Why was everything out of place/wrong with Invincible?

Butterflies doesn't do anything for me. I find it very generic tbh and it's a song that could have been sung by any artist. Now Man In The Mirror is another song that Michael didn't write but that song couldn't have been sung by anyone other than Michael.
 
Butterflies doesn't do anything for me. I find it very generic tbh and it's a song that could have been sung by any artist. Now Man In The Mirror is another song that Michael didn't write but that song couldn't have been sung by anyone other than Michael.
I really like Butterflies but yeah MJ pretty much recorded the demo and didn't change anything.
 
Now Man In The Mirror is another song that Michael didn't write but that song couldn't have been sung by anyone other than Michael.
Exactly. He didn't write Man in the Mirror but he made it his own by adding those signature ad-libs and powerful vocals to the song.
Same with Human Nature. He basically just sang it but made the "ohh why" falsetto more powerful.
I think he was simply out of ideas during the Invincible era.
 
I don't picture Pink Floyd, Diamanda Galás, Billy Idol, Geto Boys, or AC/DC doing Butterflies. 🤣
oh god, I SO wanna hear Billy Idol or Diamanda Galas doing Butterflies. My fave Gen X song is Wild Youth so that's the vibe I'm going for - complete with obligatory sneer, lol. As for DG, uh, she defies any category label I could invent so ... I dunno ... splintered glass being fed through a shredder? :ROFLMAO:
 
Or he had other priorities, being a single father of 2 toddlers!
true true. tho he could have not left Debbie and then he wouldn't have been a single father lol. i never understood why he left Debbie
 
true true. tho he could have not left Debbie and then he wouldn't have been a single father lol.
Like all millionaires, he had nannies and domestic employees taking care of all the stuff that, for regular people, is time-consuming when you have children. Tons of artists have children and that doesn't stop them from writing/producing their art. Tolstoi had 13 children and that didn't stop him from writing War and Peace. The reason MJ was so little invested in Invincible can't be ascribed to his children.
 
Like all millionaires, he had nannies and domestic employees taking care of all the stuff that, for regular people, is time-consuming when you have children. Tons of artists have children and that doesn't stop them from writing/producing their art. Tolstoi had 13 children and that didn't stop him from writing War and Peace. The reason MJ was so little invested in Invincible can't be ascribed to his children.
true tho
 
oh god, I SO wanna hear Billy Idol or Diamanda Galas doing Butterflies. My fave Gen X song is Wild Youth so that's the vibe I'm going for - complete with obligatory sneer, lol. As for DG, uh, she defies any category label I could invent so ... I dunno ... splintered glass being fed through a shredder? :ROFLMAO:
I can see Dave Grohl and/or Foo Fighters doing it since they've done You Are by Lionel Richie, Rick Astley's Never Gonna Give You Up, & You Should Be Dancin' by Bee Gees. Dave has said that a lot of the drum beats he played on the Nirvana Nevermind album came from old funk & disco records. Paul Stanley from KISS has a side band called Soul Station which performs old R&B songs. U2 performed Daydream Believer with Davy Jones at a concert. Years ago, there were videos on Youtube of Metallica performing Mike's Beat It and Sister by Prince. I don't know if they are still up. Probably not with the Prince song, since that video was up when he was alive and Prince was always removing uploads of his songs from the internet.
 
I can see Dave Grohl and/or Foo Fighters doing it since they've done You Are by Lionel Richie, Rick Astley's Never Gonna Give You Up, & You Should Be Dancin' by Bee Gees. Dave has said that a lot of the drum beats he played on the Nirvana Nevermind album came from old funk & disco records. Paul Stanley from KISS has a side band called Soul Station which performs old R&B songs. U2 performed Daydream Believer with Davy Jones at a concert. Years ago, there were videos on Youtube of Metallica performing Mike's Beat It and Sister by Prince. I don't know if they are still up. Probably not with the Prince song, since that video was up when he was alive and Prince was always removing uploads of his songs from the internet.
oh sure, yes to all of this but I was reacting more to your original joke:

I don't picture Pink Floyd, Diamanda Galás, Billy Idol, Geto Boys, or AC/DC doing Butterflies. 🤣
The idea of those crazy contrasts!

Although maybe not so crazy. I just remembered Diamanda Galas did a cover version of a Supremes song; no atonal shrieking, IIRC. When Peter Andre covers SOOML or Yngwie Malmsteen covers Beat It that seems quite normal. But Evanescence doing DD seemed weird to me. I don't love them and I thought it would be a bit feeble but it's pretty good. Same with Pentatonix. I only know them doing Christian songs so the idea of them doing an MJ medley was a bit 🤔 But, again, it was fine. And I don't like cover versions, for the most part, but I was OK with both of these.

Bands doing unexpected cover versions is a great idea, it just doesn't always work out. Chris Cornell doing BJ was brilliant. Faith No More doing Ben didn't work, imo. I appreciated the gesture, I really did. It was them paying tribute to Michael after he died and I love FNM and I really love Mike Patton's voice - it is superb - but with Ben it just sounded wrong, imo. Same with Easy. FNM used to do that every gig. Dreadful.
 
Last edited:
Instead of foucusing on the bad/negative things about Invincible I would find it even more interesting if people came with their high-lights.

What do you really like about Invincible?

I like the melody of the Lost Children - so sweet, relaxing and great.

I also really like Speechless - the best song on the album IMO. - And a song only MJ could pull of really. - A bit different than other songs with the almost spoken intro and outro. Beautiful

YRMW is classiv MJ - has all the MJ ingredients.

Whatever Happens is a new direction. Western. Guitar is great. Lyrics is nice, vocals superb. - Great song. - Sad noone knows it.

Threatened - great song, has the classic MJ vibe, but new and fresh. It's not just Thriller v. 2.0, - Great melody and great vocals.
 
Instead of foucusing on the bad/negative things about Invincible I would find it even more interesting if people came with their high-lights.

What do you really like about Invincible?
Great idea. I love the whole album.

Whatever Happens is my fave. I didn't buy Michael's albums until after he died. Smooth Criminal was my top, top fave from it's release date until 2009 when I bought Invincible and heard Whatever Happens for the first time. Mind blown 😲

I could take a whole album from Michael with this vibe - I know he would never have done that, just sayin'.

For me it's just a perfect song. Nothing could be added or taken away to improve it. I've heard someone complain about the vocals on this song which I can't understand. I think the lead vocals and the backing vocals are as perfect as it gets.

The atmosphere, the beautiful guitar work from Carlos Santana - one of my fave ever guitarists. The way you can spin different stories around the lyrics, the mysteriousness of the whole thing. From the very first second it captures my imagination, my heart, all of my emotions. There's a lot of tension there, it's bittersweet, it's melancholy. There is a sense of hopefulness there but there is so much uncertainty around it ...

The whistling! 🥰

I feel as if I'm inside a story book or a film, inside someone's life. Inside Michael's voice, if that makes sense. I want to say he sings it with so much feeling but that sounds a bit mad since he always did that.

Actually, I need to stop. I'm now singing the song inside my head, I'm distracted. Can't focus on this post, lol.
 
Bad,Dangerous and History are all amazing albums but for many reasons I just dont care for the Invincible album at all. The songs pales in comparison with earlier albums and the enginer/producers or whatever isnt the same as earlier and its very noticable.
In total I have probably played Invincible 5 times while my favorite albums at least 500 times each over the years.
I even rate Michael album MUCH higher than Invincible due to Hollywood Tonight and Behind The Mask tracks alone.
edit: Whatever Happens is hands down the best song but I havent played that one much either except in the first weeks after album release.

 
Bad,Dangerous and History are all amazing albums but for many reasons I just dont care for the Invincible album at all. The songs pales in comparison with earlier albums and the enginer/producers or whatever isnt the same as earlier and its very noticable.
In total I have probably played Invincible 5 times while my favorite albums at least 500 times each over the years.
I even rate Michael album MUCH higher than Invincible due to Hollywood Tonight and Behind The Mask tracks alone.
edit: Whatever Happens is hands down the best song but I havent played that one much either except in the first weeks after album release.

You should give it a listen again. - Speechless hasn't aged a day. Still sound crisp and fresh.

I do like Michael too. - Much Too Soon is my favorite from that album.

I hear Michael all the time at the moment. - 7 great songs and great production.
 
And I don't like cover versions, for the most part,
But there's many remakes that are more well known than the original like the ones on the early Beatles albums or Elvis songs. Like most people don't know Respect by Aretha Franklin & Lady Marmalade by Labelle are covers. Some of Whitney Houston's hits are covers, but she would often do obscure album tracks instead of old hits (Saving All My Love For You, All The Man I Need, Hold Me, etc). The song That's What Friends Are For by Dionne Warwick, Stevie Wonder, Elton John, & Gladys Knight was originally released by Rod Stewart, but his was not a single, just a song on a movie soundtrack. Pre-1970s is was common for many acts to do the same songs (ig. Christmas songs), so not many people know or heard the originals and some songs were traditional that were written long before music recording was invented. These much recorded songs generally became known as "standards".
 
But there's many remakes that are more well known than the original like the ones on the early Beatles albums or Elvis songs. Like most people don't know Respect by Aretha Franklin & Lady Marmalade by Labelle are covers. Some of Whitney Houston's hits are covers, but she would often do obscure album tracks instead of old hits (Saving All My Love For You, All The Man I Need, Hold Me, etc). The song That's What Friends Are For by Dionne Warwick, Stevie Wonder, Elton John, & Gladys Knight was originally released by Rod Stewart, but his was not a single, just a song on a movie soundtrack.
Yes to all of this.

I don't hate all cover versions or think that they shouldn't exist at all. There are some classics that I would hate to be without. Jimi doing All Along The Watchtower, Sinead / Nothing Compares 2 U, Nazareth / This Flight Tonight, Matthew Southern Comfort / Woodstock, Julie Driscoll and Brian Auger's Trinity Band / This Wheel's On Fire ...

I could go on.

Cover versions have always existed, as you say, and always will. I think for me it depends on how much I love the original. So, for example, I was very wary of the FNM cover of War Pigs. In fact, they did a pretty decent job. Billy Gould can certainly go head to head with Geezer Butler on the bass. That said, the original is so utterly perfect it seems kinda pointless anyone else even trying. That's just me, though. Other people are glad to have the chance to hear the song played live.

I think when I fall in love with a particular song it's so all-encompassing I just can't wrap my head around an alternative version. Three Days Grace doing GITM - in one sense I'm pleased bc it's a tribute (I guess) to Michael. And the chorus sounds OK. But the verses don't work at all so it grates on my ears. Same with The Scorpions doing Children of the Revolution. Musically it's pretty good and much harder than the original. But then the vocals kick in and it all goes downhill, imo. Plus, again, the original is so perfect, imo, so why bother? That said, Kesha covered the song for the tribute CD and she did OK, imo. I can listen to her version without losing the will to live.

I don't like the J5 cover of Papa Was A Rollin' Stone bc it loses its hard political and social edge. Otoh, I really like their cover of Bridge Over Troubled Water. I wouldn't play it in preference to the original but it's a really good version, imo.

I much prefer Otis singing Respect over the Aretha version even though her version was a much bigger hit.

So it really varies.

Pre-1970s is was common for many acts to do the same songs (ig. Christmas songs), so not many people know or heard the originals and some songs were traditional that were written long before music recording was invented. These much recorded songs generally became known as "standards".
I guess it depends which generation you belong to. For people of my generation, who grew up listening to the radio, we did know about the various different versions of many of these songs bc different versions would get played or the original version would get namechecked often. Now music's gone digital, maybe that has changed.
 
In my opinion,the Invincible album was nearly pure chaos. Here's why I think that:
A. Is it me ,or some outtakes are better than most of the songs that actually made it on the album?
Like for real, Michael decided not to include:
1. Hollywood Tonight. This song is classic Michael(along with classic Brad may I add lol),and only from hearing its demo it is obvious that Hollywood Tonight was a great song with the potential of becoming ,,the Billie Jean of the 2000's,,. This song was just as strong as Billie Jean and Who is it in my opinion,and not including it on the album was pure madness.
2.Blue Gangsta. This song is so damn catchy and Michael's vocal delivery is awesome. It also is like a mix between Who is it and Smooth Criminal, and it clearly had the potential of becoming Michael's sequel to Smooth Criminal.(if a proper music video would have been done, that maybe would have been even better than the short-film for You Rock My World).
3.Chicago. She was loving me/Chicago was too great of a song/ballad to just not be included in the final tracklist of the album. Michael's vocal delivery is again very great ,and the track would have been maybe his big ,,comeback,, hit if only it would have been relesead (in my opinion).
4. (I can't make it ) Another Day. This song is again classic Michael(even if it's not written by Mike) :the powerful/aggresive vocal delivery during the chorus along with the guitar would have made this song like the 2000's version of Give into me/Dirty Diana.
5. Seeing Voices. This song would have been Michael's chance of doing something different(he even wanted to release a full classical music album at one point). This song would have showed the versatility of his singing voice,and it would have proved that he fits nearly all genres (even classical music).
6.Shout. Again,this song would have been something different and it could have showcased some rap skills from Mike.
B.Why is the tracklist of the album so bad/disoriented?
For example,the album opens with 3 nearly identical tracks : Unbreakable/Heartbreaker/Invincible. Not only the songs are too similar,but they are also very repetitive(well maybe with the exception of Heartbreaker). And not only Unbreakable and Invincible sound way too similar and can be confused,but they are also very long as particular songs,maybe too long. Compared to his previous albums,this is a very weak opening. It is soo ordinary ,nothing like stuff you would expect from Michael Jackson.
And not to mention that songs like :Unbreakable/Heartbreaker/Invincible/Privacy are all on the same album.All of them sound nearly the same and happen to be on the same record 0-0. Same for Don't walk away/Heaven Can Wait/The Lost Children/You are my life. Those ballads sound so similar yet are on the same album.And not to mention that You are my life,Privacy and Don't walk away are anything but strong songs (and anything but written by Michael).This is Michael at his most repetitive and may I say Mike at his absolute worst (really now,stuff like the entirety of You are my life or the too robotic/autotuned vocals from Privacy are ridiculous)
The album had a couple of highlights(Break of Dawn/Butterflies/You Rock My World and its video) ,but out of a 16 tracks long album ,that doesn't help anything .
All in all,the title of this album was ,in my opinion,inappropriately chosen as ,,Invincible,, . It should have been something like ,,Vulnerable,,...that would have suited better.
Lots of your arguments in here are extremely subjective. What a strong or weak song is for you doesn't mean that another fan/listener feels the same.

For example, I don't think that Privacy is a weak song, quite the contrary actually. I think that YRMW is way too average. But that's my subjective view.

I agree with you that the first three songs are kinda similar, but again that's also my subjectivity matching yours.

Now, the real problem that I find with Invincible is the sound engineering. And that's objective. For example the rap parts performed on Unbreakable and Heartbreaker are too weak (I mean the sound is weak, you can barely hear the rappers). The same with Rod Serling on Threatened, instead of a clear voice like Vincent Price on Thriller, we barely hear him mumbling.

Invincible should be remastered, maybe some songs remixed.
 
Last edited:
I think for me it depends on how much I love the original.
There's a lot of songs I had never heard the original and didn't know it was a remake, so I thought they were the original. Like the Whitney Houston songs I mentioned above. Not exactly the same thing but similar, I heard Ice Ice Baby by Vanilla Ice first. I had never heard the song it was sampled from until later. I did know Superfreak before U Can't Touch This, so I knew what it was right away. I did not know Girl You Know It's True by Milli Vanilli (regardless of who was singing on their version) was a remake until the internet, which was many years later. The original was by a group called Numarx. There's other cases like I Heard It Through The Grapevine where the first recorded (The Miracles) was not the first released. So it's not really the original to the public, the Gladys Knight & The Pips version is. The Marvin Gaye version was a hit a year later after Gladys, and the long CCR version was popular too.

On a related note Ben was written for Donny Osmond to sing, but he was too busy at the time and One Bad Apple was originally offered to the Jackson 5. I think it was said that Berry Gordy didn't like it (or didn't think it was a hit) and turned it down.
 
There's a lot of songs I had never heard the original and didn't know it was a remake, so I thought they were the original.
I should have made myself clear. I was really talking about rock music since that is my first love. With lots of other genres - soul, jazz, blues, folk, swing / big band, country etc - it's a much more complicated picture.

What I meant was, with original rock songs written by the band, if I really love the original version I find it really hard to give headspace to a cover version even if it's pretty good. Now I come to think of it, I'm saying 'rock music' but maybe I should extend that to include soul and funk. I don't know if there is a cover version of Maggot Brain out there. I've never felt the need to go looking. The original is so perfect.

I definitely want artists to be adventurous and it's good to be adventurous with the music that you consume but, then again, there's only so much time available. It isn't possible to listen to everything. I was really interested to see in the recent discussion about the Brad Sundberg seminar a comment to the effect that Michael mostly liked to listen to music he was already familiar with. He wasn't spending a great deal of time listening to lots of contemporary stuff but mostly going back to Motown, soul music, stuff from the earlier part of his life. If I've got that wrong, hopefully @staywild23 - or someone - will come along and correct me. But I was fascinated to read that.

Like the Whitney Houston songs I mentioned above. Not exactly the same thing but similar, I heard Ice Ice Baby by Vanilla Ice first. I had never heard the song it was sampled from until later. I did know Superfreak before U Can't Touch This,
This is a good example. I keep reading about the Superfreak / U Can't Touch This thing but if I ever feel like investigating this I never get past watching the MC Hammer video, which I love, and by the time I've watched it several times in a row and I've had my fill of it, I've lost interest in chasing up the Superfreak thing. :D

On a related note Ben was written for Donny Osmond to sing, but he was too busy at the time and One Bad Apple was originally offered to the Jackson 5. I think it was said that Berry Gordy didn't like it (or didn't think it was a hit) and turned it down.
The Osmonds were a busy, hard-working group and thank goodness for that, lol. I'm so glad Donny didn't get this song. I'm biased because I always preferred Michael and J5 to the Osmonds but I can't see Donny doing justice to Ben. He was a good performer and definitely had a good voice but, for this song? I just don't think he'd have turned in a classic performance like Michael did.
 
I definitely want artists to be adventurous and it's good to be adventurous with the music that you consume but, then again, there's only so much time available. It isn't possible to listen to everything. I was really interested to see in the recent discussion about the Brad Sundberg seminar a comment to the effect that Michael mostly liked to listen to music he was already familiar with. He wasn't spending a great deal of time listening to lots of contemporary stuff but mostly going back to Motown, soul music, stuff from the earlier part of his life. If I've got that wrong, hopefully @staywild23 - or someone - will come along and correct me. But I was fascinated to read that.

I'm not sure if Brad meant he didn't listen to any new stuff, but I think he meant Michael just wasn't that concerned with the charts or what was really popular at a given time. He said he spent a lot of time listening to classical music and Motown and "older" music, presumably stuff from the 60s and earlier. That was what Brad observed at least. It does sort of track with Michael who seemed to never name contemporary artists as people he was into, but would always find a way to mention Tchaikovsky lol.
 
I'm not sure if Brad meant he didn't listen to any new stuff,
Yes, that chimes with what I remember from your report. I certainly wasn't implying that Michael *never* listened to any new music. That's unlikely, immersed as he was in the music industry.

but I think he meant Michael just wasn't that concerned with the charts or what was really popular at a given time.
This crops up quite often in interviews with musicians, I've noticed.

He said he spent a lot of time listening to classical music and Motown and "older" music, presumably stuff from the 60s and earlier. That was what Brad observed at least. It does sort of track with Michael who seemed to never name contemporary artists as people he was into, but would always find a way to mention Tchaikovsky lol.
I don't blame the guy. He genuinely loved Tchaikovsky but I think he also used it as a neat way to sidestep questions about his musical preferences.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that chimes with what I remember from your report. I certainly wasn't implying that Michael *never* listened to any new music. That's unlikely, immersed as he was in the music industry.
Oh, I know you weren't! I just wanted to be clear for anyone else reading :)

I don't blame the guy. He genuinely loved Tchaikovsky but I think he also used it as a neat way to sidestep questions about his musical preferences.
I hadn't really thought of that! Interesting point. I always loved when he said that though, because to me it just made him that much cooler lol.
 
This is a good example. I keep reading about the Superfreak / U Can't Touch This thing but if I ever feel like investigating this I never get past watching the MC Hammer video, which I love, and by the time I've watched it several times in a row and I've had my fill of it, I've lost interest in chasing up the Superfreak thing. :D
Most of my relatives either listened to R&B, gospel, jazz, or blues and maybe a few listened to country. That's what I heard mainly as a kid. Few if any listened to rock. The ones that did, it usually had R&Bish elements like Doobie Brothers, Santana, Steely Dan, & Rare Earth. So I heard Rick James all the time, either from people playing his records or on the radio
 
Just fyi, 2 new 12sec snippets of gywoom have leaked on twitter.

Funny note, twitter's recommend that to me
 
Instead of foucusing on the bad/negative things about Invincible I would find it even more interesting if people came with their high-lights.

What do you really like about Invincible?
Lots of slower stuff. I know lots of people really hate that about the album but I love it. Doesn't feel repetitive to me at all. Tbf, I don't play the album straight through from beginning to end but I never have done that with my albums, even back in the days of vinyl.

Michael doing lots of ballad-y stuff. Mm ... ❤️
 
Or he had other priorities, being a single father of 2 toddlers!
This is not a valid argument.

Michael Jackson had a litany of babysitters, nannies, etc, to take care of his two children so as to freely focus on the making of his new album.
I've heard someone complain about the vocals on this song which I can't understand. I think the lead vocals and the backing vocals are as perfect as it gets.
Complaints towards 'Whatever Happens' are more directed towards the fact that Michael Jackson basically covered the original demo.

When 'Whatever Happens' was released it was received with praise by many of his fans.

But when the original demo later came to light, many of his fans became extremely disappointed, and they felt that Michael Jackson cheated them.

There is also another issue with this song: the few words that Carlos Santana and Michael Jackson exchange at the very end should not have been included.
Bad,Dangerous and History are all amazing albums but for many reasons I just dont care for the Invincible album at all. The songs pales in comparison with earlier albums and the enginer/producers or whatever isnt the same as earlier and its very noticable.
It has been written that unlike his previous studio albums, on the 'Invincible' album the sound engineers, producers, songwriters, etc, were not working together with some sort of a family spirit.

For example, they did not organize dinners, nor did they have fun altogether (including Michael Jackson).

This explained not only many of the album's substandard tracks but also it had a very noticeable effect on the cohesion of the album.
 
Back
Top