analogue;4304534 said:
I understand but it was the only song with them as lead vocals & not one song performed. If i ever meet any of the remaining jacksons I'll be sure to ask in GLORIOUS detail!
What does a video "looking cheap" have to do with a company going bankrupt? Lots of music videos of the period & before were low budget. A music video is just a commercial for a record. The record labels did not want to spend much on them.
Absolutely! He is so SHARP here, like a lightning bolt. Maybe nitpicking but the intro dance to Billie Jean is entirely done like on Motown 25. Post Victory tour it never looked the same, the kicks were different, not as cool on the eye.
Yes absolutely love the lights and stage, other tours looked boring in this department.
Absolutely, I think live it blows the studio track away, there is a grittyness when he pronounces some of the lyrics here, he slurs them but he still sounds clear and unforced unlike later tours. When he comes in after Jermaine, he is like a hurricane. It is here that I started to love the track, I never gave it much attention otherwise.
You and me are probably one of the very few on this but I agree, I love it too. The music seems to fit stage, lighting and costumes.
I really enjoyed reading your comments on this thread and also the one about Thriller not being performed on the tour. Lots of stuff for me to think about, stuff I wanna follow up on, stuff I need to look out for when I revisit Victory. Haven't watched loads of it but have enjoyed the bits I've seen so far.
Yes. Kansas and NY, definitely but Toronto is my fave so far. But it's early days with Victory. I've watched Triumph and Destiny way more often.
I've seen some of this but need to go back and really absorb it properly. It blew my mind when I started to realise that is what I was seeing.
1000x better
I actually really love it when that happens. I just re-read the Time 1983 article about Michael. I had always been fairly lukewarm about it. Found it a bit all over the place. This time around I really loved it. Had a blast. So happy!
he’s also super clean and fluid with his movements. even when he gets aggressive he still looks tidy (if that’s possible).
I’d also add ‘rock with you’ to the list. ‘shake your body’ is also more dynamic with the brothers in my opinion. especially the final date where he announced his departure. I’m partial to the ones that are sung in the original key.
michael literally left a lifetime of content behind to enjoy. I can revisit certain things I may have overlooked, and rediscover them. I can never get bored
www.instagram.com
Makes sense, though. We know he didn't wanna tour with the brothers. The Victory tour is fire, the bits I've watched. But I wish Michael hadn't been pushed into doing something he didn't wanna do. He'd outgrown the family thing by then.
That would be so cool.
definitely agree with that. I was just under the impression that Michael didn’t want to tour in general at that point. he stated that ‘triumph’ would be his last. then again, he did continue to refer to himself as a ‘stage addict’.. I personally think that the ‘Motown 25’ reunion with all six brothers should have been their last.
Hm, that's interesting. I usually don't like to speculate about stuff like this bc how can I possibly know? But I'm thinking, maybe it was a combination of, he was already outgrowing the whole 'Jacksons' thing - even as early as Triumph - plus the strain of being on tour made him feel like that at that moment.
... so maybe that's part of why he kept touring. Of course, it's also mundane stuff like having contractual obligations, albums needing to be promoted etc. So there's all of that. The business side of things. But, maybe, he loved being onstage as much as he always said he did. So when the strain of being on tour had worn off and he had recovered, maybe he wanted to get back to it.
That would have worked. Otoh, bc he did Victory, we've got him singing TMIND. Which is fire. The bit where it switches over from Jermaine to Michael's vocals, omg! I'm kinda glad we've got that although if I could wave a magic wand and have Michael not be part of that tour, I would. But him doing TMIND is just so awesome.
nope. my initial instincts were right yet again. I don’t enjoy this tour, or live music in general. it’s great to see Michael glide, and if I was forced to watch a concert it would be from this tour. I stand by my original statement though . no point in repeating it..
Technically, if you go back far enough all recorded music is live. Especially before the mid 1960s when most records were in mono. Because of the technology, music had to be recorded live in studio, the singers, band, (& orchestra if one was used) at the same time. If somebody messed up, everybody had to do another take. Around the late 1960s or early 1970s, stereo recording consoles with more recording tracks were invented, which made it possible to do "one man band" records or punch a small part in for any mistakes.
That's why it's so magical to hear real instruments.
It depends on what somebody considers a "real instrument". I think when electric pianos, guitars, & later synthesizers first came around, some musicians of the time who had been playing traditional acoustic instruments did not accept them at first. That does not really have much to do with the recording equipment anyway. Probably somebody can use modern computerized instruments and record on an analogue console from the 1940s. Just everybody has to record at the same studio at the same time. They can't record their part as a computer file and email it to somebody else in another city/country to add their part like it is often done today. If multi-track consoles hadn't developed, then singers like Marvin Gaye & Michael Jackson could not have done their own background vocals.
I agree with some musicians didn't like digital that were used to acoustic instruments. I really wish I could see the process of how they did it back then. Just watching that video questioning what we're they thinking doing certain things just makes my mind wonder was it all done without computers with fl & pro tools (so far as vocal stacks.) I can't find any videos on YouTube about the multitrack process to them build it all.
I'm the complete opposite. I'm bewildered by how it's done nowadays. I understand it intellectually but, at the same time, I don't understand it at all. I'm no studio tech so I can't even really explain my confusion, lol. I can understand an interview with Keith Emerson talking about using Moogs but can't understand - not properly - what Greg Phillinganes is on about.
I've read that when drum machines, synth programming, & samplers became what was used in a lot of mainstream popular music during the 1980s, many session musicians who played on the records before that started to get fewer jobs. In popular R&B, the band (eg. Kool & The Gang) started to become extinct, especially when New Jack Swing blew up. By the 1990s, there were very few R&B bands on the radio. It all became vocal groups, solo singers, & rappers. The instrumental break in R&B music was replaced by a guest rapper break or the singing group had their own rappers as a member like TLC. This is also when the traditional producer like Quincy Jones was replaced by beatmaker producers like Timbaland.
I love your musical history let me say 1st
Not MJ-related at all, but I'll always think of Bob Dylan, lol. "He went electric?? Heresy!!" Never mind that his electric albums are now common fan favorites.
Michael was on all covers... Destiny, Triumph, Victory... it's a weird argument that the cover being a painted artwork would mean Michael wasn't interested in the project. In that case, he wasn't interested in Dangerous, HIStory, Blood On The Dance Floor and Invincible either. I think the correct conclusion is that Michael liked artworks on covers.
