I'm probably too good a kisser for you.
Music Michael Jackson is Dead (All general comment)
- Thread starter Alex
- Start date
How many threads on the cafe take a turn for the gay?
I don't think telling us that utter rubbish like Usher and Timberlake were inspired by MJ advances his case for musical greatness TBH.
I think he was a genius performer but a very well produced, packaged and presented musician. Vocally he was, at his best pretty damn good even if he became a parody of himself in later years. Not a huge fan even if I like quite a few individual tracks. That said his output after Thriller was rubbish with only one decent track, Smooth Criminal. Bad was diabolically bad with the exception of that one track. The title track itself was so embarrassing because MJ is about as gangsta as Penfold from Danger Mouse.
Thriller was a record of it's time and for that alone, if nothing else he will be remembered as a bit of a legend but calling him a musical genius is way over the top IMO.
I've been one of the most serious people in this thread actually. Spoony started with the kissing.
And Spoony started kissing you? Did he use tongue and did you reciprocate?
There is no doubt about that
You are? That doesn't bode well.
I'm not one to kiss and tell Wibbs.
And your comment that everything produced after Thriller bar Smooth Criminal was rubbish is nonsense.
It isn't at all. Some half decent pop fluff, albeit pop fluff that did nothing at all for me. You have to admit that Bad, and the video in particular, is deeply embarrassing. Like a kid playing dress up and expecting to be taken seriously.
TBH I'm amazed that so many people take him so seriously because at the time he wasn't anything more than well selling lightweight pop music that Mum's, kids and teenage girls rated. A step above Take That and the like but only a step because all of his stuff was so manufactured.
Not to mention Ebony and Ivory which was cringeworthy.
TBH I'm amazed that so many people take him so seriously because at the time he wasn't anything more than well selling lightweight pop music that Mum's, kids and teenage girls rated. A step above Take That and the like but only a step because all of his stuff was so manufactured.
Not to mention Ebony and Ivory which was cringeworthy.
I wouldn't question for a second that he was talented. Arguing that he wasn't a genius is sort of forcing me to pick apart his contributions and go a little far...he was certainly talented....but so is Gary Barlow. Wibble is talking complete sense. Though I would probably give him a little bit more credit, Bad was ridiculous....anyone trying to retroactively give that some kind of deep artistic credit is ...er...Off The Wall
Aaaah....it's like Kipling at his finest..or maybe it isn't..at all
When talking of Urban music. Raess has a point. Most of it nowadays is cringe worthy. But in terms of songs in general, it's definitely average. One of the weaker songs on Invincible. & one of his weakest singles to date.
I know he did. Michael used to write and compose most of his songs.
Sure. He helped produce a song and just hummed the strings? O PleaseSo just because folks played the instruments on the song their the ones who must have come up with how the instruments are suppsoed to sound? Are you kidding me?
Right. Arranging the beat is the simplist thing ever. That's why so many people
make loads of money and make loads of hist by just making beats for songs. ...oh wait
You seem to think that when a song is produced only one peson should arrange and play every single instrument on it.
That's he silliest thing you've said on this topic to date.
You really are not serious at all.
It never occured to you that to producer of a song must over see how every aspect of it is put together and arranged?? Mellodically and rhythymically? That they are the ones who arrange and decide how every instrument should be played and should sound. Whether they can actually play that particular instrument or not?If he's being called A Musical Genius!! then yes I do.....or at least the best bits of it.
I don't think he's shit Cheif...neither do I think he had no input...he was clearly very talented and had a lot of input into his songs...However he wasn't a musical genius. That's all
Mozart was a musical genius. Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles are musical genius'....Michael Jackson helped produce some lovely pop records. Not the flippin same...no matter how culturally significant and famous he was
In fact I've spent this whole thread arguing why I don't think he was...and you just analyse my points with scorn...You haven't once actually tried to convince me why he actually was a musical genius..why was he?
The Girl is Mine demo - before McCartney came on board
YouTube - Michael Jackson: 24 "The Girl Is Mine (Special Intro, Without McCatney)" [HD Thriller Un. Demos C.]
YouTube - Michael Jackson: 24 "The Girl Is Mine (Special Intro, Without McCatney)" [HD Thriller Un. Demos C.]
This is completely true, although at the end of the day labelling people as geniuses is mostly subjective
I wonder how MJ arranged all of his music when he couldn't read music?
Chris Martin from Coldplay can play the piano, but he can't read music
Finally I get your true reason.
As an after thought I wonder what you class Quincy Jones as.
I believe you. I just think you are judging him too harshly.
I've tried before. You just keep ignoring it. He wrote and composed the majority of his songs. Composed!
He also co produced his 3 best albums with Quincy Jones. You can't class his co Producer Quincy Jones as music maestro and genius and the turn and say Michael isn't one. Especially when the work wasn't one sided. Especially when Quincy himself never played all the instruments on the tracks he produce with him either. Yet finished items like Thriller or Don't Stop till You Get Enough ( the backing tracks)that they worked on together where musical master pieces. Not just run of the mill "lovely pop records". MJ didn't get famous for mere "lovely pop". That is what people like Spears have got famous for.
A track like "Don't Stop Till You Get Enough" can have all the lyrics removed and still blow away all other songs around in its genre today. Because it was that darn good. You don't help to produced such a track with out having that something extra about you musically. I don't think its possible.
But that's my view. At at least I'm finally able to fully understand why you don't think him a musical genius. Which is fair enough. Thanks for the good discussion.
so after 45 pages are we certain he is actually dead then?
A very good producer....Not a musical genius
Well I think you're elevating him and his songs to a level of class & artistry they aren't really worthy of. Amidst all the debating of how much he actually contributed to song writing, we've completely over looked the point that most of the songs were hardly genius anyway....They were plastic pop for the most part and hardly Mozart's Requiem
No, his dancing & entertainment played a massive part. It was his live performance of Billie Jean at Motown 25 that signaled his arrival as a superstar....Not just the song itself...Ditto the Thriller video...it was that, and not the song, that made him such a massive solo star. He was a genius at dancing and entertainment, but not musically
He is going to be very pissed off if he isn't because they buried him recently.
It is subjective, so I'm giving my opinion. I never said the sound of the song isn't important it's probably the most important part. But right after that for me comes the lyrics. It's a combination of all the parts that make a great great song. And all the great songs have a fine mix between the artistry of the lyrics and the magic of the sound. MJ was all about the melody and groove. I'm not trying to take anything away from him. I grew up being a huge fan, but saying he's a great lyricist is laughable.
The importance of lyrics is something that can't be discussed really. It's an individual opinion. But irrespective of that , he was lyrically just alright. Never up there with the greats and a step above regular pop music.
The problem is certain Jackson fans want to portrait him as brilliant at everything. He wasn't, no one ever has been. The Beatles had their positives, Dylan had his, Zeppelin had theirs, U2 have theirs and like them, so did MJ.
I do absolutely love U2. But for me to claim their music was as catchy as MJ's would be silly. Or to claim Iron Maiden wrote songs as well Dylan. They all have strengths, and we pick and choose the ones that make more sense to us.
Even despite the fact he can actually play every instrument he has ever produced. Interesting.
I am not the one comparing apples with oranges. You can't compare Classical music to the music MJ made. That makes little sense. The genre's are so different and require such different things.
If you want to compare music compare MJ's music with things people like Prince and Stevie Wonder made. One fo hwomn you classed as genius. Yet he has never played or create classical music thet fellows like Mozart made.
Plastic pop is Britney Spears class of music. Period. To class things like "Don't Stop Till You get Enough" as plastic pop is just going over the top for no reason. Wether you think it musical genuis or not. You should have more respect for such music than that.
I never said the song along made him a massive star. I'm not sure what made you think that. But to claim it's only because of his dancing (Motown 25 etc) and the video that Thriller became the biggest album ever is just wrong. The music is what really drove its success.
Very few pop, rock or R&B records in the last 20 plus years of it's existence come close to or surpass anything that album had on it.
Those that do are from people of the class of Led Zepplin. Which says it all for me.
He may not be genuis to you. But plastic pop class he isn't.
Anyway, as I said earlier, I now better appreciate your point of view from what you've told me.
Fair enough. I just feel you seem to think Lyrics carry more weight than their songs. Which they really shouldn't. For great songs don't always contain great lyrics. But great lyrics can at times make great songs.
That is why an MJ is a great song writer. But as a lyricist he is just good. Not great. IMO it's in pure rock or blues that you find truly great lyricists of the Bob Dylan ilk. Or in the type of hiphop that is about poetry with substance.
No, I give them a 60-40 percent weightage, probably. I'm a rock person so pardon my opinion. For me a good song can do without great lyrics, but a great song needs great lyrics, or at least an under tone of something with substance.
I know I grew up an MJ fan, but the fact that a rock music person like me likes his music, says a lot about him.
No need for the pardon. In fact pardon me for misreading you. I see where you're coming from better. Lyrics do carry a some more weight in rock I also feel. Since you write rock songs I see why you view songs that way.
That's true too. But a song can also be great with the simplest of lyrics tbf. Hey Jude And Yesterday of the Beatles are my favorite examples. Simple lyrics, great songs.
Indeed it does.
wtf
Well he didn't really write enough to be considered one for me. He was a session musician more than a 'writer', though he did write...It wasn't really prolific or astounding on the whole.. I'd consider him more talented at music than Jackson was though..
Well I disagree. I think it was at most 40/60 music...and again, I disagree few albums have come close to surpassing anything on it since...wildly subjective that statement is for a start. Sales aren't everything Chief.
The Backstreet Boys Millenium sold more than Dangerous....would you consider that Dangerous didn't come close to surpassing anything on that, admittedly wonderful, album?
Again, I'd redirect you to the lyrics of Bad. Almost all of the things Jackson wrote about in his best work he had very little experience of ...it wasn't deep heartfelt stuff. It was fluff. Pop. Plastic. When he started writing personal stuff, like Stranger in Moscow, it wasn't particularly that amazing musically...That song is alright tbf, an certainly his least cheesy to date...but it still isn't Stairway to heaven.
And me yours
Very few songs in the last few decades come close to any on an mj record? You're having a laugh. This is all skewed becUse of sales. There has been lots of music much better than a lot on dangerous or any other mj album. That's how music is. No one album can have 11 songs better than anything released for the next 20 years.
Nirvanas nevermind for me was a better album, so in my opi ion it definitely had more than a few songs to match mj's. That's just one example. However your opiion might be it's odd to say those mj 11 songs have been the best 11 for the last two to three decades
Nirvanas nevermind for me was a better album, so in my opi ion it definitely had more than a few songs to match mj's. That's just one example. However your opiion might be it's odd to say those mj 11 songs have been the best 11 for the last two to three decades
To be honest, Amol, the music you listen to reflects you're mood. As for MJ his stuff was very accessible - pop if you were. I don't think his songs were ever intended to be deep and meaningful - but when he was it best he did help create some fantastic pop music. Thriller is as good as anything in that respect - for me his best album by mile. And it still sounds great.
Interesting.
On another tangent though, what do you think score writing for movies?
I agree.
Perhaps. But it many ways it really isn't just subjective. IMO you harshly judge the content of that album. As a pop rock album it has very few that are it's equal. & those that are, are of only legends. Which says it all.
I'm not talking sales. That stuff from that album is still better than the vast majority of tracks you here out today. & that has been the case since 1983. That isn't just about sales. The production that album had, that he and Quincy came up with was something else. Even if you could erase all the lyrics from the tracks and just listen to the music alone. You would see very few tracks are put together as well as that.
That package was a great reason why Thriller became a behemoth sells wise. Once you sat down and forgot the dancing MJ and just listened. The stuff was rather excellent mostly.
There weren't released in the same year so never competed with each other. So I wouldn't compare their selling power. Just their content.
The content on Dangerous literally shits on everything in the BackStreet boys album. I know other albums that sold far less that do the same too.
Fair enough.
IMO though his one and only album that was truly pop plastic was Bad. That is why I get amazed when people think it was his last great work.
Any way for me stuff like Wanna Be Starting Something was personal stuff. Earth Song was personal stuff. Leave me alone, Billie Jean were personal stuff. Give In to me was personal stuff. Things like Keep the faith was heart felt. I just don't buy that all that his best work was strictly impersonal stuff. ('Cause the Bad album was largely in impersonal and I've honestly heard better from MJ.) All though I get why you might see it that way.
IMO He had a fine balance between the two. It's when his personal life got worse, that all his songs literally got worse. He wasn't focused enough on his creativity and his work begun to really suffer.
That's how you'd have Earth Song and Stranger in Moscow surrounded by laughable rock like "D.S" and weak R&B like "This Time Around".
He begun to recover some what when he made Invincible. But the self pity and lack of focus on just music had taken it's toll on his marketability.
Only mind mind blowing stuff, of the quality on Thriller plus a mind blowing concerts series or sadly, death were the only solutions to any sort of recovery in terms of his ability to sell music like he did in the past.
Post 1993, I agree. IMO He was lousy at self pity in all honesty. He was better off singing about happiness, love, being chased around or saving the world.
Whenever he touched his own anger, or negativity the results were largely bland. (i.e Scream & D.S
)Agreed. I don't think he was ever lyrically good enough to produce a "Stair way to heaven". Even though he was a good lyricist.
Good on ya.
Stairway to Heaven is a bad example because, great song though it is, the lyrics are gibberish.
I consider it one of the highest forms of accomplishment musically (depending on the score obviously). The closest contemporary composers come to mixing popular, catchy and accessible music with the high art of classical music...Which (depending on your view of each) is possibly a greater achievement than both individually. However as far as I know he only really scored one or two films ('The Color Purple' and possibly The Wiz, but that was a collection of songs rather than a score and I'm pretty sure they were already songs from a musical anyway...not 100% though)...He was hardly Williams or Morricone...two people I would undoubtably call musical genius'.
Still...If someone were to call Quincey Jones a musical genius, I certainly wouldn't take issue with it. His ability to compose, write and arrange to a high level is extremely comendable. It's not all about how well you can do things, it's about how good those things you do are...so that's subjective. For me, Jackson's 'arightness' at all of those things, rather than 'high levelness' is why he isn't a genius.
See I don't agree with this. For me most of Thriller (certainly the 'big hits') are 4 bar loops. I've learned to play a few of them and chord wise they're incredibly easy (although easiness doesn't mean it's crap obviously, almost all the Beatles stuff is 'easy') A lot of them are essentially hip hop beats in arrangement principle. 4 bar loop over a beat. Not really incredibly in any sense. Just good pop.
I though Earth Song was dire...Jarvis Cocker gave that the treatment it deserved. But subjective obviously. Leave me alone & Billie Jean I'll give you...both very good songs.
I can dig that.
Thing is though how many big 4 bar loops tracks have ever been better? I doubt there are many. I honestly haven't heard many albums better produced. Yea they were simple (I remember my high school orchestra playing stuff like Billie Jean easily back in the day) tracks, but most pop to date hasn't touched them as a package. Which IMO is what made that album gold. Musically it was less complex than Off The Wall I feel. But it was really designed in the best possible way for mass appeal. & few albums have ever done it was well. While still being quality all through.
You could have fooled me with your earlier statements about it.
Truth is it was meh.
Agreed.
Firstly, it's not any MJ record. Just Thriller. It didn't win 8 grammies because of just sales. It was that darn good.
If you think it did, you are the one having a laugh.
& no there isn't lots of music much better than what's on Thriller. No way.
Thriller is a classic. & classic songs over the years are not so many. They wouldn't be classic if they were.
No one talked of Dangerous when that was said. Just of Thriller. Thriller has better music than most of the pop rock music released since it came out. That is a statement of fact. The only music you will as good or better than it is from legends.
Sorry. Save for "Feel like Teen Spirit" Their album for me was dire and meh. I for one was sad Kobain (spelling?) kicked the bucket. For it made their album on which that song appeared way too overrated.
I said MJ's 11 songs on the Thriller album have been better than the majority of pop rock & R&B songs out since 1983. Very different from what you've just said.
This Is It was released today, saw it earlier, and its fecking brilliant...you've gotta go and watch it (at the cinema!).
The sequences for Smooth Criminal, Earth Song, Thriller are on another level...the greatest entertainer ever.
The sequences for Smooth Criminal, Earth Song, Thriller are on another level...the greatest entertainer ever.
Returning back tonight, in a live sceance on SkyOne at 10pm.
It'll be interesting to see what he's been up to since the whole cardiac death hooplah.
It'll be interesting to see what he's been up to since the whole cardiac death hooplah.