Latest on MJJC

'MICHAEL': The studio/compilation wikipedia debate

botdf

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
109
Points
0
The MICHAEL article at wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_(album)

is under attack from users that have hijacked the topic. They have placed 'MICHAEL' in the same section as things like "Number Ones", "History's Greatest hits", "King of Pop" etc, instead of the section with his studio albums, e.g. Off the Wall, Bad, Dangerous, etc..

The compilation faction seems to have "won" so far. They've convinced management to semi-lock the topic until December 20th

My guess is these "compilation" supporters are in fact Cascio haters/doubters/deniers

The fact is this is a studio album. It's nuts to have this listed as a compilation album, it's nothing like a compilation album.

The people that have hijacked this wikipedia topic are deliberately trying to downplay this album and marginalize it.

What's your opinion on the matter? Studio or compilation. Food for thought.

By the way if you have a wikipedia account, you can edit this back to studio. I suggest this be done at least once a day by every user outraged by this decision.
 
I can appreciate why it would be viewed as a compilation album, as it is essentially a compilation of unreleased songs over a period of many years. Michael Jackson did not put this album together as a "whole".
 
HornyForMike said:
I can appreciate why it would be viewed as a compilation album, as it is essentially a compilation of unreleased songs over a period of many years. Michael Jackson did not put this album together as a "whole".
Click to expand...

:puke:
 
HornyForMike said:
I can appreciate why it would be viewed as a compilation album, as it is essentially a compilation of unreleased songs over a period of many years. Michael Jackson did not put this album together as a "whole".
Click to expand...

I agree with you...
 
Well, I would have done the same. Michael only had 7 solo albums Off the Wall to Invincible. Michael is a collection of the unfinished songs he was working on. It absolutely can't be labeled as Michael's 8th studio album. That would be outrageous!

Same thing with "This Is It"..it's not Michael's fourth concert tour after HIStory...it's simply a look at the unfinished work that he was doing before he passed. The Michael album is the same. And I really respect Sony in that regard because they correctly marketed it as a collection of Michael's unfinished songs that they completed. Even the album cover and the title of the album are a tribute to him and not something totally new. That is one decision I truly respect Sony for making. Same thing with This Is It. Could have easily been marketed as a michael jackson concert film, but they instead chose to market it as his final REHEARSALS. All in all, I think Michael should definitely be among the string of material released since Number Ones..
 
This is a textbook definition of an compilation. This isn't any sort of album to me - not in its presentation, its music, its vocals, or its overall sound.

I may have considered it an album - or an attempt at an album - if it sounded more like a cohesive collection.
 
they should just classify it as "Posthumous album" as they did with Tupac etc..
 
botdf said:
The MICHAEL article at wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_(album)

is under attack from users that have hijacked the topic. They have placed 'MICHAEL' in the same section as things like "Number Ones", "History's Greatest hits", "King of Pop" etc, instead of the section with his studio albums, e.g. Off the Wall, Bad, Dangerous, etc..

The compilation faction seems to have "won" so far. They've convinced management to semi-lock the topic until December 20th

My guess is these "compilation" supporters are in fact Cascio haters/doubters/deniers

The fact is this is a studio album. It's nuts to have this listed as a compilation album, it's nothing like a compilation album.

The people that have hijacked this wikipedia topic are deliberately trying to downplay this album and marginalize it.

What's your opinion on the matter? Studio or compilation. Food for thought.

By the way if you have a wikipedia account, you can edit this back to studio. I suggest this be done at least once a day by every user outraged by this decision.
Click to expand...


Why place the blame with the people that are against the Cascio tracks? Why does everything have to be about that?

Anyway, in my opinion, I don't see this as a compilation in the same league as those Greatest Hits CDs.
 
I see nothing wrong with this. He didn't pick, fix, choose, or have any input whatsoever. (And you can sure damn tell.)
 
MusicMan26 said:
Why place the blame with the people that are against the Cascio tracks? Why does everything have to be about that?

Anyway, in my opinion, I don't see this as a compilation in the same league as those Greatest Hits CDs.
Click to expand...

IKR.

Let's face it. This is not a studio album. It's a posthumous album. Period. If they want to classify it as a compilation album, it really isn't too far away from the truth. The nature of this album is indeed closer to a complilation album than a studio album.

Michael had 10 studio albums and one remix album - 6 of them are the best ever created in the history of music. His legacy catalog is as perfect as it is now.
 
MusicMan26 said:
Why place the blame with the people that are against the Cascio tracks? Why does everything have to be about that?
Click to expand...

You're right, not a fair judgment, I respectfully retract that part of the statement.
 
MJStorm said:
MICHAEL is NOT the eighth studio album (Off the Wall - Invincible), but it is NOT a collection.
Click to expand...

I can agree with that. As long as we acknowledge that Michael is not the follow-up to Invincible. I personally called it a collection. But I guess you could call it anything you want..posthumous album maybe? I don't know. I just don't think that being listed with Number Ones and The Ultimate Collection is something wrong. I mean it's either an MJ studio album or it's not, right?
 
The album contains a remix of a song already released 6 years ago.

A "studio" album or albums like the Biggie/Tupac albums would contain fairly recent, original material.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top