Earlier today Christina Aguilera revealed on her radio station that she has enlisted the help of both Santigold & M.I.A. for her upcoming fourth studio album "Light & Darkness".

Santigold singer/songwriter/producer is best known for her critically acclaimed self-titled debut album.

Working with Aguilera won't be the first time that Santigold has teamed up with a mainstream pop artist, with the 32-year-old being responsible for penning Lily Allen's hit single "Littlest Things" and Ashlee Simpson's "Outta My Head" with Kenna.

This will be the first time though that M.I.A. has worked with a pop artist before, though she did collaborate with Timbaland for his "Shock Value" album back in 2007.

Aguilera also stated during the interview that she was in the process of "finishing up" the new album which she believes is her "best work" yet. She described her new collaborations as "the best of both worlds experimenting" and that she'll be showing off a different side to her vocals that we've never heard before.

"Light & Darkness" is also set to feature contributions from Tricky Stewart, Ladytron, Claude Kelly, Steve Morales, Le Tigre, Sia, Linda Perry, Goldfrapp, and Diplo & Switch. It's currently due in stores early next year.



Aguilera has gotten all these "indie" artists, but she's made sure that they aren't too indie, and she's mixed them with mainstream producers and writers. I'm a fan of hers but you just know she is gonna use their names for credibility and then take all the credit for creating her "new" sound herself, which will basically be THEIR sounds that she's dragged into the mainstream. It should be an amazing album tho. Just what she needs.

Interesting - they're both really talented ladies, so itll be interesting to hear what they bring to Christina's sound. Ill be honest id have never thought MIA and Santigold would have agreed to work with her - but ill definitely be keen to hear the results.

I LOVE CHRISTINA!!!!!

FYI.....It's SANTOGOLD not Santigold.

Wowugotit said:

no, it's Santigold now. copyright issues.

All the producers and writers she is working with make me go
and I LOVE christina, so this album is gonna be AMAZING, I'm so excited, I just hope it's a longer dick since it's not a double like B2B. and I hope we get plenty of B-sides!

RKJCNE said:

always

RKJCNE said:

I think fourteen tracks would be good

Back To Basics had too much filler

Alej said:

I enjoyed almost everysong for B2B except "Understand" never did anything for me. but I'd say 14 would be enough to satisfy.

RKJCNE said:

Wow Understand is one of my favourites

I never really cared for F.U.S.S., Hurt, Here to Stay, Oh Mother and Still Dirrty
.
[Edited 8/15/09 11:02am]

Alej said:

haha those are my favorites, I guess we enjoy different aspects of Christina. I love all those plus Back in the Day and Save me from myself.
[Edited 8/15/09 11:23am]

RKJCNE said:

We do

Lawd, Save Me From Myself !!!

Alej said:

I love how simplistic it is following the more grandiose Mercy on me and Hurt. It just works so well. Plus its beutiful video.

RKJCNE said:

Christina

I hope her voice is a lot quieter in her new album

Alej said:

Her hints in interviews and the new KGB songs were softer. I think she'll just bring her voice out a few times to keep the haters away.

RKJCNE said:

I love her lower register. It's all sexy and shit <3

and

Excited because Christina always brings a new sound to all her new releases, so she's not predictable or boring to me like soo many who choose to do the same sound over, and over, and over, and over....ya'll get what I'm sayin'.

Sad because it's not coming out until next year. I had originally heard that it was coming out in September and had prepared a place for it in the Christina Aguilera section of my CD case, but if the wait makes for an even better album, than I can't complain....hate when albums sound rushed and half-assed, very tacky. I know for sure that I'll be picking this album up on debut week and also Maxwell's second installment . So far, 2010 is looking pretty good for me.


[Edited 8/15/09 12:19pm]

I love me some Xtina. She has shown such profound growth as an artist, swiftly leaving the Britney crowd in the dust.
[Edited 8/15/09 22:20pm]

Copycat said:

how so? isn't she singing pop songs while dressed like a tart?

i mean, not that i hate her or anything, but really, what's the difference?

I love M.I.A and Santogold and I hope this works out.I don't see how you're gonna get Diplo,Switch and the other producers and NOT have their sound?.The collaborators have nothing to lose..Xtina fans need to get ready for a complete different sound next year.I look forward to new Santogold and post baby M.I.A.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I believe pop radio needs Christina right about now. Hopefully this next effort will b better than the wildly uneven "Back to Basics", which was largely just a mess and SO didn't need 2 b two discs.

errant said:

I think it's pretty obvious

errant said:

Wow, were you being serious when you typed that question? Mariah sings songs with less clothing on than Christina but I would hope that you wouldn't compare her to anything that Britney has done. Seriously, anyone with the ability to hear would totally know that Christina is nothing like Britney, publicly or privately. The only reasons people ever compared the two of them in the beginning was because they both came off of the same kid's show, both were blonde, both were under the age of 18, and both sang bubblegum pop songs on their debut albums. That was really where the comparisons ended because they are definitely not alike vocally; nor do they dance on the same level...or did dance on the same level that is.

At one time, Britney was by far the better dancer, but from current video evidence, that's not the case now. They were both puppets in the beginning who did what they were told, but Christina cut her strings when she released Stripped against her label's wishes. Unfortunately, Britney is now more of a puppet than she ever was due to the direction her personal life took which started affecting her career, thus causing her handlers to step in and take charge so they didn't lose money on her since she's their cash cow. Britney has barely ever made any hardcore decisions without her management or label when it comes to her career. She just goes out and performs the routines that her choreographers and production crew have laid out for her. I don't believe that she has as much input into her career as many of her fans like to believe that she does and I think it's more because her label and management don't allow her to have the ultimate final say in business matters due to the state of her mental health at the moment.

Honestly, I think Britney would love to have more power in her professional life, but has become so accustomed to having others do the business side of things that she has unwillingly and naively allowed them to take control. Britney just doesn't seem capable of making good business decisions on her own unlike Madonna who is a pro at it. I don't think it's because Britney isn't intelligent, I just think it's because she's not as shrewd, steadfast, and confident as Madonna who has never allowed anyone to control her or tell her what to do with her career.

Britney just doesn't control her career; I don't think she ever really did and that's something that anyone can see by just watching her through the past 10 years. She doesn't write, produce, play any instruments, design her costumes, or make up her own choreography, which even Paula Abdul was capable of doing and Paula didn't play instruments or write most of her hit songs and was never an outstanding singer; but, at least, she was able to make up her own choreography and contribute something to her career besides just a cute face, nice body, and sexed up imagery which is something that exotic dancers do for far less money. If Britney actually stood up for herself more, I'd have more respect for her, but she does as she's told and I can't respect anyone who allows others to walk all over them and take advantage of them that way. She seems like a sweet, genuine person, but a truly strong and independent woman would stand up for herself even when nobody is there to support her.

In reality, B2B was more jazz and blues influenced than pop, but some may want to throw the title 'jazz pop' at Christina just because she started out as a bubblegum pop artist. Honestly, I've always seen the Britney/Christina comparisons as being somewhat insulting to not just Christina but to her fans because Britney never had vocals like Christina's and Christina knows her voice is really her bread and butter over just her image. It's like comparing Madonna to Mariah or Janet to Whitney and while I enjoy all of these ladies, the comparisons are really inaccurate and somewhat delusional. Madonna and Janet are entertainers; Mariah and Whitney have always been vocalists more than anything else. It's like comparing apples to oranges. The only thing similar about those two is that they are both fruits and that's the end of the comparison. The only thing they all have in common is they are all women and that's pretty much the end of the comparison IMHO. All just my
[Edited 8/16/09 8:50am]

estelle81 said:

mmm, I don't know. it's a pretty fine line between what Christina and Britney and others do, to me. you say that last record was more of a jazz album than a pop album, but that's not true at all. it's a pop album that a producer gave an electro-jazz vibe.

I guess if I were to delve into the world of Britneys and Christinas and take it on as something I care much about, I might see the difference, but as it stands, it's tarty pop singers singing a sound that a songwriter or producer gave them.

I mean, there's nothing wrong with that. One of my favorite acts is just that, or at least started that way. And if Christina's taken more control of her career than others, then good for her, but I really don't see much difference in the end product to justify thinking she'se grown as an "artist" more than any of her other contemporaries.

errant said:

Fair enough. Like I stated, no matter what Christina does, people will always label her a 'pop artist' because that's how she started out. Labels don't take precedence over the quality of the work for me, so they could label her sound 'turd-tastic' and if it sounds good, I'd still listen to it. Unforutnately, she's definitely not the first to be 'pigeon-holed' in the music industry.

Being pigeon-holed was something that Justin Timberlake pissed and moaned about when his solo debut album got the 'pop' label. Initially, he had hoped that the album would be labeled 'R&B' and said that he was excited that he was going to be in the R&B category like his hero Al Green (who lives in his hometown in Tennessee); that is until they slapped the 'pop album' title on it. He was pretty upset and that is the major reason why 'FutureSex/LoveSounds' came out the way it did. He said that if he was going to get labeled a 'pop artist', no matter what the album sounded like, than he was going to do the album the way he wanted to do it since the sound ultimately wasn't going to matter anyway when it came to what genre it would be filed under. JT fought with his label the whole way on that album because they didn't want it made like that and felt it was too different sounding for the public to accept; and, they didn't want 'Sexyback' to be the lead single either...we all know who won that little squabble in the end. Wish all artists had this type of thinking pattern because then maybe current music wouldn't suck soo much.

For me, when other people compare artists, I usually like to take the initiative to listen to both artists with a open mind to see why they are being compared to begin with before I praise one and discredit the other. When both girls came out in '99, I listened to what both of them had to offer, musically. Image really doesn't mean jack shit to me because when I put the CD into the player, I don't see the person singing. People don't usually hear with their eyes, so what they look and dress like really didn't matter much to me until the image started taking precedence over the music, which happened to Britney and a little to Christina with 'Stripped'...B2B kept it from getting worse IMO.

In the beginning they both had that innocent, bubblegum pop, teen dream image and sound, but that disappeared the moment I saw their follow-up albums and all the issues that surrounded them. They both went from being wholesome and kid-friendly with their images and lyrics to being more grown-up which was inevitable no matter how much some people protested, except Christina actually had to argue with her label over everything that had to do with Stripped because they wanted her to stay with the pure and wholesome image and she wanted to break away from that and try something different and new for herself.

If Christina is like any other artist(s) who released a follow-up album at that time (around 2002), she would be more like Justin Timberlake and P!nk because they both did this exact same thing with their labels on their second albums...demanded creative freedom and control. Britney didn't start fighting for creative control until waay after they all did (around 2005 after her third or fourth album); and, she really didn't get it in the end. The Britney/Christina comparison ended for me when the song 'Dirrty' hit the airwaves.

Honestly, I always saw the Britney/Christina comparison in the same way that I saw the Tiffany/Debbie Gibson and Brandy/Monica comparisons...a little over-zealous and very flawed. Monica and Tiffany had better vocal abilities than Debbie and Brandy did IMO, but people love a good rivalry and want to see a cat fight, so that's what I chalked up the whole comparison thing to in the end. Now, the Whitney and Mariah comparison held some water, because both of those women could sing their asses off back in the day. If they had a vocal show down, it would have been very close, but even they are nothing alike because Mariah writes her songs and Whitney has never been a songwriter that I can remember. Same goes for Janet and Madonna. They are both more performers than vocalists, but Janet has written a lot more of her material than Madonna has.

Britney is the performer/image with a soundtrack, meaning she doesn't excel in any particular area and Christina is a vocalist (always has been); that alone makes them sit on opposite ends of the music spectrum for me. It's like the Prince/MJ comparison, which is really the most ridiculous one of them all because as great as Michael was, he wasn't an instrumentalist like Prince and didn't write most of his music on his own like Prince did...plus, he's much taller than Prince and by far the most amazing dancer out of the two. They all have offered something different to the table and have made their own names using their talents and abilities. They have all contributed to not only music history but pop culture history as well.

Wowugotit said:

As if I don't know how to spell her name. Mess. Anyone who is a fan knows she had to change it due to legal reasons.

damn, this is what i wanted Janet to do next.

But she enlists the stale J&L to produce a 'janet. pt10'

But i still love you dunk!

ugh..an album of like more than 5 producers are never good

M.I.A

mancabdriver said:

They aren't stale!