Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
B***s***
I think it could fit with a tracklist, that has more uptempo tracks:Evening listening to Shout now, it doesn't fit the vibe of Invincible.
to me Shout is Invincible's TDCAUI’ll maintain that it’s one of the best songs MJ made during that era
Yep! That's a solid lineup right thereI think it could fit with a tracklist, that has more uptempo tracks:
1. Unbreakable
2. Heartbreaker
3. Invincible
4. Break of Dawn
5. You Rock My World
6. Hollywood Tonight
7. Butterflies
8. Speechless
9. 2000 Watts
10. Shout
11. Get Your Weight Off Of Me
12. Whatever Happens
13. Blue Gangsta
14. Xscape
I forgot APWNN!Yep! That's a solid lineup right there
Both are good, but I'm more of a fan of the fast, aggressive songs and, especially after HIStory, Invincible was a drastic change in style.Is the problem with Invincible that the uptempos are bad or that the downtempos are bad?
This goes off topic, but my view is: Nothing wrong with the songs. Among the reasons that they didn't connect with a sustained audience at the time was for the lack of an engaged promotional campaign *akin to a tour* to imbue the presentation with more of his soul.Is the problem with Invincible that the uptempos are bad or that the downtempos are bad?
George Michael famously sued Sony in the early 90’s (when Tommy was boss) because of how they were controlling him to have this image of a very sexual heterossexual male to appease the girls, but he wanted to release other kinds of songs they were blocking through shady tactics. And he complained that no other artist supported him on this tirade.Sort of off-topic but I never knew George Michael had (rumored) problems with Tommy Mottola too:
'Of course, (George) Michael’s sexuality, he would later deadpan, was the worst-kept secret in show business—it was rumored that Michael broke off his Sony contract after he heard Tommy Mottola mutter a gay slur under his breath when he thought the pop star was out of earshot'
Source: https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/george-michael-older-super-deluxe/
BTW. George Michael's 'Older' is the type of album that would be much better for MJ instead of 'Invincble', imho
That's an absolutely terrible idea.What would have boosted sales of Invincible would have been to
Bonus tracks would be better than just the colorful covers that fans bought anyway. That would have been a real service for fans.That's an absolutely terrible idea.
The whole concept of bonus tracks is disgusting. I don't give a shit how many copies an album sells. It's released and it's either good or it isn't. I don't need the record company to be given any more anti-consumer ideas about ways to manipulate me into wasting more of my money buying the same thing twice.
Strewth.
It's not better because an orange cover can easily be ignored. New music is a bit harder to ignore.Bonus tracks would be better than just the colorful covers that fans bought anyway.
I'm glad you don't work at a record company.That would have been a real service for fans.
I agree!It's not better because an orange cover can easily be ignored. New music is a bit harder to ignore.
Again - bonus tracks are disgusting. I think part of the reason CDs died is because of the Walmart edition, Target Edition, Tower edition, Virgin edition, Amazon edition etc.
It's absolute nonsense.
You know what every other artist did with their outtakes in 2001? They released them as the B-sides on singles. It's always better to spend 1.99 on a CD single with a couple of unreleased tracks, rather than spending 12.99 on a version of an album you've already got. Or 64.95 on five copies of an album you've already got. That's for chumps.
That's actually the reason lots of fans used to buy singles - not for the title track, but for the B-sides. I think the reason MJ didn't have a lot of UK number ones is because his singles were quite poor value (ie hardly any unreleased tracks).
I'm glad you don't work at a record company.
Stop thinking like a profit-hungry executive and start thinking like a value-conscious fan.
The vast majority of 45s just had a song from the same album as the A-side, & in some cases an instrumental version of the A-side or even a mono mix. Very few had exclusive B-sides like Prince or The Beatles. People bought 45s because they were cheap and they only wanted the songs they heard on the radio. That's also why Greatest Hits, K-Tel, & That's What I Call Music albums are popular sellers. For some artists, their Greatest Hits/Best Of sold way more than any of their original albums (ig. Eagles, The Carpenters, ABBA, Queen, Johnny Mathis, etc.). Pre-1970s, it was also more common for acts to have singles only contracts. Especially with independent labels. Some of these labels didn't release many albums or none at all. When cassette & CD singles first came out in the late 1980s, there was often a rap free version of a track for people who didn't like it, because that is when rap collabos with singers/bands started to become popular. It was also for radio stations that were still reluctant to play hip hop.That's actually the reason lots of fans used to buy singles - not for the title track, but for the B-sides.
Also, 45 RPM should provide a better sound definition than 33 RPM.People bought 45s because they were cheap and (...)
Since most people had a cheap component stereo from Sears, Radio Shack, or K-Mart, the quality of the record didn't matter that much.Also, 45 RPM should provide a better sound definition than 33 RPM.
(Assuming same manufacturing quality.)
(And what? Let me dream that the whole world turned audiophile for a minute...)
dude pretending he's MJ??Sometimes as you grow older, you've gotta make some tough decisions. Did I want to replace that song? No. I had to do it for the fan base.
PS: How could have they thrown my brother Conrad straight into prison? It was very unnecessary. Also, before I go, watch out for 2029. Something big is coming along with Mars.
I really miss CD singles. That's how I used to find new artists. Music stores in the mall used to have a ton for .49-1.99. It was cool how they often had extra tracks such a remixes, instrumental, acapella. I often bought both.It's not better because an orange cover can easily be ignored. New music is a bit harder to ignore.
Again - bonus tracks are disgusting. I think part of the reason CDs died is because of the Walmart edition, Target Edition, Tower edition, Virgin edition, Amazon edition etc.
It's absolute nonsense.
You know what every other artist did with their outtakes in 2001? They released them as the B-sides on singles. It's always better to spend 1.99 on a CD single with a couple of unreleased tracks, rather than spending 12.99 on a version of an album you've already got. Or 64.95 on five copies of an album you've already got. That's for chumps.
That's actually the reason lots of fans used to buy singles - not for the title track, but for the B-sides. I think the reason MJ didn't have a lot of UK number ones is because his singles were quite poor value (ie hardly any unreleased tracks).
I'm glad you don't work at a record company.
Stop thinking like a profit-hungry executive and start thinking like a value-conscious fan.
Cutting “Shout” for political reasons makes absolutely no sense lmao. I’ll maintain that it’s one of the best songs MJ made during that era, but I don’t believe for one second that any external pressure made him cut it.
it seems like he just had a personal beef with Rodney Jerkins, who was the most prolific producer on Invincible. Even then, I don't see why Jerkins or any of other producers would have cared about "Shout' being on the album