Rare Songs/B-Sides?

[Seanc]

Michael didn't really have many B Sides...I don't think he liked having them.

 

[SoS]

Here's the thing. I posted a comment earlier saying this exact thing. Without a physical, tangible object (i.e. 7" or 12" single) there is no such thing as a B side. But then I wondered if I'd misunderstood @SoS 's question. If they are specifically talking about songs that Michael originally released as B sides but which are now available online then I can understand people continuing to use that term (although maybe not since he often used previous album tracks as B sides)

But, generally speaking, in this streaming era? Yeah, it's a meaningless concept now.

Ah! (duh me haha) Thank YOU .. (for context)

 

[DuranDuran]

It's just a case of offering value. A lot of people would pick up a single like Jam, see it has 4 versions of the same song, and put it straight back down. Same thing if it's just got the album version of Girlfriend.

On the other hand, if you had an unreleased song like Carousel, Price of Fame, Al Capone or Sunset Driver, every time a new single came out, you'd suddenly find that every MJ fan was buying every CD single.

Unlikely. Most people didn't buy an album and a single from it. They bought 1 or the other. So they wouldn't know that a song is exclusive to the 45 or maxi single. Sometimes B-sides were only on a 12" maxi single or in Prince's case, a longer version of the B-side instead of the 45 edit. So unless a person is interested in dance remixes, they won't buy it. Not every place sold maxi singles anyway. It's usually hardcore fans who are aware of exclusive B-side songs (Prince, Sting, Depeche Mode, Tori Amos, etc.). Many people don't even care about an artists album. They only care about the songs they heard on the radio. That's why Greatest Hits/Best Of compilations are popular and there's also oldies radio stations. With some artists, their Greatest Hits sold way more than any of their regular albums (Eagles, ABBA, Queen, The Carpenters, Johnny Mathis, etc.)

Here's the thing. I posted a comment earlier saying this exact thing. Without a physical, tangible object (i.e. 7" or 12" single) there is no such thing as a B side.

Non-album songs put on a CD single were also called B-sides. Sometimes there were multiple extra tracks up to 3 or 4. Although a CD only has 1 side. Not exactly the same thing, but some artists like Mariah Carey would record different vocals for remixes. In some cases the remix or re-recorded version was on the single and the music video. One example is No One Is To Blame by Howard Jones. The single version has Phil Collins playing drums and on background vocals, Phil isn't on the album version. I had Howard's album already before that was released as a single, so I knew it was different. Some people would buy these albums and get upset that the radio/video version wasn't on it, lol. There was song Whitney Houston had out in the 1990s called If I Told You That. The album version is Whitney solo, but the single version is a George Michael duet. The 12" version of Mike's You Can't Win is different from the one on The Wiz soundtrack & movie.

 

[zinniabooklover]

Non-album songs put on a CD single were also called B-sides. Sometimes there were multiple extra tracks up to 3 or 4. Although a CD only has 1 side. Not exactly the same thing, but some artists like Mariah Carey would record different vocals for remixes. In some cases the remix or re-recorded version was on the single and the music video. One example is No One Is To Blame by Howard Jones. The single version has Phil Collins playing drums and on background vocals, Phil isn't on the album version. I had Howard's album already before that was released as a single, so I knew it was different. Some people would buy these albums and get upset that the radio/video version wasn't on it, lol. There was song Whitney Houston had out in the 1990s called If I Told You That. The album version is Whitney solo, but the single version is a George Michael duet. The 12" version of Mike's You Can't Win is different from the one on The Wiz soundtrack & movie.

I know. I lived through that era.

 

[DuranDuran]

I know. I lived through that era.

In Japan, the version of albums there sometimes have extra songs not released anywhere else. Also in more recent years various stores have different versions of albums where some of the songs are different (Target exclusive, Barnes & Noble, Best Buy). This is even done with DVDs like a different cover for a specific store or a steelbook cover instead of the regular plastic one.

 

[MJJuniorSinceMW]

In Japan, the version of albums there sometimes have extra songs not released anywhere else. Also in more recent years various stores have different versions of albums where some of the songs are different (Target exclusive, Barnes & Noble, Best Buy). This is even done with DVDs like a different cover for a specific store or a steelbook cover instead of the regular plastic one.

You‘re right, that’s the closest thing to having a b-side in recent years. Like with the different „King Of Pop“ releases around the world. Great observation &
comparison on your part.

How great it would have been, when on each of the different Invincible CD’s (I’m talking about the colored covers) there would have been one different hidden track for each color.

 

[R1chard]

If they are specifically talking about songs that Michael originally released as B sides but which are now available online then I can understand people continuing to use that term (although maybe not since he often used previous album tracks as B sides)

Yeah, if we mean actual "B-Sides", ie from a vinyl or CD, then MJ only had a handful in his whole career. Come Together being one. It's sad that this stands out as a rare example.

I guess more recently, these have simply been labelled as "previously unreleased", or just "extras". It's actually pretty sad that in the last decade, albums stopped having 12 tracks, and instead started to have 10 tracks and "2 exclusive bonus tracks!!"

Michael didn't really have many B Sides...I don't think he liked having them.

Yeah, that's the strange part.

I think in the UK he only had 7 number ones. Most singles would get to number 3 or 4. It could easily have been double or triple this number if they'd put in a little effort with the actual release.

Unlikely. Most people didn't buy an album and a single from it. They bought 1 or the other. So they wouldn't know that a song is exclusive to the 45 or maxi single.

I'm not talking about most people. Specifically MJ fans, who might think "I'm just gonna buy the album". These are the people Sony should try to convert into people who say "I have to buy the new single because it's the only place I can get Carousel!"

Also in more recent years various stores have different versions of albums where some of the songs are different (Target exclusive, Barnes & Noble, Best Buy).

And that's a really sucky practice. I blame Americans for being gullible enough to accept it.

How great it would have been, when on each of the different Invincible CD’s (I’m talking about the colored covers) there would have been one different hidden track for each color.

That would be ****** disgusting. Taking advantage of your customers just turns them off. I don't live in a world where that's great.

A single for £1.99 is very reasonable if you get 3 brand new tracks with it. But it's totally unacceptable to sell a £14.99 album multiple times just to get one extra song.

I was happy enough to buy one copy of Invincible. There's absolutely no way I would buy 4 versions of it.

 

[DuranDuran]

That would be ****** disgusting. Taking advantage of your customers just turns them off. I don't live in a world where that's great.

A single for £1.99 is very reasonable if you get 3 brand new tracks with it. But it's totally unacceptable to sell a £14.99 album multiple times just to get one extra song.

I was happy enough to buy one copy of Invincible. There's absolutely no way I would buy 4 versions of it.

How is that taking advantage of customers? People buy & collect all kinds of things, like Funko Pops or MCU popcorn bins. Years ago there was a person who paid $24,000 for Paul McCartney's birth certificate. Some rock bands like KISS make more money from their merchandising than their records. I remember acts like New Kids On The Block & MC Hammer had 1-900 phone numbers to call which cost a certain amount of money for each minute. People, mainly teens, called it. People also pay hundreds of dollars to see veteran acts in concert like The Rolling Stones and some current ones too like Taylor Swift. That's more money than buying 4 copies of Invincible.

 

[Thatkliqkid]

The A side was the song the artist or record company wanted to highlight and promote.

B sides were literally just the secondary side of a single.

There was no rule that said it had to be a bonus track or rare or unreleased. It was literally designed as filler for the second side of a record when flipped.

People need to remember Michael came up on Motown. Go back and count how many singles he was featured on during the 70s that contained a b side not otherwise available on an album. It's a very short list.

 

[DuranDuran]

There was no rule that said it had to be a bonus track or rare or unreleased. It was literally designed as filler for the second side of a record when flipped.

People need to remember Michael came up on Motown. Go back and count how many singles he was featured on during the 70s that contained a b side not otherwise available on an album. It's a very short list.

In some cases, it was the B-side that became the big hit, not the A-side (Carl Douglas - Kung Fu Fighting, Salt n Pepa - Push It). The Beatles often had what was called a double sided hit. Both sides hit the Top 10. This is also the case with Hey Ya/The Way You Move by OutKast

Motown back then was more about having 20 of their artists record the same song than non-album B-sides. So if Mike was following that he would have released covers albums like Rod Stewart was doing with those series of Great American Songbook CDs. He did release a few remakes: It's The Falling In Love, Come Together, Girlfriend, & The Jacksons' Blame It On The Boogie.

 

[Thatkliqkid]

Motown back then was more about having 20 of their artists record the same song than non-album B-sides. So if Mike was following that he would have released covers albums like Rod Stewart was doing with those series of Great American Songbook CDs. He did release a few remakes: It's The Falling In Love, Come Together, Girlfriend, & The Jacksons' Blame It On The Boogie.

I think Michael took a lot from the school of Berry Gordy though. He learned how to craft a single based on what he was taught at 10 years old.

 

[R1chard]

How is that taking advantage of customers?

If you can't see that being manipulated into buying an album 4 times is disrespectful, then I guess I can't help you.

There was no rule that said it had to be a bonus track or rare or unreleased. It was literally designed as filler for the second side of a record when flipped.

I'm not saying there's a rule. I'm just saying a single that offers value will sell more copies than a single that doesn't.

Releasing 3 or 4 brand new songs on a single is a purchase incentive. On the other hand, releasing a remix or live version is seen as cheap. Releasing a straight album track is even worse than that.

People need to remember Michael came up on Motown. Go back and count how many singles he was featured on during the 70s that contained a b side not otherwise available on an album. It's a very short list.

Exactly. That's the point we're making! And let's not forget the majority of his career on Motown wasn't actually that successful.

The Beatles often had what was called a double sided hit.

The Beatles were special in that a lot of the time the A-side wasn't on any album.

Can you imagine how many #1s MJ would have had if he released singles that weren't on an album? Hint: all of them.

 

[DuranDuran]

The Beatles were special in that a lot of the time the A-side wasn't on any album.

In the USA, all of the singles were on albums, because their albums released on Capitol Records (USA, Canada) were different from the ones released elsewhere. That's why The Beatles shot the album cover photo known as "butcher babies" because they didn't like that Capitol chopped up their albums

 

[DuranDuran]

If you can't see that being manipulated into buying an album 4 times is disrespectful, then I guess I can't help you.

Yeah, Mike and/or Epic Records held a gun up to people heads to force them to buy multiple copies. Invincible is not the first or the last album to have more than 1 cover. There's a video of a guy who buys the same album from different countries (mainly heavy metal acts). All of them had the same cover and songs, the only difference is the scan bar code for each country, but in some cases the songs are in a different order. The only way he could have done that is to buy imports, which most stores did not sell. He bought some from online. There's anther guy who buys the record, cassette, CD (also 8-track tape & reel to reel if there are those) of the same album. He has done this with a lot of releases. I guess these guys were manipulated too. The 2nd guy must have played the record backwards and it had a subliminal message saying "buy this album in multiple formats"

 

[Thatkliqkid]

I'm not saying there's a rule. I'm just saying a single that offers value will sell more copies than a single that doesn't.

Releasing 3 or 4 brand new songs on a single is a purchase incentive. On the other hand, releasing a remix or live version is seen as cheap. Releasing a straight album track is even worse than that.

Exactly. That's the point we're making! And let's not forget the majority of his career on Motown wasn't actually that successful.


The Beatles were special in that a lot of the time the A-side wasn't on any album.

Can you imagine how many #1s MJ would have had if he released singles that weren't on an album? Hint: all of them.

How many artists actually release a single with 3 or 4 brand-new songs? Every single I've ever bought in the mid-2000s contained either a remix, live or alternate version of the title track or something from the same album. This wasn't specific to Michael Jackson.

In my personal opinion, The Beatles are overrated. They had very little competition in way of other artists. Ditto Elvis. Ditto Cliff Richard. If they had been around in the 80's up against the likes of Prince, MJ, Madonna, Whitney, the amount of choice and genre....I doubt they'd have done as well.

 

[zinniabooklover]

In my personal opinion, The Beatles are overrated. They had very little competition in way of other artists. Ditto Elvis. Ditto Cliff Richard. If they had been around in the 80's up against the likes of Prince, MJ, Madonna, Whitney, the amount of choice and genre....I doubt they'd have done as well.

Bit confused by this.

Rolling Stones, The Beach Boys, The Who, The Kinks, The Zombies, Small Faces, Bee Gees, Dave Clark Five, The Spencer Davis Group, The Hollies, The Animals, The Searchers, The Yardbirds, Manfred Mann, The Byrds, The Pretty Things, all the Motown stuff.

Obviously loads of solo artists as well including Bob Dylan ...

 

[Mister_Jay_Tee]

You‘re right, that’s the closest thing to having a b-side in recent years. Like with the different „King Of Pop“ releases around the world. Great observation &
comparison on your part.

How great it would have been, when on each of the different Invincible CD’s (I’m talking about the colored covers) there would have been one different hidden track for each color.

Nah that's horrible actually. We don't need Taylor Swift crap. It's nice to just buy some music and not have to invest in a DLC of it later.

 

[R1chard]

In the USA, all of the singles were on albums, because their albums released on Capitol Records (USA, Canada) were different from the ones released elsewhere.

Yeah, I know. But none of the American stuff counts. I'm just talking about the original discography. They made a point of keeping albums and singles separate. Therefore both did well.

Yeah, Mike and/or Epic Records held a gun up to people heads to force them to buy multiple copies. Invincible is not the first or the last album to have more than 1 cover.

Again, I'm not talking about what's worse. I'm talking about what's bad.

It's always a crappy idea for a record company to try to make people buy an album twice just to get one song. That's all there is to say.

How many artists actually release a single with 3 or 4 brand-new songs?

Most bands in the 90s.

EVERY Oasis single came on one 4-track CD, containing 3 brand new songs you'd never heard before (occasionally one of them was a demo or live version).

EVERY Foo Fighters single and EVERY Radiohead single and EVERY Supernaturals single came on two 3-track CDs, containing 4 tracks you'd never heard before (occasionally one of them was a demo or remix).

See also Bush, Garbage, U2, Nirvana, Ash, Stereophonics, Skunk Anansie and Travis...

It very much was the standard. Some bands even used to release 3 CDs of B-sides for each single, or otherwise the cassette and vinyl single might have different B-sides. MJ was simply uncompetitive, in a competitive market.

In my personal opinion, The Beatles are overrated. .....I doubt they'd have done as well.

That just makes you sound silly. And jealous.

 

[wonderouzmj]

Invincible is not the first or the last album to have more than 1 cover.

Yep. A group called b2k had an album called pandemonium & the album had each group member on the cover & then the regular with all four of them so fans could pick thier favorite member & could buy more omarion face copies or lil fizz face etc because people have thier favorites in all groups. Great marketing if u ask me

 

[SmoothGangsta]

Saying The Beatles didn't have any competition is a pretty ridiculous statement to make. I also don't think they're overrated at all. It's fine to not like something but I think making big statements like that puts you in danger of looking a bit silly.

 

[mj_frenzy]

The explanation that Michael Jackson himself provided about the different colors of the 'Invincible' album was not only disrespectful but also ridiculous:

"Because we wanted the fans to have some fun with it and collect them ... there's albums that I love and I will buy them 5 times, even though I have the same cover. Like, 5 times 'cause I love that album so much. So, imagine if they did a different color or just changed the color, I would buy it 5 more times. We just wanted the fans to have some fun with the pictures and with the colors ... That's why we did it" (Michael Jackson, October 2001)

He talked about the fans/potential buyers of that album as if he referred to naive, 5-year-old children.

 

[zinniabooklover]

The explanation that Michael Jackson himself provided about the different colors of the 'Invincible' album was not only disrespectful but also ridiculous:

"Because we wanted the fans to have some fun with it and collect them ... there's albums that I love and I will buy them 5 times, even though I have the same cover. Like, 5 times 'cause I love that album so much. So, imagine if they did a different color or just changed the color, I would buy it 5 more times. We just wanted the fans to have some fun with the pictures and with the colors ... That's why we did it" (Michael Jackson, October 2001)

He talked about the fans/potential buyers of that album as if he referred to naive, 5-year-old children.

Not really seeing any disrespect or infantilisation in Michael's statement

At least the different colours were out in the open. Better than being into Led Zeppelin in 1979 and being confronted with this:

"The album was originally released with a brown paper bag slip cover that had a rubber stamp identifying the band and album title, which had a minimalist look and feel, [...] However the bags design was for concealing the cover image. When the paper slip cover was removed it revealed a sepia style scene inside a bar which was on both the front and back covers. Why the concealment? For marketing purposes six different jackets were produced and tucked inside the brown paper sleeve which kept the buyer unaware of the cover they were purchasing."

Black Flag's debut EP in 1979 - 16 different versions of the 7" Vinyl, 3 different versions of the 10" Vinyl