The Singles Jukebox

Might not.

[Video][Website]
[4.92]

Crystal Leww: More evidence that 2016 is lawless: Anderson .Paak takes a couple of samples from Xscape’s “Who Can I Run To” and puts out “Might Be.” The song is a goofy kind of high and matches .Paak’s overall persona of being a chill dude who puts out sunny So-Cal R&B tunes. Two years later, Luke Nasty took the production and theme of women and weed from .Paak and turned it into a late-night L.A. raunchy lounge jam. .Paak’s version definitely doesn’t shy away from the topic of sex, but compared to Luke Nasty’s version, it is definitely a more passive approach to chatting up girls using weed. There is nothing wrong with being overtly sexual, but Nasty’s come-ons are too corny to be sexy, and the point of comparison is .Paak’s version, which matches the production better. Neither version is as good as Jeremih’s “oui” though.
[4]

Alfred Soto: The source material is as tangled as the bed sheets: Anderson .Paak interpolated Xscape‘s 1995 cover of The Jones Girls’ disco-era “Who Can I Run To” to create the feminine submission he can’t summon on his own. Pledging to be the most considerate of love men in the leaden tones of Big Sean, Luke Nasty sounds as threatening as a slip cover.
[5]

Taylor Alatorre: I won’t waste your time, or mine, doing a lyrical side-by-side of the original and this SoundCloud rework, because the difference in quality should be self-evident. But there is one difference that stands above all the rest, and that is Luke Nasty’s pig-headed insistence on letting the sampled vocals complete every other line, even when the end result is nonsensical (e.g. “we on cloud high”). His marriage to this gimmick puts the song’s potential in a straitjacket, preventing his bland rhymes from approaching even Wiz Khalifa levels of stoner cheese, which would at least be something. It’s absolutely criminal that Anderson .Paak remains a virtual unknown on urban radio, and this song’s success compounds that crime even further.
[3]

Tim de Reuse: I will say, at very least, that the backing vocals chanting “high” in a feathery, sinking chord every so often are just lovely — they’re caught between that word and a bored “ahh,” content and distant. Presumably they’re listening to a much better song. By the second verse, this guy’s already douchey, awkward play-by-play gets so linear and dry it’s like he’s trying to follow a poorly-written wikiHow article.
[2]

Cassy Gress: The first couple times you hear the women cooing “high” (hi?), it sounds like bubbles, hot tubs, and steam. But the more they repeat it, the more animatronic it sounds. Also, if I’m not mistaken, I think he implied that girls have to be high to enjoy sex with him.
[4]

Edward Okulicz: The “hiiiiiigh” female vocal sample becomes a siiiiigh awfully quickly. Luke Nasty hasn’t got the natural charm to make his sex-talk interesting or inviting.
[3]

Anthony Easton: I really like the juxtaposition of the stumbling, blocked flow of Luke, and the floating, airy push-back by whoever is singing high here. It would be nice if she was credited. 
[7]

Alex Ostroff: A study in contrasts that’s almost impressively less sexy than its source material. Even the beat sounds more awkward, but I’m not sure if it’s actually been constructed differently or if it’s just the effect of Nasty dropping lines like “but you know what you can blow.” Not even an early invocation of The-Dream’s “sugar-honey-iced-tea” can make me crack a smile at this. Naturally, this is the version that’s going to be a giant hit.
[4]

Brad Shoup: The man’s going to be one hell of an A&R rep. The BPM, the nods to The-Dream and 50 Cent (still relevant for white college students), the endless talk about getting high all speaks to someone who knows his market. Luckily, he’s also fairly charming, mostly when he’s guessing at notes. I didn’t know about .Paak’s original, so I can’t give Luke credit for suggesting chipmunk soul without actually delivering.
[6]

Natasha Genet Avery: Breezy and playful enough to earn a spot on this summer’s cookout playlist but too safe to make it on to next year’s.
[6]

Thomas Inskeep: The rap is just so-so and not very memorable, but the way the samples from Xscape’s cover of “Who Can I Run To” are used, most definitely are. 
[6]

Peter Ryan: Luke’s lines here are a little lame but he’s betting she won’t care (“You can tell me if I’m wrong”). It’s pesky insistence and unselfconscious goofy charm all at once, elevated by a spongy bass anchor and hazy rhodes undertones, but most of all those sublime wafting “hii-iiigh”s.
[6]

Gin Hart: Normally, I’m too much of a prude for ~explicit sex jams~. If the POV character’s penis is chorus-integral and the activities made explicit, my honest-to-god first reaction is probably “ew.” Human adulthood! Yikes! Despite these qualifiers, “Might Be” is a fucking jam?!?!?! The politics of sex-related drug awakenings (drug-related sex-awakenings?) are complicated, true, but — sorry!!! — high sex is the best sex and (here’s the part where I conflate the song and the video) Mr. Nasty & Girl seem to be having a really sweet/sexy/consensual beach date. I’m here for it. I’m here for YOU’RE THE SHIT, YOU’RE THE SUGAR, HONEY, ICED TEA, which is a) one of of the best lines of all time and b) not even part of the .Paak original, which is pallid by comparison. Poor buddy! I figured out this was a cover after I’d fully formed my opinion of it. How must it feel when somebody’s made the aural equivalent of a silk sheet out of your television static? No offense, but I truly adore when good shit trumps fame shit. You go, Luke. A fan? I might be. 
[8]