Surprisingly modern sounding MJ songs

[17mosorio]

I was just listening to Unbreakable, and I had a sudden realization that it sounded entirely like it could've been released recently. I could definitely imagine hearing it on the radio as if it were a new single or something.

I think subconsciously I always knew lots of Michael's music sounded timeless, but for some reason it just really hit me.

Which songs do you think sound like they could play on the radio nowadays without seeming out of place? I'd like to know what you guys think!

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Which songs do you think sound like they could play on the radio nowadays without seeming out of place? I'd like to know what you guys think!

IMO, almost his entire discography.

 

[DuranDuran]

IMO, almost his entire discography.

Unless they get a trap remix or feature Rihanna, Pitbull, or Fatty Wap, I don't see much of it getting played on the main R&B stations that play new music.:cheeky:

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Unless they get a trap remix or feature Rihanna, Pitbull, or Fatty Wap, I don't see much of it getting played on the main R&B stations that play new music.:cheeky:

This must get plenty of spins then.:jump:

 

[Zack44]

This must get plenty of spins then.:jump:

Oh God no. Let's pray that the Estate never tries to do something like THAT again!

Anyway, the whole Invincible album in particular (even songs that didn't make the final record) has a lot of tracks that were ahead of their time. That's why it took 6 years for him to make after HIStory (personally I think the Blood On the Dance Floor songs count as an EP's worth of material). He wanted all of his music to sound cutting-edge, so he got the best of the best producers to work on tracks with him. Rodney Jerkins was delivering hit after hit at the time, so it only made sense for him to be Invincible's main producer. Even during 2006-2009, Michael was collaborating with the likes of will.i.am. and Neff-U for songs that were never finished.

That's one of the many reasons I love MJ's music: he always tried (and succeeded) to be ahead of what other artists put out. To Michael, it had to sound perfect, so he meticulously worked hard to make his musical visions into a reality.

 

[barbee0715]

They only play "trap" music on R&B stations? What exactly is trap music? I've seen some stuff on YouTube but thought they were parodies.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

They only play "trap" music on R&B stations? What exactly is trap music? I've seen some stuff on YouTube but thought they were parodies.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_music

 

[Doggone]

MJ himself said that Invincible was ahead of its time. And he was right. Invincible is a great album. But it took a long time to get used to the songs. But now, I looove most of the songs on the album. I really hope one day the album gets the credits and spotlight it deserves.

 

[DuranDuran]

They only play "trap" music on R&B stations? What exactly is trap music? I've seen some stuff on YouTube but thought they were parodies.

Well, there's actually 2 R&B formats on regular free radio. One is the main R&B stations, which plays rap and singers like Rihanna & Bryson Tiller. This is where trap is played and in Billboard is charted on the chart called "hip hop/R&B". The audience is primarily younger. An popular example of trap would be 7/11 by Beyoncé. Trap is a sound in a lot of currently popular R&B and rap songs. The other format is called "adult R&B" which doesn't play trap and the audience is more likely to be middle aged & older. They play new songs by veteran acts like Charlie Wilson, New Edition, Maxwell, Jaheim, & Jill Scott, plus some younger ones like Adele. Adult R&B doesn't play exclusively new songs though, there's a lot of oldies which the "hip hop/R&B" doesn't play. It's the Tom Joyner/Sinbad cruise audience. The hip hop/R&B format is the more mainstream popular one and these acts often get way more views on Youtube than the "adult R&B" acts as their audience is less likely to be watching videos on Youtube. Hip hop/R&B acts are also the ones who crossover and get Top 40 airplay today.

 

[17mosorio]

Unless they get a trap remix or feature Rihanna, Pitbull, or Fatty Wap, I don't see much of it getting played on the main R&B stations that play new music.:cheeky:

I was referring to radio in general, like top 40 pop, etc.

 

[17mosorio]

MJ himself said that Invincible was ahead of its time. And he was right. Invincible is a great album. But it took a long time to get used to the songs. But now, I looove most of the songs on the album. I really hope one day the album gets the credits and spotlight it deserves.

THIS. Invincible is *so* underrated, not just by the general public, but even within the fanbase too.

 

[analogue]

THIS. Invincible is *so* underrated, not just by the general public, but even within the fanbase too.

I wouldn't say Invincible is underrated within the fanbase (At least not on this forum). It's one of his most talked about albums. Mainly because of the mixed reaction it got from fans.

I remember hearing that Michael was ready to release Invincible back in 1999, but because of some disagreements with Sony, the album was delayed until 2001. I've always wanted to hear what the 1999 version of the album sounded like, and what the song selection was.

 

[mj_frenzy]

I was just listening to Unbreakable, and I had a sudden realization that it sounded entirely like it could've been released recently. I could definitely imagine hearing it on the radio as if it were a new single or something.

Despite its modern sound & nice hook, thematically ‘Unbreakable’ is not really a radio-friendly song.

Even during 2006-2009, Michael was collaborating with the likes of will.i.am. and Neff-U for songs that were never finished.

I do hope that none of those ideas/songs will come to light (in any form)!

I remember hearing that Michael was ready to release Invincible back in 1999, but because of some disagreements with Sony, the album was delayed until 2001. I've always wanted to hear what the 1999 version of the album sounded like, and what the song selection was.

The 1999 version of the ‘Invincible’ album included (among others) also the following songs:

‘Break Of Dawn’
'Speechless’
‘Blue Gangsta’
‘We’ve Had Enough’
‘A Place With No Name’
‘You Rock My World’
‘Xscape’
‘She Was Loving Me/Chicago’
‘Cry’

The aforementioned songs were the first to have been recorded (1998 – 1999) & were meant to make the final version of that album. But while they were being mixed, MJ decided to go to a completely different musical direction.

Personally, I really liked those songs because they are reminiscent of the ‘Off The Wall’ album (both musically & vocally).

 

[MJJ'slilgrl]

I think "Behind the Mask" was ahead of its time. When I first heard it, I couldn't believe that it had been recorded in the 80's. I also agree that "Invincible" is very modern sounding, especially "Heartbreaker."

 

[HIStoric]

I wouldn't say Invincible is underrated within the fanbase (At least not on this forum). It's one of his most talked about albums. Mainly because of the mixed reaction it got from fans.

Yeah. TBH this forum overuses the word "underrated".

This must get plenty of spins then.:jump:

Hahaha nah. Pitbull was a shit choice. If they actually got someone super big and well-liked like Rihanna (for example) then it has a very real potential of getting heeeeaps of spins. Case in point: JT with LNFSG.

I'm honestly fine with them bringing in posthumous duet partners for MJ, so long as they release the solo-demo and solo-contemporised as they did on Xscape. Having the solos is key (unless MJ wrote further lyrics and never recorded those lines or intended for it to be a duet).

 

[innuendo141]

Listening to HIStory at work and everything on that album sounds completely timeless. You Are Not Alone is blowing me away today. The drums during the key change.... Oh lord

 

[Andymachine]

I think a lot of his songs would sound pretty good in the "modern era" . One that would NOT is "BAD" the actual title track. I think it was cheesy back then even at the time. Hate it. Excellent album but horrible title track. Dangerous i think would be an album that would still work. Its probably for me his technical peak. However the good thing about MJ was when he did a track live it sounded so much better. Good example of this is "She's out of My Life" . Hate the studio version , live ( especially on the Dangerous Tour) is just impeccable

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

I'm honestly fine with them bringing in posthumous duet partners for MJ, so long as they release the solo-demo and solo-contemporised as they did on Xscape. Having the solos is key (unless MJ wrote further lyrics and never recorded those lines or intended for it to be a duet).

Meh, I'm not really a fan of the posthumous duet stuff.
Do I undertstand why it's done, yes I do.
Was it a success, yes.
Do I like it, no, no I don't.

I still don't like how they passed off LNFSG as a "collab" instead of a feature.
I also don't like Justin Timberlake in general.
He comes across as very fake to me.

 

[KOPV]

Honestly to me 90% of songs Michael has done (from vocal style to rhythms) could be released today in my opinion and be smash hits.. The only thing that sometimes sounds dated is choice of instruments used.. which with masters can easily be changed!

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

THIS. Invincible is *so* underrated, not just by the general public, but even within the fanbase too.

Invincible is not underrated within the fanbase. It's frequently discussed here and the general consesus is just that it wasn't MJ's best album.

 

[analogue]

Meh, I'm not really a fan of the posthumous duet stuff.
Do I undertstand why it's done, yes I do.
Was it a success, yes.
Do I like it, no, no I don't.

I still don't like how they passed off LNFSG as a "collab" instead of a feature.
I also don't like Justin Timberlake in general.
He comes across as very fake to me.

I hate posthumous duet stuff too. It's just a cheap and tacky way of getting a hit.

 

[Tony R]

Jam sticks out for me. But I'd say everything on Dangerous save Keep The Faith which has the same synthesised sound the Bad album sounds.

As perfect as Bad is, you can date it straight away to mid-late '80s.

Scream, TDCAU, Stranger in Moscow, Give In To Me, WII, WYBT all deserve honourable mentions also.

SOOML demo dates better than the original. Just that voice and an acoustic guitar will never date.

 

[mj_frenzy]

I'm honestly fine with them bringing in posthumous duet partners for MJ, so long as they release the solo-demo and solo-contemporised as they did on Xscape.

I am shocked to see that this marketing strategy is supported by some of his fans!

MJ’s solo vocals (in songs he recorded) were never meant to be used as posthumous duets. The phenomenon of posthumous duets aims mainly at profits, but it significantly (if not fully) ruins the authentic feeling that his songs used to have.

On the contrary, I have no problem at all when MJ’s songs are effectively sampled in tracks from different (R’n’B) artists, such as Aaliyah’s ‘Got To Give It Up’, or Monica’s ‘All Eyez on Me’ (these two are among my favorite ones).

As a matter of fact, in Monica’s song there are few, new MJ’s vocals (ad-libs) from ‘Pretty Young Thing’ that were not even used when the song was included on the ‘Thriller’ album!

[video=youtube;VKBnXKwKZN0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKBnXKwKZN0[/video]

[video=youtube;r6WaYjJHQn8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6WaYjJHQn8[/video]

 

[DuranDuran]

MJ’s solo vocals (in songs he recorded) were never meant to be used as posthumous duets.

You could say this for anybody like Nat King Cole, Elvis Presley, John Lennon, Hank Williams, Marvin Gaye, and many others. But it's done. Mike himself participated in such a project for Minnie Riperton on a song called I'm In Love Again. There's the Verve remix albums for old jazz songs. Even the 3 living Beatles (George was still alive at the time) used John Lennon demos that they got from Yoko for the Anthology songs Free As A Bird & Real Love.

 

[sknoker]

His Bad album definitely sounds the most dated, it has the biggest '80s feel' to it. Dangerous follows with the new jack swing songs having that 90s sound but HIStory and especially Invincible, with it's experimental sounds, could easily pass for a more modern album than 2001.

 

[mj_frenzy]

You could say this for anybody like Nat King Cole, Elvis Presley, John Lennon, Hank Williams, Marvin Gaye, and many others. But it's done. Mike himself participated in such a project for Minnie Riperton on a song called I'm In Love Again. There's the Verve remix albums for old jazz songs. Even the 3 living Beatles (George was still alive at the time) used John Lennon demos that they got from Yoko for the Anthology songs Free As A Bird & Real Love.

Let me explain my train of thought: When an singer lays his vocals down, he does not have in his mind that these vocals are going to be used in another artist’s song (after that artist’s death). Or, alternatively, when an singer lays his vocals down, he does not have in his mind that these vocals are going to be used in his song (but after his death) along with another, living artist’s vocals.

Of course, posthumous duets are more of a necessary evil (in music industry) & there are many examples which prove that (including the ones you addressed).

Regarding the current sound of albums, generally I think that albums released at given periods have to include (to some extent) music elements of the eras in which they were released. Otherwise, they would not have appealed to many people (who lived at those periods), neither would they have achieved significant chart success (at given periods). I think that Duran Duran’s sound in their ‘80s albums (along with a fitting image to that sound) is a very characteristic example of that. But, at the same time, I strongly believe that Duran Duran squandered their potential by being engrossed in those (at that time) trends.

MJ’s albums (with the exception of ‘Invincible’ which virtually is a mishmash of different sounds) are not the exception to the rule. Still, this does not make them necessarily sound dated. Of course, some of his songs are heavily influenced by specific musical trends/sounds (such as, ‘Another Part Of Me’, or ‘Blood On The Dance Floor&#8217, which may give the impression of being sonically outmoded. So, I can understand those complaints that being raised even by his fans.

 

[HIStoric]

I am shocked to see that this marketing strategy is supported by some of his fans!

MJ’s solo vocals (in songs he recorded) were never meant to be used as posthumous duets. The phenomenon of posthumous duets aims mainly at profits, but it significantly (if not fully) ruins the authentic feeling that his songs used to have.

Let me explain my train of thought: When an singer lays his vocals down, he does not have in his mind that these vocals are going to be used in another artist’s song (after that artist’s death). Or, alternatively, when an singer lays his vocals down, he does not have in his mind that these vocals are going to be used in his song (but after his death) along with another, living artist’s vocals.

Doesn't take much to shock you then haha. Unlike some other fans, I don't mind if his music is used in interesting ways, which posthumous duets can be if done right. Like honestly, as long as the solo versions of MJ are available and the song itself is good and done respectfully, it really doesn't bother me. I enjoyed JT's take on LNFSG and I feel he was respectful to Michael. He doesn't try to out-do Michael and the song is mixed so Michael's vocals remain prominent when they are truly dueting on the final choruses. Was it to help profits and gain traction on the charts? From the perspective of The Estate/Sony, most likely, but so what? From the perspective of JT, given how much he looks up to MJ, I highly imagine he approached it it from a more respectful and artistic perspective. The output was good in my eyes so it was win-win.

It also doesn't bother me because Michael himself partook in similar practises. Notorious BIG did not record his verse for Shaquille O'Neal's "You Can't Stop The Reign" with the intention of it being included in the song "Unbreakable" but yet there it is. I'm fine with the use on Unbreakable because MJ wasn't disrespectful to Biggie and the output was good. Same story with LNFSG. I know that Biggie was a big fan of Michael, Michael too was a fan of Timberlake (he said in a 2008 interview that he really admired what he and Chris Brown were doing). So while not exactly the same, they're still pretty similar in my eyes.

In saying that, I can't say I want it to become a regular occurrence either, I'm not exactly keen on a "duets" album like that Elvis Christmas album a few years back. It's just something I don't mind seeing every once in a blue moon so long it meets the above criteria ya know?

You could say this for anybody like Nat King Cole, Elvis Presley, John Lennon, Hank Williams, Marvin Gaye, and many others. But it's done. Mike himself participated in such a project for Minnie Riperton on a song called I'm In Love Again. There's the Verve remix albums for old jazz songs. Even the 3 living Beatles (George was still alive at the time) used John Lennon demos that they got from Yoko for the Anthology songs Free As A Bird & Real Love.

Free as a Bird and Real Love are great songs, albeit tinted with sadness (I also like listening to John's demo of Real Love, specifically Take 4 I think it is).

Great examples of how posthumous duets can be interesting, I really like how Paul and George's added lines help complete Free as a Bird, how the reversed snippet of John saying "turned out nice again" at the end sounds like him saying "Made by John Lennon". It's also quite interesting reading how they approached this aspect of the Anthology project, it was an extremely delicate and difficult process for them and they (naturally) approached it with a lot of respect in regards to how John would feel.

 

[SmoothCriminal1995]

I think one of the reasons Michael's catalogue is so great, is because on the whole not much of it sounds dated. That's why you hear radio stations playing his music alongside the newest singles, rather than on rewind hours, because Mike's sound is still fresh to this day.

 

[DuranDuran]

Re: posthumous duets

It also doesn't bother me because Michael himself partook in similar practises. Notorious BIG did not record his verse for Shaquille O'Neal's "You Can't Stop The Reign" with the intention of it being included in the song "Unbreakable" but yet there it is. I'm fine with the use on Unbreakable because MJ wasn't disrespectful to Biggie and the output was good.

When Rod Serling was filming Twilight Zone, he had no idea that his voice was going to be used as a rap on Threatened or on a song at all. Old acts didn't know that their music was going to be sampled, because samplers hadn't been invented. Mike has used samples. In a similar way, there are commercials that mix old footage (ig. Bruce Lee, Fred Astaire, Brady Bunch, John Wayne, Marilyn Monroe, etc.) with whatever product that is being sold.

 

[Ms. BlueGangsta]

Re: posthumous duets

Doesn't take much to shock you then haha. Unlike some other fans, I don't mind if his music is used in interesting ways, which posthumous duets can be if done right. Like honestly, as long as the solo versions of MJ are available and the song itself is good and done respectfully, it really doesn't bother me. I enjoyed JT's take on LNFSG and I feel he was respectful to Michael. He doesn't try to out-do Michael and the song is mixed so Michael's vocals remain prominent when they are truly dueting on the final choruses. Was it to help profits and gain traction on the charts? From the perspective of The Estate/Sony, most likely, but so what? From the perspective of JT, given how much he looks up to MJ, I highly imagine he approached it it from a more respectful and artistic perspective. The output was good in my eyes so it was win-win.

It also doesn't bother me because Michael himself partook in similar practises. Notorious BIG did not record his verse for Shaquille O'Neal's "You Can't Stop The Reign" with the intention of it being included in the song "Unbreakable" but yet there it is. I'm fine with the use on Unbreakable because MJ wasn't disrespectful to Biggie and the output was good. Same story with LNFSG. I know that Biggie was a big fan of Michael, Michael too was a fan of Timberlake (he said in a 2008 interview that he really admired what he and Chris Brown were doing). So while not exactly the same, they're still pretty similar in my eyes.

In saying that, I can't say I want it to become a regular occurrence either, I'm not exactly keen on a "duets" album like that Elvis Christmas album a few years back. It's just something I don't mind seeing every once in a blue moon so long it meets the above criteria ya know?

Were going to have to agree to disagree on the posthumous "duets."

I've never gotten the vibe from Justin Timberlake that he truly looks up to or respects MJ (he's never seemed genuine to me).
I also wouldn't go as far as to say MJ was a "fan" of Justin Timberlake or Chris Brown because AFIK MJ was a fan of James Brown, Fred Astaire, the Nicholas Brothers, etc.
Was it possible that MJ liked Justin Timberlake and Chris Brown, yes it is (MJ liked a lot of artist such as Kanye West, Rihanna, Beyonce, Usher etc).
But I doubt MJ was a true fan of either of them.
Either way though, I wouldn't use that as a premise to justify the posthumous duets.

Also Biggie's rap on Unbreakable (as great as it is) isn't the same as shooting a whole video, and having an entire song laced with someone else's vocals then advertising it as a "collab."

I also COULD see this becoming a regular occurrence simply because it's a way to boost posthumous album sales.
But like I said, I guess were just going to have to agree to disagree. :/