Could the Dangerous Album Have Been Better?

Re: Could have the Dangerous album been better?

The question 'Could it be better?' is a bit weird when talking about art. Let's compare it to a painting. Could Girl with a Pearl Earring by Vermeer have been better? Well, yes, technically. If Vermeer had used paint that didn't discolor and crack over time, that would have been better. Likewise, an 4K recording of the BAD Tour would have been better than the VHS quality we got. Those are technical, measurable characteristics. But the art itself... that's a matter of personal interpretation, taste, emotion. Yes, I have my favourite tracks on Dangerous, and I have some tracks that don't appeal to me. So if I was asked by Michael Jackson to make a selection, it probably would have been different. Like any person on this forum would probably have made a (slightly) different selection. I love the song Blood on the Dance Floor, for example, and if the version Michael worked on during the Dangerous sessions was a lot like it, I would have put it on Dangerous. Because there is a limit to the amount of tracks that fit on a cd, another track would have to go. Does that make the album better? Probably not, it would only suit my personal taste better. For someone else, it might be less interesting.
 
Re: Could have the Dangerous album been better?

The question 'Could it be better?' is a bit weird when talking about art. Let's compare it to a painting. Could Girl with a Pearl Earring by Vermeer have been better? Well, yes, technically. If Vermeer had used paint that didn't discolor and crack over time, that would have been better. Likewise, an 4K recording of the BAD Tour would have been better than the VHS quality we got. Those are technical, measurable characteristics. But the art itself... that's a matter of personal interpretation, taste, emotion. Yes, I have my favourite tracks on Dangerous, and I have some tracks that don't appeal to me. So if I was asked by Michael Jackson to make a selection, it probably would have been different. Like any person on this forum would probably have made a (slightly) different selection. I love the song Blood on the Dance Floor, for example, and if the version Michael worked on during the Dangerous sessions was a lot like it, I would have put it on Dangerous. Because there is a limit to the amount of tracks that fit on a cd, another track would have to go. Does that make the album better? Probably not, it would only suit my personal taste better. For someone else, it might be less interesting.
I put forward the question, the title of this thread, with this thought process in mind. Part of me was aware that I would be met with different opinions and thoughts, and was pretty much looking forward to reading other member's insight. That's the splendor of discussion, the result of varying views. Your's are as important as anyone else's here. ;)
 
Re: Could have the Dangerous album been better?



I don't think you understand what "production" means.
I think you are the one that does not .Michael was a lycris writer,NOT a music composer or instrumental producer or musician that can play instruments and produce.He never contributed with anything other than some or a bit more than some lycris to the song hes credited as a writer and producer.Trust me,writting a hook does not mean even writting a song,let alone produce.He had some rhytym in himself,but his credits as a producer and even songwriter are either exagerrated or over the top fake.Michael could not produce shit.So getting a co producer credit was really something since he aint any kind of muscian or producer like Prince or Quincy Jones.He just wrote lycris...
 
I think you are the one that does not .Michael was a lycris writer,NOT a music composer or instrumental producer or musician that can play instruments and produce.He never contributed with anything other than some or a bit more than some lycris to the song hes credited as a writer and producer.Trust me,writting a hook does not mean even writting a song,let alone produce.He had some rhytym in himself,but his credits as a producer and even songwriter are either exagerrated or over the top fake.Michael could not produce shit.So getting a co producer credit was really something since he aint any kind of muscian or producer like Prince or Quincy Jones.He just wrote lycris...
What on earth..
 
I think you are the one that does not .Michael was a lycris writer,NOT a music composer or instrumental producer or musician that can play instruments and produce.He never contributed with anything other than some or a bit more than some lycris to the song hes credited as a writer and producer.Trust me,writting a hook does not mean even writting a song,let alone produce.He had some rhytym in himself,but his credits as a producer and even songwriter are either exagerrated or over the top fake.Michael could not produce shit.So getting a co producer credit was really something since he aint any kind of muscian or producer like Prince or Quincy Jones.He just wrote lycris...
Have you heard Beat It demo? He definitely had the songs in his head so that is writing a song.

 
Its work in progress. He hummed the song and that is how he told the band how to play.
Well thats not how I hear it on the record.The band changed it completely .Its not MJ s song anymore then,its the band s compostion with some advice by MJ.So he still didnt write music,just lycris :D
 
*Reads the latest posts in here, bewildered by the outlandish, almost trollish claims and walks out of it before sayin' anything that could be misconstrued as anger or nastiness, since it's Advent*

:ninja:







makes note to self - return to this thread after Christmas
 
Michael might not have been a producer in the traditional sense but he sure as hell was a producer from a creative point of view. He simply needed people who were experts on their fields, to help him create his vision. I get how that could come of as lazy and stuff, but if you'd see some footage of him in the studio, talking to his co-workers or about his art in general (which sadly wasn't very often the case in his interviews), you could understand what a genius this man actually was.

Back to topic, I really really wish he would have included "Someone Put Your Hand Out", this song is just perfection in my eyes and would have added another amazing layer to the overall great Dangerous (maybe eben sacrifice one of the (imo) fillers like Why You Wanna Trip on Me, Can't Let Her Get Away or She Drives Me Wild). Also, I would have liked to see Slave to the Rhythm on the album instead of one of those three).
 
Well thats not how I hear it on the record.The band changed it completely .Its not MJ s song anymore then,its the band s compostion with some advice by MJ.So he still didnt write music,just lycris :D
Nah, that's not how it works. As long as you write a melody - doesn't matter if it's a bass line, the vocal melody or a guitar melody - you are at the very least a co-composer of that particular track.

Do you think Lennon and McCartney composed every bit of the arrangement on ''Eleanor Rigby''? No, McCartney wrote the song on the piano, Lennon wrote some of the lyrics and they presented it to George Martin who pretty much composed the rest. The song is still Lennon and McCartney's composition and Martin is considered the producer and arranger.

Go watch Michael's 1993 Mexico deposition if you want to get a glimpse into the creative process. Michael explains exactly how The Girl Is Mine was composed.

Btw, in that Beat It demo you can definitely hear (apart from the vocal melody) the melody for the rhythm guitar which can also be heard on the album version.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion Dangerous is one of the best albums of all time.
If you change a track from it, perhaps the whole narrative of the record shifts and I think that would be a mistake
 
For me personally no. It is perfect and the only album of that length that I can listen to without skipping tracks. Some of the left over tracks definitely deserved a place but it would have been technically impossible.
 
Not a single skip from me on the entire album, although I do find "Keep The Faith" to be the weakest song on the album. I love "Someone Put Your Hand Out" - but kinda like that it's a hidden gem and not on the album.
 
Where did the "Dangerous - The Real Special Edition" even come from?
I remember receiving IYDLM on MSN by Birchy in 2007. Back then they all leaked over a shot period.
 
I think you are the one that does not .Michael was a lycris writer,NOT a music composer or instrumental producer or musician that can play instruments and produce.He never contributed with anything other than some or a bit more than some lycris to the song hes credited as a writer and producer.Trust me,writting a hook does not mean even writting a song,let alone produce.He had some rhytym in himself,but his credits as a producer and even songwriter are either exagerrated or over the top fake.Michael could not produce shit.So getting a co producer credit was really something since he aint any kind of muscian or producer like Prince or Quincy Jones.He just wrote lycris...
I don’t even have time to analyze how aggressively wrong everything you just said is. As someone who has worked in recording studios and contributed to a handful of independent albums, Michael Jackson was a songwriter, composer, and producer. Literally everyone who’s ever worked with him has confirmed as such, and every piece of information we have about his process falls in line with it. What a hilariously warped mindset.
 
Wasn’t Michael the producer on “centipede” the track he wrote for his sister Rebbie? So he might not have been Quincy Jones but he knew what to do in a studio for sure.
Great song btw, I hope there is version of Michael floating around somewhere.

I think Michael deserves the world class status in performing, vocal arrangement, dancing and singing.
He must have been adequate as a drummer as he played drums very early on with the Jackson 5 and I think being very studios like Michael was , watching and learning and stealing with his eyes from all the people he worked with at Motown he must have been at least an above average producer. The picture of young Michael watching carefully what Stevie Wonder was doing is proof that he at the very least had interest in the studiowork as well as the singing.

In the end it doesn’t matter how you compose a song, you can write it down or you can hum every musical line into a recorder or you can fiddle around with chords yourself on a guitar but if you are able to come up with a song you pretty much are a writer.
 
Wasn’t Michael the producer on “centipede” the track he wrote for his sister Rebbie? So he might not have been Quincy Jones but he knew what to do in a studio for sure.
Great song btw, I hope there is version of Michael floating around somewhere.

I think Michael deserves the world class status in performing, vocal arrangement, dancing and singing.
He must have been adequate as a drummer as he played drums very early on with the Jackson 5 and I think being very studios like Michael was , watching and learning and stealing with his eyes from all the people he worked with at Motown he must have been at least an above average producer. The picture of young Michael watching carefully what Stevie Wonder was doing is proof that he at the very least had interest in the studiowork as well as the singing.

In the end it doesn’t matter how you compose a song, you can write it down or you can hum every musical line into a recorder or you can fiddle around with chords yourself on a guitar but if you are able to come up with a song you pretty much are a writer.
Exactly. When you see on the songwriting credits: written and composed by yada yada yada it means this...

written= who wrote the lyrics
composed= melody/sound of song

So listening to Michael Jackson's demos it's clear to see the songs in which he got solo song writing credits for are the ones in which he wrote the lyrics, and came up with the beat/sound. That doesn't mean sound engineers and producers didn't come in and flesh it out and add to the song... they did in many instances. But MJ was the guy who created the sound. It came out of his head. That's all that matters.
 
Yay, first thread! Let's do this.

I have started pondering on this once I listened to some "unreleased Dangerous sessions" on YouTube. I have listened to the demo of "Serious Effect" before (hence my username), yet was never aware of how much material was actually drafted and recorded for the Dangerous album and did not end up making it on there. In fact, I will say that some of the shelved tracks could replace some of the album's final selections. For example, "In The Closet," "Can't Let Her Get Away," and "Why You Wanna Trip On Me" can be substituted with "Serious Effect" (when finished), "She Got It" (when finished)," and "Monkey Business." "Someone Put Your Hand Out" can easily take the place of "Will You Be There" (I like that song, but I prefer the former). "If You Don't Love Me" is another honorable mention, though I am not sure if it is better than "Give Into Me" (I love that song; the "Dirty Diana" of the Dangerous album). "Mind Is The Magic" almost rivals "Dangerous."

But this is just my opinion. Could the Dangerous album actually have been better? I like the album, but in all honesty, the album should not have been a set of New Jack Swing pieces. There is likely a plethora of hidden demos and songs that were never completed or never made the album, like some of the examples, that can beat the final tracks. Anymore examples I did not cite?

I think so. An album can always be better. This is for me the weak song of the album and others are forgettable. I love Serious Effect, I would have loved it to be officially included in the album.
 
Back
Top