Small “frustrations” I have regarding us fans

[filmandmusic]

It annoys me to no end that the vast majority of the fanbase does not recognize Michael’s Motown albums as part of his studio discography. What makes it even worse is the inclusion of a remix album as a studio album. Blood on the dancefloor was never a “new” album. It has no business being discussed and compared with Invincible or Thriller or Ben.
Sometimes I even wonder if Destiny would be included or not if it was released as a Michael Jackson solo album.

Also tracks of Destiny or Triumph barely get played on spotify while they are for over 75% Michael Jackson tracks due to them not only being sung by Michael but he most often also has writing credits on them and all the vocal arrangements are done by the man himself. Why is work credited as “ the jacksons” supposedly inferior to work credited as Michael Jackson.

If you’re not interested in the Jackson 5 I can understand that though I don’t agree with that but yes it is a kids boysband I get that it doesn’t get liked as much.

 

[DuranDuran]

That's not really a unique thing. Many of the Peter Gabriel 1980s fans don't care much about when he was the lead singer of Genesis in the early 1970s. Same for Genesis fans when Phil Collins was the lead singer & vice versa. Some fans of the early prog rock Genesis said they "sold out" in the 1980s. Most Journey fans aren't interested in their albums before Steve Perry joined or after he left. There's Van Halen with David Lee Roth vs. Van Hagar fans. Some Beatles fans don't care about Wings or their solo material in general. It's nowhere near as popular as the Beatles as a group. Maybe certain songs are like Imagine, but the albums are not. The people who got into Prince with 1999 or Purple Rain don't generally seek out For You or Dirty Mind. How many Stevie Wonder fans get into the Little Stevie era stuff other than Fingertips?

 

[filmandmusic]

I fully understand genesis fans don’t like the switch to Phil Collins as a leadsinger as they started producing pop music instead of prog. We don’t have that genre switch from the Jacksons to Michael Jackson solo.
I don’t think the beatles compare either, of course John Lennon fans would be less interested in Wings material.
It is like saying why don’t Michael Jackson fans rate Jermaine Jackson albums? Well because they are different singers. The Jacksons had one lead singer and they made pop music just like Michael Jackson did when he went solo.

Like I said in my first post I understand most fans are not into the jackson 5 but once they switched to Epic I really don’t get it

 

[DuranDuran]

The Jacksons didn't make "pop", they were R&B. There's no such thing as pop music, it's not a genre. That's just short for "popular music" for the mainstream Top 40. In the 1930s, big band jazz was "pop music", right now rap is "pop". In the 1980s, Mötley Crüe, Lisa Lisa, Debbie Gibson, Bruce Springsteen, John Mellencamp, Madonna, Guns N Roses, Run-DMC, MC Hammer, etc. were all pop music because they got played on the pop radio stations. The Jacksons were played on R&B radio, Bon Jovi wasn't. The R&B acts had to crossover to pop radio, just like a country singer like Kenny Rogers got crossover airplay on the Top 40 pop stations. Kenny's main genre was country, and that's where his records were in the record store. Mötley Crüe was in the rock section, or heavy metal if a particular store had metal as a category. Not all acts in a particular genre got crossover airplay.

 

[filmandmusic]

@DuranDuran
I know that I know my history as well, for me it is pretty simple. If a band or artist is looking for commercial success then it is pop music.

 

[Michaels Lover]

I don't get it either and it frustrates me too, but there's not much we can do about it?

 

[filmandmusic]

@Michaels Lover No we can't change that, if they genuinely don't like his music as part of the Jacksons then it is what it is. It doesn't stop us from liking it

 

[DuranDuran]

@DuranDuran
I know that I know my history as well, for me it is pretty simple. If a band or artist is looking for commercial success then it is pop music.

A singer/band can have commercial success with a particular audience, not only the mainstream one. That doesn't mean it got pop radio airplay. Like a gospel group such as Mary Mary or DC Talk. Religious music rarely got pop airplay. Or groups like Insane Clown Posse or Grateful Dead. Grateful Dead only had 1 pop radio hit, and that happened around 20 years after they first started, but they have been a popular touring act for decades. Many acts have big success in their particular genre like George Strait & Garth Brooks. Garth didn't get much pop airplay, but he has more diamond albums than any other performer. Garth's only pop Top 10 hit (Lost In You) was released under the name "Chris Gaines" and it wasn't a country song. Ironically, the Chris Gaines album didn't sell as well as his country albums, but it did go platinum at the time. The Chris Gaines album was R&B type songs.

 

[Zeus 7]

I celebrate the J5 music and albums although as Michael fan I don't count them on par with the Jacksons or solo albums because Michael did write or produce them. Destiny and Triumph on the other hand are masterpieces, for me, Triumph is on power with Off the Wall and Thriller.

 

[Maxym]

I celebrate the J5 music and albums although as Michael fan I don't count them on par with the Jacksons or solo albums because Michael did write or produce them.

It's true they (the J5) didn't write, Motown wouldn't let them do their own music, they were fulfilling a contract and had no real control... but it's not like they weren't involved in it. Even from the earlier songs at Motown, thinking of things like "Who's loving you", MJ's vocal performances just scream "talent". And I think "that" only is enough not to disregard that period.

Also for me Michael's biggest and sometimes underrated strength has always been that he knew how to use his voice to make or contribute to a melody...