junkie, etc. That's just my personal opinion : )
 
Andymachine said:
Despite songs like This Time Around and a few other songs that were difficult to even make out vocally.
Click to expand...
TTA is not hard to make out vocally.


Andymachine said:
Scream imo was one of the worst songs he ever did.
Click to expand...
I don't even wanna deal with this statement. A song that literally has only gotten better with time.


Andymachine said:
Also putting old songs that he wrote 10 years plus before on it maybe not a good idea.
Click to expand...
There's literally only one song that's that old, and it's Little Susie.
 
R1chard said:
Yeah, and in a way that's a weakness of the album. It means the songs are a lot less relatable.
Click to expand...
Michael about relatable songs:
AD: We have a question from Helen in Scotland says “If you could only perform one of your songs for the rest of your life, what would it be and why?”
MJ: Oooh, it would probably be… If I could pick more than one, if I could pick up to two or three?
AD: Yes, I think we could go that far.
MJ: Heal the World, Speechless, ummm and that’s a difficult one, I think ummm. hmmmm .. You are my Life.
AD: So you went for the ones that are kind of the biggest statements in a way, it seems to me.
MJ: Yeah because it is important they are very melodic and they have a great important message that’s kind of immortal. That can relate to any time and space you know.
mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com

Get Music – Michael Jackson – Oct 30, 2001

Anthony DeCurtis: Hello Ladies and Gentlemen this is Anthony DeCurtis your on GetMusic.com and we’re here tonight for a very special event. The King of Pop, one of the greatest artists in the histo…
mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com
Click to expand...
 
DuranDuran said:
I don't know why people here ignore it, but the entire 1st CD (or sides 1-3 on the record) are old songs. 🤣
Click to expand...

I tend to forget there's a Disc 1... and I guess many people do.

When it came out, it was marketed a "greatest hits" + an album... and there was hype because, allegedly, no one had done this before. But so, there is indeed a "greatest hits" part and an album part. At least I always understood it that way.
 
Maxym said:
I tend to forget there's a Disc 1... and I guess many people do.

When it came out, it was marketed a "greatest hits" + an album... and there was hype because, allegedly, no one had done this before. But so, there is indeed a "greatest hits" part and an album part. At least I always understood it that way.
Click to expand...
It's still part of the album, not much different from other Greatest Hits/Best Of albums where they put 2 or 3 new or previously unreleased songs on it. The first CD of HIStory later got a separate release in the USA as Greatest Hits: HIStory Volume 1, but the 2nd CD never has as far as I know. If Mike wanted the 2nd disc to be considered a separate release, he could have done like Bruce Springsteen & Guns n Roses. They released 2 individual albums (of then new material) on the same day instead of a 2 CD album. But unlike 2 separate albums, the 2 CD album sales are counted double in the USA. An album that sold gold in actual unit sales, will automatically be considered platinum. Which is also a way to spike the album charts
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
There's literally only one song that's that old, and it's Little Susie.
Click to expand...
LS is pre OTW. ES is a holdover from Dangerous sessions. TDCAU & TJ were initially demoed for Bad.

Same with some other songs that were worked on during History. Changes & DYKWYCA were demoed for Bad; MTS & DBMA for Thriller.
 
Fuzball said:
LS is pre OTW. ES is a holdover from Dangerous sessions. TDCAU & TJ were initially demoed for Bad.

Same with some other songs that were worked on during History. Changes & DYKWYCA were demoed for Bad; MTS & DBMA for Thriller.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of TDCAU and Tabloid Junkie being from the Bad sessions. I've heard of a apocalypse now having a military esque drum beat, and i've heard of TDCAU being worked on during Dangerous but not for Bad. This is also the first time ever hearing about Tabloid Junkie being demoed for Bad. Do you have any sources for that?

I think "Mister_Jay_Tee's" statement still holds because the only song on the record that's 10+ older that he wrote is Little Susie (not counting Come Together)

Also for that second part, MJ working on older songs is not something that's exclusive to the HIStory album. He did that for all his albums.
 
Themidwestcowboy said:
I've never heard of TDCAU and Tabloid Junkie being from the Bad sessions. I've heard of a apocalypse now having a military esque drum beat, and i've heard of TDCAU being worked on during Dangerous but not for Bad. This is also the first time ever hearing about Tabloid Junkie being demoed for Bad. Do you have any sources for that?
Click to expand...
someone working on Dangerous (don't recall exactly who that was; could have been Loren or his engineer) said tdcau was started during bad.

TJ was discussed here in the unreleased songs thread. iirc it was revealed in one of the seminars that the song was originally called Tabloid Jungle in the 80s
 
Agonum said:
How is You are Not Alone chasing a trend?

This Time Around… could just as well be Dallas Austin’s chasing at work, couldn’t it? In any case, I don’t feel it’s that different from some Dangerous tracks.
Click to expand...
I would argue those two songs are the only ones that could’ve been given to other artists with similar or equal success. “You Are Not Alone” especially feels like a standard R. Kelly tune. Good beats and nothing against them, but they’re definitely more chart-oriented than the rest of the album.
 
R1chard said:
Yeah, and in a way that's a weakness of the album. It means the songs are a lot less relatable.

Like, I'm not inside Michael's head, so how am I supposed to understand about media harassment? I have no experience of being strip-searched, or losing my childhood, or needing a security team, so I find that stuff really hard to care about.

That's probably a reason very few songs on HIStory get any meaningful cover versions. They're just too personal to MJ. I can play DS on guitar, but I'd never play it outside my house...
Click to expand...
If artists only made songs about other people and not about their personal experiences it would all be so uninteresting and bland imo
 
AlwaysThere said:
I would argue those two songs are the only ones that could’ve been given to other artists with similar or equal success. “You Are Not Alone” especially feels like a standard R. Kelly tune. Good beats and nothing against them, but they’re definitely more chart-oriented than the rest of the album.
Click to expand...
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think R. Kelly has a unique sound. You are Not Alone is a fairly “standard” pop ballad. It is Michael’s vocals that elevates it.
 
alexbism said:
If artists only made songs about other people and not about their personal experiences it would all be so uninteresting and bland imo
Click to expand...
During the entire history of the recording business, the majority of singers & bands didn't write their own songs. So the songs are not that likely to be about their personal life. Elton John's songs are probably about Bernie Taupin's experiences, or whoever else wrote the lyrics. Elton only writes the music. But Elton is the voice on the songs. With the band Rush, I think many of the lyrics were written by the drummer and not the lead singer. Like I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of artists who primarily make instrumental music, like with jazz & new age. There are jazz vocalists, though. But they tend to do old standards that have been recorded by many artists.
 
Agonum said:
I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think R. Kelly has a unique sound. You are Not Alone is a fairly “standard” pop ballad. It is Michael’s vocals that elevates it.
Click to expand...
That’s more so what I meant. Anyone could perform it well enough; it feels like something made specifically for the charts. MJ takes it to the next level, as he does for pretty much everything he contributes to.
 
History would rank within the top 5 best albums of all time, with Bad, Dangerous, Thriller, Off the Wall taking up the other 4 spots. This time around is my only really gripe with it, Earth Song, TDCAU, Stranger in Moscow beats any other musicians discography
 
I think HIStory is an album with quite a few tracks that were amongst his best but its not really an album I've ever been able to play from start to finish. It feels more like a collection of singles and B sides crammed together rather than a coherent album. But the theme I thought was good. It just missed a lot in sequencing, a few too many fillers, and there was no need for a watered down 'come together" almost a decade after the fact. I still rank it higher than Invincible but the thing Invincible does have over HIStory disc 2 is the sense of coherence in sequencing, albeit overblown and overwrought. The tracks that really shine for HIStory are Scream, TDCAU, YRNA, Earth Song, Stranger in Moscow. Any of those tracks wwuld be among his finest. A few tracks I personally like are Little Susie, Tabloid Junkie, Money, and I don't mind the original HIStory song. I am not a fan of the remaining songs. 2BAD seems try hard. I think Childhood is a decent autobiographical song but its not one I choose to listen to all that often. D.S didn't need to happen. Come Together feels awkward on this record. I think given all he'd been through it was a triumph that he was able to release some songs that reached number 1 and some that have had recent resurgence. I think history and time has been kind to HIStory in retrospect. If I were ranking Michael Jackson albums I'd put them something like this:

Thriller
Dangerous (I think these two are quite close)

BAD
Off The Wall (I think these two are quite close as well)

HIStory
================ Daylight ==================




Invincible
BOTDF - only due to lack of nnew tracks or it would leapfrog Invincible.
 
Hurley509 said:
I think HIStory is an album with quite a few tracks that were amongst his best but its not really an album I've ever been able to play from start to finish. It feels more like a collection of singles and B sides crammed together rather than a coherent album. But the theme I thought was good. It just missed a lot in sequencing, a few too many fillers, and there was no need for a watered down 'come together" almost a decade after the fact. I still rank it higher than Invincible but the thing Invincible does have over HIStory disc 2 is the sense of coherence in sequencing, albeit overblown and overwrought. The tracks that really shine for HIStory are Scream, TDCAU, YRNA, Earth Song, Stranger in Moscow. Any of those tracks wwuld be among his finest. A few tracks I personally like are Little Susie, Tabloid Junkie, Money, and I don't mind the original HIStory song. I am not a fan of the remaining songs. 2BAD seems try hard. I think Childhood is a decent autobiographical song but its not one I choose to listen to all that often. D.S didn't need to happen. Come Together feels awkward on this record. I think given all he'd been through it was a triumph that he was able to release some songs that reached number 1 and some that have had recent resurgence. I think history and time has been kind to HIStory in retrospect. If I were ranking Michael Jackson albums I'd put them something like this:

Thriller
Dangerous (I think these two are quite close)

BAD
Off The Wall (I think these two are quite close as well)

HIStory
================ Daylight ==================




Invincible
BOTDF - only due to lack of nnew tracks or it would leapfrog Invincible.
Click to expand...
It goes
Dangerous>Thriller>History>Bad>BOTDF>OTW>Invincible
 
Themidwestcowboy said:
I think "Mister_Jay_Tee's" statement still holds because the only song on the record that's 10+ older that he wrote is Little Susie (not counting Come Together)
Click to expand...
Thank you, and yeah, it does. Little Susie is the only original song that's 10+ years old, which is what the guy said. Everything else was, around 5 to 6 years old. As far as we know. Come Together and Smile, as covers though, are each a few decades old though.
Themidwestcowboy said:
Also for that second part, MJ working on older songs is not something that's exclusive to the HIStory album. He did that for all his albums.
Click to expand...
I was thinking of making a thread about this actually.

Thriller has songs predating it, so do Bad, Dangerous and HIStory. Not really Invincible though; seems like it's all material from the "Invincible Sessions", just 3 different ones.
 
I dont know how anyone can say HIStory is better than BAD. and I dont know how anyone can say BAD is better than Thriller.
 
Bad is a perfect album with several perfect songs. Thriller is an album of Perfect Songs. With a couple that technically aren't.
 
Hurley509 said:
I think HIStory is an album with quite a few tracks that were amongst his best but its not really an album I've ever been able to play from start to finish. It feels more like a collection of singles and B sides crammed together rather than a coherent album. But the theme I thought was good. It just missed a lot in sequencing, a few too many fillers, and there was no need for a watered down 'come together" almost a decade after the fact. I still rank it higher than Invincible but the thing Invincible does have over HIStory disc 2 is the sense of coherence in sequencing, albeit overblown and overwrought. The tracks that really shine for HIStory are Scream, TDCAU, YRNA, Earth Song, Stranger in Moscow. Any of those tracks wwuld be among his finest. A few tracks I personally like are Little Susie, Tabloid Junkie, Money, and I don't mind the original HIStory song. I am not a fan of the remaining songs. 2BAD seems try hard. I think Childhood is a decent autobiographical song but its not one I choose to listen to all that often. D.S didn't need to happen. Come Together feels awkward on this record. I think given all he'd been through it was a triumph that he was able to release some songs that reached number 1 and some that have had recent resurgence. I think history and time has been kind to HIStory in retrospect. If I were ranking Michael Jackson albums I'd put them something like this:
Click to expand...
Interesting, to me it is his most cohesive album, all the songs are about his anger, sadness and frustration and sonically they match, the production feels moody and dark/angry and dystopian in some parts. The only song I really dislike and don't really feel belongs here is Come Together but to me the rest is really solid and the sequencing is great
 
DuranDuran said:
During the entire history of the recording business, the majority of singers & bands didn't write their own songs. So the songs are not that likely to be about their personal life. Elton John's songs are probably about Bernie Taupin's experiences, or whoever else wrote the lyrics. Elton only writes the music. But Elton is the voice on the songs. With the band Rush, I think many of the lyrics were written by the drummer and not the lead singer. Like I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of artists who primarily make instrumental music, like with jazz & new age. There are jazz vocalists, though. But they tend to do old standards that have been recorded by many artists.
Click to expand...
I know this, but isn't it more interesting the hear the stories and experiences a very unique individual such as Michael Jackson has to share rather than some random song writer that will write just another love or breakup song ?
To me a piece of art is a way for an artist to share a bit of his story, of course no one other than him can relate to being the most famous person on Earth, but i'm glad he shared how it felt just so we can understand him a bit more, in a way it helps getting to know him and his life by hearing his side of the story, like an autobiography.
 
R1chard said:
Yeah, and in a way that's a weakness of the album. It means the songs are a lot less relatable.

Like, I'm not inside Michael's head, so how am I supposed to understand about media harassment? I have no experience of being strip-searched, or losing my childhood, or needing a security team, so I find that stuff really hard to care about.

That's probably a reason very few songs on HIStory get any meaningful cover versions. They're just too personal to MJ. I can play DS on guitar, but I'd never play it outside my house...
Click to expand...
I agree and ironically enough his unique circumstances also made it hard to 'believe' him (for me) when he actually did songs more relatable to the public later on; like when he sings about casually walking into a park with a girl I immediately think: yeah right, MJ in park without a crowd of people :)
 
BTW, I always wished History would be a 100% protest concept album; only songs about his side of the (allegation) story and explaining who he was instead of a few songs that touch on that subject. But now that I think of those songs: did History actually bring something new besides D.S.? I mean that one was definitely about the allegations but all the other songs..? Thematically they could have easily been on Bad or Dangerous too right..?
 
alexbism said:
I know this, but isn't it more interesting the hear the stories and experiences a very unique individual such as Michael Jackson has to share rather than some random song writer that will write just another love or breakup song ?
To me a piece of art is a way for an artist to share a bit of his story, of course no one other than him can relate to being the most famous person on Earth, but i'm glad he shared how it felt just so we can understand him a bit more, in a way it helps getting to know him and his life by hearing his side of the story, like an autobiography.
Click to expand...
Many people don't listen to music for the lyrics per se. Like they used to say on American Bandstand "It has a good beat and I can dance to it". An artist writing their own material does not necessarily mean it's about their experiences though. KC & The Sunshine Band songs are usually about partying and dancing, Lionel Richie's are mostly love songs. Public Enemy songs are about political/social topics. A gospel artist music will generally be about Jesus, God & other people in the bible, or just positive thinking songs. Some older country songs are story songs like El Paso by Marty Robbins. There's others who make comedy music like Spike Jones, Ray Stevens, & Weird Al.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top