|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Sept 12, 2017 11:41:32 GMT
I went through a period of really loving this song, but when I listen to it now I don't really see it as anything special.
|
|
|
Post by anc282 on Sept 12, 2017 14:29:46 GMT
Love this tune, but it was one I had to come around to when I was younger. Once I did, I realised how absolutely great it is. I always saw it as a sequel to Bad, with a couple of nods, using 2 instead of too, "tell me that youre doin wrong" and the evolved "throwing rocks to hide your hands" instead of throwing stones. Great beat, interesting instrumentation and a damn fine snare drum sound. I always liked the rap, but that doesn't count because I hate rap (its better than any of the raps on Invinvcy, Unbreakable aside) I LOVE the Refugee Camp remix on BOTDF too. That drum. The harmonies in this song are phenomenal too. Yeah, that's what I was getting at, there are clearly a couple of lyrical nods to "Bad" in this song, not to mention its title, "2 Bad."
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 18, 2017 3:53:00 GMT
2 Bad is awesome. Love the beats (it hits with Shaq going "ugh!") I guess I love Invincible enough for all of us... I love the little sound effects in the song. One thing Michael doesn't get praise for is being an awesome arranger. Also most people don't know how intricate his songs are. 'Monster' follows the same route. That's why I always tell them to hear it on the best format with the best quality. Invincible on MOV 10/10
|
|
TonyR
The Legend Continues
Posts: 8,423
|
Post by TonyR on Sept 18, 2017 6:05:01 GMT
2 Bad is awesome. Love the beats (it hits with Shaq going "ugh!") I guess I love Invincible enough for all of us... I love the little sound effects in the song. One thing Michael doesn't get praise for is being an awesome arranger. Also most people don't know how intricate his songs are. 'Monster' follows the same route. That's why I always tell them to hear it on the best format with the best quality. Invincible on MOV 10/10 2 Bad is on HIStory not Invincible and Monster wasn't a Michael Jackson track. But yes he was a great arranger as seen on tracks like TDCAU, DSTYGE or Who Is It.
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 18, 2017 6:41:31 GMT
2 Bad is awesome. Love the beats (it hits with Shaq going "ugh!") I guess I love Invincible enough for all of us... I love the little sound effects in the song. One thing Michael doesn't get praise for is being an awesome arranger. Also most people don't know how intricate his songs are. 'Monster' follows the same route. That's why I always tell them to hear it on the best format with the best quality. Invincible on MOV 10/10 2 Bad is on HIStory not Invincible and Monster wasn't a Michael Jackson track. But yes he was a great arranger as seen on tracks like TDCAU, DSTYGE or Who Is It. I know all that. I was referring to your 'I'll love 2 Bad enough for the rest' against my admiration for Invincible, and the dislike for Invincible here. Michael wrote Monster, and the beat is enough for me to love it. The impersonator is able to provide the barebones feel of Michael and that is much better than having incomplete vocals, at least in the original version of the track. My mention of Invincible didn't really mean "Invincible is so awesome it has 2 Bad".
|
|
|
Post by SoCav on Sept 18, 2017 6:45:16 GMT
2 Bad is on HIStory not Invincible and Monster wasn't a Michael Jackson track. But yes he was a great arranger as seen on tracks like TDCAU, DSTYGE or Who Is It. I know all that. I was referring to your 'I'll love 2 Bad enough for the rest' against my admiration for Invincible, and the dislike for Invincible here. Michael wrote Monster, and the beat is enough for me to love it. The impersonator is able to provide the barebones feel of Michael and that is much better than having incomplete vocals, at least in the original version of the track. My mention of Invincible didn't really mean "Invincible is so awesome it has 2 Bad". No he didn't. He did write a song called 'Monster', but it's not the Cascio track that was released on the 'Michael' album. It's an entirely different song from the late 90s.
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 18, 2017 6:50:13 GMT
I know all that. I was referring to your 'I'll love 2 Bad enough for the rest' against my admiration for Invincible, and the dislike for Invincible here. Michael wrote Monster, and the beat is enough for me to love it. The impersonator is able to provide the barebones feel of Michael and that is much better than having incomplete vocals, at least in the original version of the track. My mention of Invincible didn't really mean "Invincible is so awesome it has 2 Bad". No he didn't. He did write a song called 'Monster', but it's not the Cascio track that was released on the 'Michael' album. It's an entirely different song from the late 90s. I have a different version then what was released in 2010. Perhaps it was a leak - it doesn't feature 50 Cent. The vocals are the same though.
|
|
|
Post by SoCav on Sept 18, 2017 6:55:36 GMT
That's the demo version that leaked, along with all the other Cascio demos, in 2011. It's the same song as the one that ended up on the Michael album, just before it got reworked by Teddy Riley. It still features Jason Malachi on vocals. It's not the track that MJ wrote (in the late 90s).
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 18, 2017 7:08:24 GMT
That's the demo version that leaked, along with all the other Cascio demos, in 2011. It's the same song as the one that ended up on the Michael album, just before it got reworked by Teddy Riley. It still features Jason Malachi on vocals. It's not the track that MJ wrote (in the late 90s). Alright. So we what do we know about the original version?
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Sept 18, 2017 10:44:01 GMT
The impersonator is able to provide the barebones feel of Michael and that is much better than having incomplete vocals, at least in the original version of the track. Since when is fraud with the assistance of a poor singer better than MJs own music, whether complete or incomplete?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2017 11:12:24 GMT
Who's making the thread for 1 Bad to be song of the week?
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 19, 2017 10:08:37 GMT
The impersonator is able to provide the barebones feel of Michael and that is much better than having incomplete vocals, at least in the original version of the track. Since when is fraud with the assistance of a poor singer better than MJs own music, whether complete or incomplete? I spoke without knowing much (or anything) about the Cascio circus. Sorry for that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2017 11:19:18 GMT
Since when is fraud with the assistance of a poor singer better than MJs own music, whether complete or incomplete? I spoke without knowing much (or anything) about the Cascio circus. Sorry for that. It's worth reading about. It's a very frustrating thing to be reminded of, but I can imagine for non-fans it's a very interesting matter considering how it was allowed to happen.
|
|
|
Post by speedd3mon on Sept 19, 2017 11:47:15 GMT
I spoke without knowing much (or anything) about the Cascio circus. Sorry for that. It's worth reading about. It's a very frustrating thing to be reminded of, but I can imagine for non-fans it's a very interesting matter considering how it was allowed to happen. To be honest it doesn't really set me off because I was quite little to get it back then, as in, I wasn't really aware that they were doing all these releases meaning if I did and found out that they faked the material I'd be as angry as you guys. Still, the album is the weakest thing with Michael Jackson's name on it. They did so bad in a year while MJ and Q did so good with Thriller UNDER a year in '82. I understand your anger. Also, sorry for derailing the thread. I'll shut up about the Cascio tracks now.
|
|