Michael Jackson - New Single From New Album

**jobeterob** · 05-02-2014, 11:31 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/01/showbi...kson-new-song/

**jobeterob** · 05-02-2014, 10:35 PM

CBC played this tonight when I was driving home from work; very 80's; sure isn't any Beat It or Billie Jean or I Want You Back.

**midnightman** · 05-03-2014, 01:14 AM

It's a dull track.

**soulster** · 05-03-2014, 03:27 AM

I like the production. It sounds very "Michael", too. It sounds like it's right out of 1981 or 1982. Problem: the vocal is weak. It's too low in the mix.

**jaybs** · 05-03-2014, 05:13 AM

I like it! album was ordered when first announced! better than plenty of rubbish that passes as R&B today!

**marv2** · 05-03-2014, 07:52 AM

Not very good. Michael sounds like he had a cold and why Justin Timberlake? Michael sounds like a young Carl Carlton on that song:

**midnightman** · 05-05-2014, 12:35 PM

This was actually taken from a demo MJ did back in 1983. The demo version was online as far back as 2006 and if you hear the demo, they didn't really do much of an upgrade. It was actually a demo for another singer: Johnny Mathis.

Here's Johnny's 1984 [[finished) version with more lyrics than MJ's:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4NL9nv0Vr8

The new lyrics were, not by MJ, but by American songwriter Kathleen Wakefield and Paul Anka. So I wonder MJ just mumble some words on the demo because Johnny's version was totally different.

**midnightman** · 05-05-2014, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

I like the production. It sounds very "Michael", too. It sounds like it's right out of 1981 or 1982. Problem: the vocal is weak. It's too low in the mix.

It's low in the mix because that's how the demo sounded. It was the only demo they could find. It was in Paul Anka's ownership. I know so because a few years ago on one of my YouTube accounts, I uploaded the demo and within a couple days, it was taken down, I assume, by Anka/Sony. And then I read that since MJ had died, Anka/Sony were co-owners of the demo and they requested people to take down their videos that uploaded the song, as they did with a lot of the MJ demos/unreleased material. What's odd about the Xscape album in general is that some of the songs were originally finished but the estate and Sony felt they needed to "contemporize" them because they feared no one was interested in Michael anymore, hence why they added Justin Timberlake on "Love Never Felt So Good". In fact, if you hear the Justin duet, you'd think it was Justin's song and not Michael's but that was because Michael didn't do much with the original demo. You think if they were serious about promoting the album, they'd release "Chicago" from the album but no they release an unfinished demo with unfinished lyrics and vocal mumbles and tics and add in a modern pop star because they're desperate for sales. But then again, so was Michael for the last 26 years of his life.

**marybrewster** · 05-05-2014, 01:17 PM

I've never questioned why singled are released posthumously; in many cases, it's about striking while the iron is hot. But I do wonder why after such a length of time a "new" MJ single would be released. Is it about money? And if so, who benefits?

So far, in general, I've read all negative reviews. The sound isn't "current", so they added JT. But how "current" is JT? His last release was over a year ago, and chart and saleswise, was the weakest in his discography.

Perhaps Janet should have been added instead; or maybe even the J4? If they wanted to make a splash, they should have went with Pharrell, or the biggest MJ fan of all, Usher.

**midnightman** · 05-05-2014, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by marybrewster

I've never questioned why singled are released posthumously; in many cases, it's about striking while the iron is hot. But I do wonder why after such a length of time a "new" MJ single would be released. Is it about money? And if so, who benefits?

So far, in general, I've read all negative reviews. The sound isn't "current", so they added JT. But how "current" is JT? His last release was over a year ago, and chart and saleswise, was the weakest in his discography.

Perhaps Janet should have been added instead; or maybe even the J4? If they wanted to make a splash, they should have went with Pharrell, or the biggest MJ fan of all, Usher.

They added Justin because of the Timbaland connection. They didn't ask Pharrell to produce this album either, which would've helped if they wanted to "contemporize" Michael to the general public. In this case, Jackson has been dead five years so any attention will be limited to a few days if only to give fans the confidence that MJ is still "popular".

**marybrewster** · 05-05-2014, 01:33 PM

One would assume MJ has a mountain of unreleased material; I wonder whya demo was chosen? Is this the cream of that crop? Or perhaps, cream of the crap.

**Bokiluis** · 05-05-2014, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by marybrewster

I've never questioned why singled are released posthumously; in many cases, it's about striking while the iron is hot. But I do wonder why after such a length of time a "new" MJ single would be released. Is it about money? And if so, who benefits?

So far, in general, I've read all negative reviews. The sound isn't "current", so they added JT. But how "current" is JT? His last release was over a year ago, and chart and saleswise, was the weakest in his discography.

Perhaps Janet should have been added instead; or maybe even the J4? If they wanted to make a splash, they should have went with Pharrell, or the biggest MJ fan of all, Usher.

Prior to the album release, Xscape was played for critics at exclusive album listening parties in New York City.[12] Bernadette McNulty from The Daily Telegraph praised the album as "pristine", calling it the "front-and-centre presence of Jackson's voice in the mix".[13] Michael Cragg from The Guardian said Xscape feels "like an album created to showcase a handful of Jackson songs that on the whole deserve to be heard".[14] Richard Suchet from Sky News thought the album "sound more like modern day remixes".[15] Nick Stevenson from Mixmag believed the album "more like a collection of B-sides from Off the Wall than a follow up to Invincible".[16] Michael Arceneaux from Ebony said "the upcoming project 'from' the late singer sounds like a recipe for legacy tarnishing".[17] Elysa Gardner of USA Today said that the producers on the album "ensure that Jackson's enduring strengths as a singer are represented, layering in modern electronic textures without overwhelming the distinctly slinky, shivery vocals or overall structure of the tunes."[18]

**midnightman** · 05-06-2014, 03:08 AM

Originally Posted by marybrewster

One would assume MJ has a mountain of unreleased material; I wonder whya demo was chosen? Is this the cream of that crop? Or perhaps, cream of the crap.

It was insinuated by someone in the media shortly after MJ's death, probably a "friend" from his camp, who said MJ left behind "250 unreleased songs" or something. But I'm beginning to think the number was much less than that. Much less. Apparently if the estate is to be believed, there are like nine other songs with the Cascios "credited" to MJ. There doesn't seem to be a lot of talk of unreleased songs. Most of the leftovers were probably left unfinished.

**jack020** · 05-06-2014, 06:39 AM

The UK seems to like it!
Last sunday it already entered the top 40 at number 27 .

**jobeterob** · 05-06-2014, 01:49 PM

The executors of the estate have a duty to maximize any financial return for the estate.

Michael died essentially broke but his estate was the biggest musical money maker for a few years due to the Cirque du Soleil show.

They will probably release anything they can and it'll make a few dollars. I am sure there won't be any Billie Jeans amongst the releases.