Dangerous 25: what would you like to see happen? [UNCONFIRMED]

[Cprep20]

A detailed documentary of the making of the Dangerous album and the accompanying short films with the people that work with Michael personally. All that extra stuff was cute and funny for Bad 25 (waste of time and space. Please someone get it right. Show Michael's creative side. His song writing process. Show how much he was involved in the creations of his songs and short films. I also hope they touch up on songs that didn't make the album like they did with Streetwalker on Bad 25. Talk about his donations and humanitarian efforts. Touch upon his tour and the rehearsals. The sky's the limit.

I also believe there will be a few demos of the songs that made the original album along with songs that already leaked and a few songs (2-4) that we didn't know existed/songs that simple haven't leaked yet. I also think they will have a few remixes of course because the estate doesn't have faith in Michael and they believe the remixes gain new fans.

Wishful Thinking!

 

[lougrizli]

Rehearsal + Studio footage + Demos + Concert in BLU-RAY + Footage of Michael having fun in Neverland etc. THIS IS THE BOX-SET WE NEED! I really don't give a damn about peoples talking about the Dangerous Album mostly when those people are Justin Bieber.

 

[Zakk]

I would hope for either Munich/Tokyo or Bangkok on Blu-Ray, a documentary... But it needs stacks of on the road and hospital footage... at least 10 unreleased tracks, we know that their are PLENTY also, I'd love to see the 1993 rehearsals for SuperBowl and the tour... Also, Dangerous The Short films re-release on Blu-Ray with behind the scenes of short films (extensive) and studio footage...

 

[lougrizli]

For a concert I think it would be better if it's released as a non-anniversary Project. They have to do something "BIG" for this kind of release. Albums Anniversary interest only fans, not the general public.
(Even if as soon it would be released, as soon it would be awesome but still.. we've to think about MJ not about us)
It would be a mess to miss an opportunity like this one to show to the world what Michael was on stage. So I take back what I said, they don't have to put a concert in the "box-set". (Unless if they released another concert after Dangerous Anniversary ^.^)

 

[mj_frenzy]

There isn't anything official yet as Dangerous' 25th anniversary is still over a year and half away. Waaaay too early for The Estate or Sony to announce anything.

Hope we get a Dangerous 25 though.

I think that they must have laid out (tentatively) some ideas...

(I think MJ recorded more in the Dangerous era than in the BAD - tech was better and cheaper)

Although I agree that it was a very prolific period, I doubt if technology was (much) cheaper because MJ started recording new material (demos, instrumental versions, etc.) right after the release of BAD.

A detailed documentary of the making of the Dangerous album and the accompanying short films with the people that work with Michael personally.
I also think they will have a few remixes of course because the estate doesn't have faith in Michael and they believe the remixes gain new fans.

An in-depth documentary of the Dangerous recording sessions is one of the most surrealistic videos I have ever imagined!

There is no point in releasing remixes on a possible “Dangerous 25” at the expense of authentic tracks.

I would hope for either Munich/Tokyo or Bangkok on Blu-Ray, a documentary... But it needs stacks of on the road and hospital footage... at least 10 unreleased tracks, we know that their are PLENTY also, I'd love to see the 1993 rehearsals for SuperBowl and the tour... Also, Dangerous The Short films re-release on Blu-Ray with behind the scenes of short films (extensive) and studio footage...

I agree. The minimum number should be 10 – 12 tracks.

Albums Anniversary interest only fans, not the general public.

Then, they should release a very basic, standard edition for the general public.

 

[HIStoric]

I think that they must have laid out (tentatively) some ideas...

Well of course that goes without saying. Only problem is, they haven't announced anything nor has anything credible leaked so us fans are in the dark about this potential project

There is no point in releasing remixes on a possible “Dangerous 25” at the expense of authentic tracks.

I'm honestly all for remixes so long as they're done by credible artists who can deliver a great remix. I quite enjoyed Kanye's remix of Billie Jean (honestly the only Thriller 25 remix I enjoyed) and wish he did a verse on there. I enjoyed the Bad 25 remixes as well, except for the Pitbull one which I honestly keep forgetting exists because it's the only track on a Michael Jackson CD that I haven't imported to my iTunes. I'd actually be totally down for a Daft Punk remix, I have little doubt they'd do justice to the original song. Hell, assuming they don't release anything in the meantime, Daft Punk releasing the first piece of material since 2013 would draw quite a bit of news and attention towards the project.

I don't believe they should do it at the expense of authentic tracks though but given that a CD can hold 74-80 minutes of music, I really don't think it's that big of a problem. Assuming we get 10-12 new MJ songs (which is a lot) and that they're on average 4-6 minutes long, there's still room for 1 or 2 remixes. Hell, they could always do a deluxe edition for the fans that has some more tracks on it.

 

[SmoothCriminal1995]

As much I think they're tons of unreleased songs and demos from the Dangerous era, I doubt they'll release 10 or 12 songs on an anniversary edition. Especially when they only release 8 songs on a studio album...

 

[analogue]

I'd like to see this get a re-release

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

So much behind the scenes stuff we can get

[youtube]B96-XF8AZKI[/youtube]

 

[lougrizli]

So much behind the scenes stuff we can get

[youtube]B96-XF8AZKI[/youtube]

There is so much materials they can release but only in our dreams lol. They don't care about us (not the song:rofl For them it's simple : • Not hard work • Bad stuffs • Bad quality • Leaked songs and we run to buying it as quick it's on store. We should say stop.
We are able to do better than what they do! I know they read the forum sometimes, SO IF SOMEONE SEEN THAT: ****U!:mat:

 

[Doggone]

I'd like to see this get a re-release

I need this in my life.

 

[HIStoric]

As much I think they're tons of unreleased songs and demos from the Dangerous era, I doubt they'll release 10 or 12 songs on an anniversary edition. Especially when they only release 8 songs on a studio album...

Yup and given the fact that Michael is no longer with us, I'd be very happy with this amount!

 

[AlwaysThere]

Dangerous25 is more than likely not going to happen. Bad25 sold much less than Sony had anticipated - and Bad sees a much higher level of respect and recognition than Dangerous does.

If it does happen, it'll more than likely be four or five new songs tacked on to a second disc. Don't expect a concert.

 

[HIStoric]

Dangerous25 is more than likely not going to happen. Bad25 sold much less than Sony had anticipated - and Bad sees a much higher level of respect and recognition than Dangerous does.

If it does happen, it'll more than likely be four or five new songs tacked on to a second disc. Don't expect a concert.

Who knows. Anniversary editions tend to never really sell a lot (bar the odd one) and yet they happen all the time. I imagine it'll probably go ahead, perhaps with a lower budget than Bad 25. It's a pretty straightforward idea for 2016.

 

[mj_frenzy]

Assuming we get 10-12 new MJ songs (which is a lot) and that they're on average 4-6 minutes long, there's still room for 1 or 2 remixes. Hell, they could always do a deluxe edition for the fans that has some more tracks on it.

I think, it makes some kind of sense to release 1 or 2 (very) strong remixes (in order to cater for all tastes).

So much behind the scenes stuff we can get

[youtube]B96-XF8AZKI[/youtube]

It is really frustrating for fans to receive again snippets of backstage footage.

But, I understand that there are some serious reasons for doing that (for example, footage that had already been auctioned, footage that was recorded but was never meant for public view, footage that is still subject to long-standing contractual agreement, etc.).

On the other hand, I believe that there is still a great amount of that type of footage. MJ had always at least 2 cameras beside him (while touring) that were continuously filming & literally captured almost every aspect of him (charity events, hotel rooms, rehearsals, interaction with fans, airports, local award ceremonies, etc.).

Dangerous25 is more than likely not going to happen. Bad25 sold much less than Sony had anticipated - and Bad sees a much higher level of respect and recognition than Dangerous does.

If it does happen, it'll more than likely be four or five new songs tacked on to a second disc. Don't expect a concert.

That’s why, “Dangerous” needs to be re-released, & an anniversary edition seems to be a perfect opportunity.

Also, I think that “Dangerous” is a kind of an underestimated record because it had such great potential but all the negativity from the second leg of Dangerous World Tour onwards damaged (irreparable) that album. For example, “Dangerous” would have made amazing sales unless big markets eventually were left out of the tour.

Who knows. Anniversary editions tend to never really sell a lot (bar the odd one) and yet they happen all the time. I imagine it'll probably go ahead, perhaps with a lower budget than Bad 25. It's a pretty straightforward idea for 2016.

I agree that their intention is to release “Dangerous 25” in 2016.

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

I'm getting goosebumps watching Jam live from the Dangerous Tour! I just can't get over how majestic this introduction is with the toaster, the pose, the glasses then the music! I have never seen the likes of it. How can you get people to scream and faint doing absolutely... nothing?..

[youtube]seBLQorgX9A[/youtube]

 

[L.T.D]

Give us a friggin' box set! I want the original album remastered, remixes, unreleased songs, demo's. A 3 disc blu ray/dvd set set of London 92', Munich 92' and Tokyo 92' or a show from 1993.

A documentary made for TV would also be nice. Release a really good unreleased song as a single to promote it. I'm a Michael Jackson fan and this is one of the best excuses to get as much material as we possibly can!

They also need to be releasing concerts digitially on itunes etc. once a year.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I'm all for a re-release. I'm not sure if it will happen though. No remaster though lol. Most of the time remastering nowadays just means smashing the audio with compression or/and making it too loud. like they did with bad 25. Just release the original cd master with some extra tracks. I mean I suppose a decent remaster could be done but with todays music industry I don't see it happening. I know a remaster will be done though. A documentary about the creation of the album would be nice also.

 

[reibish]

I agree with many of the comments that call for more on his creative process. Dangerous was a turning point in his production value, sound, and, well...adulthood in general. Dangerous is a divisive border among "80s Michael" fans and superfans like us. Each of Michael's albums are truly unique with their own sound, but Dangerous was an impressive feat and he really pushed boundaries while staying within the hot trends. People either love or hate Dangerous - and I, too, hope the Estate sees how important this was in his career and reflects it in the package. I doubt they will, but one can dream, yeah?

 

[mj_frenzy]

I'm getting goosebumps watching Jam live from the Dangerous Tour! I just can't get over how majestic this introduction is with the toaster, the pose, the glasses then the music! I have never seen the likes of it. How can you get people to scream and faint doing absolutely... nothing?..

[youtube]seBLQorgX9A[/youtube]

MJ knew the meaning of the word “anticipation” (probably) better than anyone else in the world.

I agree with many of the comments that call for more on his creative process. Dangerous was a turning point in his production value, sound, and, well...adulthood in general. Dangerous is a divisive border among "80s Michael" fans and superfans like us. Each of Michael's albums are truly unique with their own sound, but Dangerous was an impressive feat and he really pushed boundaries while staying within the hot trends. People either love or hate Dangerous - and I, too, hope the Estate sees how important this was in his career and reflects it in the package. I doubt they will, but one can dream, yeah?

Personally, I believe it's on the horizon.

In any case, it remains to be seen…

 

[mj_frenzy]

I'm all for a re-release. I'm not sure if it will happen though. No remaster though lol. Most of the time remastering nowadays just means smashing the audio with compression or/and making it too loud. like they did with bad 25. Just release the original cd master with some extra tracks. I mean I suppose a decent remaster could be done but with todays music industry I don't see it happening. I know a remaster will be done though. A documentary about the creation of the album would be nice also.

I totally agree.

For me, remastering is a little more than an excuse for a higher market price considering that mastering (a really costly process) had already served its purpose in the first place.

For example, it is quite illogical to remaster “HIStory” when that album had (probably) the most expensive mastering of all time.

 

[easter]

I want to release Demo and unpublished works at the Dangerous era

 

[lougrizli]

Maybe as an individual project but non as Anniversary, it won't be successful. (I'm talking about all videos stuffs, Documentary, Rehearsal, Concert...)

 

[Electro]

...considering that mastering (a really costly process) ....

Mastering / Re-Mastering isn't that costy. It probably depends on the studio, but in the independent music world an album master doesn't cost more than ~1500 Euro.
So even if it's a little more than that for a Michael Jackson album, it's still peanuts for Sony.

What would be really expensive is if they re-do the MIX (working the single layers / multitracks of a song), but that's hardly ever done for re-releases.

 

[mj_frenzy]

Mastering / Re-Mastering isn't that costy. It probably depends on the studio, but in the independent music world an album master doesn't cost more than ~1500 Euro.
So even if it's a little more than that for a Michael Jackson album, it's still peanuts for Sony.

What would be really expensive is if they re-do the MIX (working the single layers / multitracks of a song), but that's hardly ever done for re-releases.

I have to be more specific:

I am not referring to these “all-in” bargains in mastering field that, in many cases, come from companies that offer a variety of audio services (including mastering). These solutions are more suitable for lower production budgets & without a doubt better than home-based, personal sound systems.

On the contrary, I am referring mostly to these top notch (in every aspect & not only in the way they are built) expensive mastering rooms that are staffed (exclusively) with skilled, experienced & thus well-respected mastering engineers. Big, renowned label record companies for the most part trust their final mixes to them.

Regarding Michael Jackson & Sony let me remind you that “HIStory” album cost 200.000 (dollars) just to master it (according to Brad Sundberg), a lot more money than 1.500 (euros).

 

[Electro]

I have to be more specific:

I am not referring to these “all-in” bargains in mastering field that, in many cases, come from companies that offer a variety of audio services (including mastering). These solutions are more suitable for lower production budgets & without a doubt better than home-based, personal sound systems.

On the contrary, I am referring mostly to these top notch (in every aspect & not only in the way they are built) expensive mastering rooms that are staffed (exclusively) with skilled, experienced & thus well-respected mastering engineers. Big, renowned label record companies for the most part trust their final mixes to them.

Regarding Michael Jackson & Sony let me remind you that “HIStory” album cost 200.000 (dollars) just to master it (according to Brad Sundberg), a lot more money than 1.500 (euros).

"Mastering" in that case probably meant mixing and mastering together or at least multilayer mastering.
I can't imagine how otherwise anyone could burn 200.000 USD just for mastering. That would be absolutely crazy.
but then again, it's Michael... so who knows, if that number is correct, how exactly that money was burned.

And I wasn't really referring to "all-in" bargain masterings as well.
But Sony rather seems to go with these "all-in" cheap solutions in recent years when they do re-releases, and vinyl releases.
The audio quality of the vinyl cuts and re-masters is just plain poor. I don't know how a renowned big mastering and cutting studio would let that happen.

 

[mj_frenzy]

"Mastering" in that case probably meant mixing and mastering together or at least multilayer mastering.
I can't imagine how otherwise anyone could burn 200.000 USD just for mastering. That would be absolutely crazy.
but then again, it's Michael... so who knows, if that number is correct, how exactly that money was burned.

And I wasn't really referring to "all-in" bargain masterings as well.
But Sony rather seems to go with these "all-in" cheap solutions in recent years when they do re-releases, and vinyl releases.
The audio quality of the vinyl cuts and re-masters is just plain poor. I don't know how a renowned big mastering and cutting studio would let that happen.

No, I am referring to mastering as a complete distinct & separate process.

But, I understand this widespread misconception (that mastering also involves mixing) because many sound engineers, for the sake of a lower price, undertake a lot of tasks at the same time.

Also, even these costly mastering processes are not 100% infallible. Take for example, the recording error in “Give In To Me” that even the most expensive (mastering) equipments seemed unable to correct (the error still persist on later releases).

 

[ChrisC]

the recording error in “Give In To Me”

What is that?

 

[Electro]

No, I am referring to mastering as a complete distinct & separate process.

But, I understand this widespread misconception (that mastering also involves mixing) because many sound engineers, for the sake of a lower price, undertake a lot of tasks at the same time.

Also, even these costly mastering processes are not 100% infallible. Take for example, the recording error in “Give In To Me” that even the most expensive (mastering) equipments seemed unable to correct (the error still persist on later releases).

Well it would be interesting to question Sundberg a little more indepth about this. Otherwise you can't know for sure
what exactly he meant. When he does his seminars, he's not talking to studio nerds, and big numbers are always extra entertaining I guess.
In any case, Michael Jackson or not, spending 200K USD on an Album mastering is absolutely crazy.

 

[mj_frenzy]

What is that?

00:45 & 02:28.

It is audible even in compressed formats (mp3, etc.).

These errors reappeared on Dangerous – Special Edition, which is pretty strange because that specific release (2001) was extensively advertised for its state of art remastering…

Well it would be interesting to question Sundberg a little more indepth about this. Otherwise you can't know for sure
what exactly he meant. When he does his seminars, he's not talking to studio nerds, and big numbers are always extra entertaining I guess.
In any case, Michael Jackson or not, spending 200K USD on an Album mastering is absolutely crazy.

I agree that 200.000 (dollars) is a staggering amount of money maybe a little bit far-fetched (prestige reasons, rounding reasons etc.) & in no way the general rule in mastering industry.