ViintageJunkiie said:

MJJstudent said:

which they did with all the albums after thriller anyways.

pretty much .. even MJ was trying to break his own record with that album ..

it's sad that in a lot of ways he didn't have faith in himself to think he would do better than that. he was always thinking about marketing, and even though he publicly talked about how he didn't like to look to the past, he was highly disappointed whenever he didn't hit 'thriller' sales, even though nothing in the history of music hit that much. and never will ever again.

i personally think his art was better after 'thriller', and in some ways i believe him when he said this as well. but again, for him it comes down to the marketing.

MJJstudent said:

ViintageJunkiie said:

pretty much .. even MJ was trying to break his own record with that album ..

it's sad that in a lot of ways he didn't have faith in himself to think he would do better than that. he was always thinking about marketing, and even though he publicly talked about how he didn't like to look to the past, he was highly disappointed whenever he didn't hit 'thriller' sales, even though nothing in the history of music hit that much. and never will ever again.

i personally think his art was better after 'thriller', and in some ways i believe him when he said this as well. but again, for him it comes down to the marketing.

OWT and Bad were better than Thriller to me .. Thriller was the biggest selling album due to the promotion .. Notice how after Thriller, he kinda faded into the background and wasn't seen as much .. promotion wise, Thriller was his prime but album and performance wise, I think it was Dangerous

ViintageJunkiie said:

MJJstudent said:

it's sad that in a lot of ways he didn't have faith in himself to think he would do better than that. he was always thinking about marketing, and even though he publicly talked about how he didn't like to look to the past, he was highly disappointed whenever he didn't hit 'thriller' sales, even though nothing in the history of music hit that much. and never will ever again.

i personally think his art was better after 'thriller', and in some ways i believe him when he said this as well. but again, for him it comes down to the marketing.

OWT and Bad were better than Thriller to me .. Thriller was the biggest selling album due to the promotion .. Notice how after Thriller, he kinda faded into the background and wasn't seen as much .. promotion wise, Thriller was his prime but album and performance wise, I think it was Dangerous

dangerous is amazing... i love HIStory the most though, because that is his most socio-political album. then there's dangerous.

it seems to me that with dangerous, michael seemed happy to get out of the reins of quincy jones... he was definitely thankful to jones for the experience, but he wanted to reinvent his sound. again, marketing...

MJJstudent said:

ViintageJunkiie said:

OWT and Bad were better than Thriller to me .. Thriller was the biggest selling album due to the promotion .. Notice how after Thriller, he kinda faded into the background and wasn't seen as much .. promotion wise, Thriller was his prime but album and performance wise, I think it was Dangerous

dangerous is amazing... i love HIStory the most though, because that is his most socio-political album. then there's dangerous.

it seems to me that with dangerous, michael seemed happy to get out of the reins of quincy jones... he was definitely thankful to jones for the experience, but he wanted to reinvent his sound. again, marketing...

I love HIStory too but something about Dangerous just grabs me .. His sound was just amazing! vocally he seemed to be at his prime also

ViintageJunkiie said:

MJJstudent said:

dangerous is amazing... i love HIStory the most though, because that is his most socio-political album. then there's dangerous.

it seems to me that with dangerous, michael seemed happy to get out of the reins of quincy jones... he was definitely thankful to jones for the experience, but he wanted to reinvent his sound. again, marketing...

I love HIStory too but something about Dangerous just grabs me .. His sound was just amazing! vocally he seemed to be at his prime also

for me, the message/teaching is more important than how his vocals sound (even though that's nice too)... i love the messages on dangerous, like 'keep the faith', 'jam', 'heal the world', 'why you wanna trip on me'...

[Edited 4/29/11 1:01am]

I agree that Dangerous is more about the lyrics and the heart and soul though traces of it were on the 3 quincy albums, and full of that on destiny & triumph

ViintageJunkiie said:

MJJstudent said:

dangerous is amazing... i love HIStory the most though, because that is his most socio-political album. then there's dangerous.

it seems to me that with dangerous, michael seemed happy to get out of the reins of quincy jones... he was definitely thankful to jones for the experience, but he wanted to reinvent his sound. again, marketing...

I love HIStory too but something about Dangerous just grabs me .. His sound was just amazing! vocally he seemed to be at his prime also

Bad arrived one year late. In early 1986, the impact would have been huge. But in 1987, the hard-dance/power-ballads formula was already established, so it was a small disappointment, it was like "Oh, so Michael is following the trends, eh? He's ripping his sister's sound off, eh?". If not for some quality singles, Bad's sales (in the US) would have been even lower...

Dangerous arrived TWO years late. New Jack was already old by 92 standards... In 1990 it would have been JUST AS successful as Thriller...

I wonder if MJ was making room for Janet to have room on the charts sometimes, cause Control-Bad-Rhythm Nation-Dangerous-Janet were practically back to back, with the last two overlapping. Or he just didn't want to compete with her

JoeTyler said:

Bad arrived one year late. In early 1986, the impact would have been huge. But in 1987, the hard-dance/power-ballads formula was already established, so it was a small disappointment, it was like "Oh, so Michael is following the trends, eh? He's ripping his sister's sound off, eh?". If not for some quality singles, Bad's sales (in the US) would have been even lower...

Dangerous arrived TWO years late. New Jack was already old by 92 standards... In 1990 it would have been JUST AS successful as Thriller...

to me, it was all right on time... i think those albums are better than most of the contemporaries, so... i hate new jack with a passion, and dangerous is the only album worth anything, regarding that genre, even if it WAS late.

to me, michael's use of the linn drums was a lot better than the 808 stuff going on... and 'bad' overall is a better album than 'control' (even though you see the influences, especially when he toured with the album.

i'm personally not concerned with the sales, but of course i'm not the one in the marketing department.

alphastreet said:

I wonder if MJ was making room for Janet to have room on the charts sometimes, cause Control-Bad-Rhythm Nation-Dangerous-Janet were practically back to back, with the last two overlapping. Or he just didn't want to compete with her

i think he liked the competition though... if she charted higher than him (if they were on the chart at the same time) it would be devestating to him, i'm sure. i mean, when she signed that $80 million virgin deal he had to top that. even if it was friendly competition it was still competition. and as usual, if his albums were falling on the charts he came out with some major event or film, which rocketed the album back to the top.

i'd say for invincible he should have waited to do the MSG shows, but that wasn't 100% his idea to do the shows in the first place; and then sony didn't really have much to do with the event. so it was a different situation that sony or some other sponsor backing your tour or film.

and it's interesting how, overall, janet had an easier time with the labels she's been on... like how she just split from def jam as soon as she joined them, with no major press drama (not like what went down between michael and sony, anyways). janet made more appearances that were not as grand as michael, so even though she is shy she seems better able to cope with how press works. i don't know much about janet; it's just a gague.

it would have been interesting to see him and janet collaborate more.

JoeTyler said:

New Jack was already old by 92 standards...

Although there were a few hits on the pop charts, New Jack Swing as a genre never really crossed over to mainstream audiences and was mainly popular on R&B radio. That's where it had been played since around 1986 and was oversaturated by 1991 and was just about over. The brothers (2300 Jackson Street) and Randy & The Gypsys released New Jack records 2 years before Dangerous was released. I think that is one of the reasons Dangerous was more popular overseas than in the USA. New Jack wasn't really an international thing, so it was a new sound in a way.

"THE POINT IS MUTE!" Nothing after the brilliance of Off The Wall matters.

MJ was an perfectionist so therefore, I do not see him dropping an album that soon.

angel345 said:

MJ was an perfectionist so therefore, I do not see him dropping an album that soon.

Between 1969 and 1980, there was at least an album each year (including Jackson/J5). In some cases, there were multiple albums a year. Before the mid 80's most acts released an album a year. Thriller started the trend of releasing a lot of singles from an album, when before the average album generally had 2 (maybe 3) singles. Steely Dan were notorious perfectionists and even they released albums often.

JoeTyler said:

Bad arrived one year late. In early 1986, the impact would have been huge. But in 1987, the hard-dance/power-ballads formula was already established, so it was a small disappointment, it was like "Oh, so Michael is following the trends, eh? He's ripping his sister's sound off, eh?". If not for some quality singles, Bad's sales (in the US) would have been even lower...

Dangerous arrived TWO years late. New Jack was already old by 92 standards... In 1990 it would have been JUST AS successful as Thriller...

Off The Wall arrive TWO years late. There was already an anti-disco movement going on in the States as the time & disco was old by '79 standards. Had it been released in 1977 it would have been JUST AS successful as Thriller...

Isn't touring one of the biggest forms of promotion that an artist can do for themselves and an album? Yet Thriller didn't have a tour to go with it. =/

The question is: Unless her titties are popping out of her clothes in front of millions of people would the press even care?

She seems to live a pretty quiet life as I don't see or hear about her much, yet, then again, that could be for one of two reasons. Either her life is pretty drama free, or not enough of the buying public really just don't give a damn.

Unholyalliance said:

Isn't touring one of the biggest forms of promotion that an artist can do for themselves and an album? Yet Thriller didn't have a tour to go with it. =/

Depends on what kind of music an act makes. Some groups were mainly studio groups like Steely Dan or The Beatles after 1966. Even when the fabs were touring, they performed little of their current music (which couldn't be reproduced on stage with a four man band) and mostly did Twist And Shout era songs. No one could hear it anyway because of all the screaming. Performers who make dance music like disco, house, dance pop, Latin Freestyle, etc, also doesn't rely on touring.

MickyDolenz said:

Unholyalliance said:

Isn't touring one of the biggest forms of promotion that an artist can do for themselves and an album? Yet Thriller didn't have a tour to go with it. =/

Depends on what kind of music an act makes. Some groups were mainly studio groups like Steely Dan or The Beatles after 1966. Even when the fabs were touring, they performed little of their current music (which couldn't be reproduced on stage with a four man band) and mostly did Twist And Shout era songs. No one could hear it anyway because of all the screaming. Performers who make dance music like disco, house, dance pop, Latin Freestyle, etc, also doesn't rely on touring.

Yeah, but it's not as if Steely Dan or the Beatles were obscure music acts by then. Though, are you sure about the dance music makers not touring? Djs, such as Daft Punk, Armin Van Buren, and etc. all tour. Don't smaller ones play in the club circuit?

MJJstudent said:

he was highly disappointed whenever he didn't hit 'thriller' sales, even though nothing in the history of music hit that much..

Post an MJ quote saying as much, any article or video. No '100million sales note sellotaped to a mirror' nonsense either. The whole internet is at your fingers.

There isn't one. Keep learning 'student'.

Marrk said:

MJJstudent said:

he was highly disappointed whenever he didn't hit 'thriller' sales, even though nothing in the history of music hit that much..

Post an MJ quote saying as much, any article or video. No '100million sales note sellotaped to a mirror' nonsense either. The whole internet is at your fingers.

There isn't one. Keep learning 'student'.

So...that wasn't a true story?

I always thought that at some point he stopped caring and just wanted to release music for people to hear. I mean...obviously if he wanted to make Thriller-like sales then HIStory just isn't the way to go you know?

[Edited 4/29/11 15:56pm]

Why is it that we have better discussions in this post than the Michael Sticky? I wish some in here migrated over to that post

babybugz said:

Why is it that we have better discussions in this post than the Michael Sticky? I wish some in here migrated over to that post

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

MickyDolenz said:

babybugz said:

Why is it that we have better discussions in this post than the Michael Sticky? I wish some in here migrated over to that post

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

LOL I don’t either but it would be cool if you and some others bring nice discussions over there. Just a thought

MJJstudent said:

alphastreet said:

I wonder if MJ was making room for Janet to have room on the charts sometimes, cause Control-Bad-Rhythm Nation-Dangerous-Janet were practically back to back, with the last two overlapping. Or he just didn't want to compete with her

i think he liked the competition though... if she charted higher than him (if they were on the chart at the same time) it would be devestating to him, i'm sure. i mean, when she signed that $80 million virgin deal he had to top that. even if it was friendly competition it was still competition. and as usual, if his albums were falling on the charts he came out with some major event or film, which rocketed the album back to the top.

i'd say for invincible he should have waited to do the MSG shows, but that wasn't 100% his idea to do the shows in the first place; and then sony didn't really have much to do with the event. so it was a different situation that sony or some other sponsor backing your tour or film.

and it's interesting how, overall, janet had an easier time with the labels she's been on... like how she just split from def jam as soon as she joined them, with no major press drama (not like what went down between michael and sony, anyways). janet made more appearances that were not as grand as michael, so even though she is shy she seems better able to cope with how press works. i don't know much about janet; it's just a gague.

it would have been interesting to see him and janet collaborate more.

I read accounts at some point of michael being jealous of janet's Control success and being worried he won't do well with his next album, I think in magic and the madness and in some black women's magazine where they wrote an article about janet during the Velvet Rope era. But I also read in Magic and the Madness he was so proud of her for doing Rhythm Nation and saying The Knowledge was so good and asking why there was no melody. I didn't realize this till recently but the 1,2,3 in The Knowledge and Jam are the same I don't believe the jealousy story is true, although I think it did lead to friendly competition...and great minds, from the same family mind you, think alike. Even if there are slight Control influences during Bad, those Control-isms were inspired by Off The Wall, Thriller and the Jacksons tours very much. And in the music I hear mj, prince/minneapolis, funk, freestyle influences a lot.

I guess because Janet was a star and not a mega-mega star, she didn't have it as bad and she was raised differently from Michael a little. I also think doing things like marrying young and moving out young matured her and prepared her for life and Michael was too sheltered, both at home and living in the world's fishbowl.

MickyDolenz said:

JoeTyler said:

New Jack was already old by 92 standards...

Although there were a few hits on the pop charts, New Jack Swing as a genre never really crossed over to mainstream audiences and was mainly popular on R&B radio. That's where it had been played since around 1986 and was oversaturated by 1991 and was just about over. The brothers (2300 Jackson Street) and Randy & The Gypsys released New Jack records 2 years before Dangerous was released. I think that is one of the reasons Dangerous was more popular overseas than in the USA. New Jack wasn't really an international thing, so it was a new sound in a way.

I thought songs like Poison, Every Little Step, Romantic, songs from RN etc. were all popular r&b/pop hits in the late 80's/early 90's. I also have heard from others that dance music was the sound all over the world, and though popular in the early 90's, new jack swing and hip hop was more popular in North America. I've also read Dangerous is the best selling New Jack Swing album....plus Bobby Brown's 1992 album has a song that sounds a little like Remember the Time, and that album was a hit even if it didn't sell like Don't Be Cruel. So wasn't 92/93 the last of New Jack Swng?

Unholyalliance said:

Marrk said:

Post an MJ quote saying as much, any article or video. No '100million sales note sellotaped to a mirror' nonsense either. The whole internet is at your fingers.

There isn't one. Keep learning 'student'.

So...that wasn't a true story?

I always thought that at some point he stopped caring and just wanted to release music for people to hear. I mean...obviously if he wanted to make Thriller-like sales then HIStory just isn't the way to go you know?

[Edited 4/29/11 15:56pm]

That story should be filed along side 'Elephant man's bones' and 'hyperbaric chamber'. It really should. His people (Frank) pushed a lot of crap into the publics consciousness back then and it's been repeated over an over. Seems like some stuck. Myth = Reality.

Your point about HIStory is valid. I hated the hits being attached to it at the time. I thought that was off. Cowardly even. On both Michael's and Sony's part.

He should have said fuck it, this is my album and that's my statement (and just released disc 2.)

[Edited 4/29/11 16:53pm]

MickyDolenz said:

babybugz said:

Why is it that we have better discussions in this post than the Michael Sticky? I wish some in here migrated over to that post

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

I'm a mod at a MJ forum and I'm gonna make make a copycat thread of this subject there

MickyDolenz said:

babybugz said:

Why is it that we have better discussions in this post than the Michael Sticky? I wish some in here migrated over to that post

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

No way! MJJC is more like, "Everyone around Michael can go f themselves", "Poor Michael, never had anyone to fully trust", To a certain extend I do agree with these kind of statements and I don't think it's necessarily false but people there just go too far. Like during memorial service people gave so much shit to Brooke Shields for even being there... I find that MJ fans on Prince fan-site are much more logical and fair...kinda ironic lol

bboy87 said:

MickyDolenz said:

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

I'm a mod at a MJ forum and I'm gonna make make a copycat thread of this subject there

uh oh....+_+

Emancipation89 said:

MickyDolenz said:

I never go in there because it's no different than MJJC, just a lot of gossip and "Jackson family sucks" griping. I don't wanna see negative stuff like that.

No way! MJJC is more like, "Everyone around Michael can go f themselves", "Poor Michael, never had anyone to fully trust", To a certain extend I do agree with these kind of statements and I don't think it's necessarily false but people there just go too far. Like during memorial service people gave so much shit to Brooke Shields for even being there... I find that MJ fans on Prince fan-site are much more logical and fair...kinda ironic lol

Shit, i just called Mike cowardly for the release structure of HIStory. Die hard fan but I always thought that. I could only get away from that here.