Latest on MJJC

"Breaking News" All General Discussion Here [Merged]

What do You Think Now???

  • Now im Sure Its Michael!!!

    Votes: 89 21.4%

  • I Still Think its Not him!!!

    Votes: 223 53.7%

  • I now think that its Michael, but still have my doubts!!

    Votes: 24 5.8%

  • Im Confused!!!!

    Votes: 79 19.0%
  • Total voters
    415
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
You know if Michael's family certain members anyway are so certain that this not Michael how come they won't hire there own music expert to prove that it is not him? All of this going back and fourth on twitter solves nothing and really it looks like this argument is over the song is staying on.
 
Nova said:
Yeah... but it was only a demo. A rough demo with guide vocals.
Apparently.
Click to expand...

Well in that case it shouldnt be on the album anyway. . . .Do you think Michael would want vocals he recorded on a demo with a cold on a new album?

Forget about it being him or not. Michael wouldnt want these songs on the album after all this.
 
cinderella said:
for me it sounds like Michael now
Click to expand...
I think it's just a matter of file's quality.
Maybe Sony in first place didn't want to put online an high quality of the song due to the song going to be ripped and shared everywhere.
Then they uploaded the higher quality song.
 
L.T.D said:
Well in that case it shouldnt be on the album anyway. . . .Do you think Michael would want vocals he recorded on a demo with a cold on a new album?

Forget about it being him or not. Michael wouldnt want these songs on the album after all this.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Jackson CHOOSE his own executors? I'm sure at one point or another over the last 25-30 years, he would have had at least one or two conversations with them over what to do with unreleased material, recordings, etc. Thank you for your opinion, but all of this hate-mongering toward the album and the songs on it needs to stop.

I think I will choose to trust their judgement, as the Estate seems to be doing nothing but taking care in how Michael's legacy is preserved. Album deal, video game, Cirque tour, Vegas show, and now this album. I applaud them.

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
 
Gosh are my ears totally playing with me now? Ther version that's now on mj.com does sounds little different for me too?
 
L.T.D said:
Well in that case it shouldnt be on the album anyway. . . .Do you think Michael would want vocals he recorded on a demo with a cold on a new album?

Forget about it being him or not. Michael wouldnt want these songs on the album after all this.
Click to expand...

I agree. Let's say for a moment it's Michael. Then he must have been ill, or not really trying or not having his voice warmed up or all of the above, or something because these tracks are not his usual standard. It's just like he was casually fooling around in the studio, not really trying. I doubt he would have ever released these in this form if he was here.

And sorry, but I don't like the job Teddy's done on it either. The song sounds average and cheap.
 
Justthefacts said:
You know if Michael's family certain members anyway are so certain that this not Michael how come they won't hire there own music expert to prove that it is not him? All of this going back and fourth on twitter solves nothing and really it looks like this argument is over the song is staying on.
Click to expand...

It would be a waste of money, its too obvious that it isnt him.

We dont need experts, we are judging by our own hearing.

respect77 said:
I agree. Let's say for a moment it's Michael. Then he must have been ill, or not really trying or not having his voice warmed up or all of the above, or something because these tracks are not his usual standard. It's just like he was casually fooling around in the studio, not really trying. I doubt he would have ever released these in this form if he was here.
Click to expand...

Spot on. Regardless of whether they are MJ's vocals or not, he wouldnt have wanted these songs on the album. He would not have intended this song to sound like this. If he did have any part in this, I personally think he had nothing to do with it.
 
cppounders said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Jackson CHOOSE his own executors? I'm sure at one point or another over the last 25-30 years, he would have had at least one or two conversations with them over what to do with unreleased material, recordings, etc. Thank you for your opinion, but all of this hate-mongering toward the album and the songs on it needs to stop.

I think I will choose to trust their judgement, as the Estate seems to be doing nothing but taking care in how Michael's legacy is preserved. Album deal, video game, Cirque tour, Vegas show, and now this album. I applaud them.

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
Click to expand...

and i applaud you my friend :clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:
 
cppounders said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Michael Jackson CHOOSE his own executors? I'm sure at one point or another over the last 25-30 years, he would have had at least one or two conversations with them over what to do with unreleased material, recordings, etc. Thank you for your opinion, but all of this hate-mongering toward the album and the songs on it needs to stop.

I think I will choose to trust their judgement, as the Estate seems to be doing nothing but taking care in how Michael's legacy is preserved. Album deal, video game, Cirque tour, Vegas show, and now this album. I applaud them.

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :clapping:
Click to expand...

We can spot the fans who think it is him from a mile off. All you have to look for is this emotion:

:clapping:
 
L.T.D said:
We can spot the fans who think it is him from a mile off. All you have to look for is this emotion:

:clapping:
Click to expand...

a cheerful emotion that calls for joy and hapiness for MJ and his music i'd prefer this rather than the insults, the bashing and swearing about every little information, insider, annoucement

No offense LTD but you need a walk my friend and maybe a beer or something ;)
 
Lets think about this.

After his trial in 2005, Michael moved out of the country and out of the spotlight for a while. It seemed to me like he wanted to start fresh and put it all behind him.

I cant see him writing and recording a song like that in 2007. I think he wanted to focus on more positive things and move forward. Thats the impression I got anyway.

darkmed said:
a cheerful emotion that calls for joy and hapiness for MJ and his music i'd prefer this rather than the insults, the bashing and swearing about every little information, insider, annoucement

No offense LTD but you need a walk my friend and maybe a beer or something ;)
Click to expand...

I havent bashed, insulted or swore at anyone. That last bit was a joke, as I have noticed that a lot of the people who think its MJ have been using that emotion a lot. Its not meant to be taken seriously.

I think i'm not the only one that needs to calm down at the moment, all the fans are pretty stresed about this. Wouldnt say its really fair to single me out :clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:
 
L.T.D said:
We can spot the fans who think it is him from a mile off. All you have to look for is this emotion:

:clapping:
Click to expand...

OK then... go ahead and continue to delude yourself into thinking that it's not Michael, and allow one of the final songs he ever put down on paper and recorded to be tarnished BY YOU.

Everyone asked for the Estate to make a response. THEY DID. You choose not to accept it. But it's Michael... people who worked with him for decades say that it's HIM. Sweiden, Freeze, Riley, Phillanges, and Holley. They were with him day in and day out -- they knew more of him than just the songs that were released over the years.

From this point, the view of the ESTATE... which REPRESENTS MICHAEL... is that the work is HIM. Public outcry without any scientific proof (which you would have to have, because if you took them to court, all they would have to do is show their proof and you would lose) is what will tarnish Michael's legacy.

:mat: So listen up, bud. It's ok to have an opinion, and it's ok to disagree, but do it respectfully. I had respect for you in my post, yet you cannot afford the same common courtesy to anyone yourself. Last time I checked you weren't an executor, and that's something I can be grateful for.

Now, it's time for more "Breaking News!":dancin:
 
cppounders
Pathetic.
madonna_002_102606.jpg
 
The bridge sounds like MJ to me, it could easily be him. The first verse is sketchy for sure. MJ is for sure in the background though, I can hear some of his famous vocal hiccups and such.
 
One of my first posts regarding the topic. Anyways..
All I want to point out is that the supposedly "new" version of Breaking News on MichaelJackson.com is not different from the original upload from this monday at all..
I recorded the original stream monday morning and re-recorded the "new" one about an hour ago, since so many claim that it's "newly mixes/EQ" or whatnot. Since I have a history of making DIY acapellas I figured I could try one of the DIY methods to see what happens. Technicaly, what happens when you mix 2 sounds/waveforms that are identical, they cancel each other out, turning into complete silence.. So I figured if the "new" version is mixed differently, some sounds will stay put - if it's the same mix as this monday it will turn into a straight line of silence.. And yeah, here's the result - I only recorded about a minute of the "new" mix (first verse and first chorus) into the old mix (from this monday) and it turned silent... So conclusion - there's no difference in the mix from this monday, it's the same file so the fact that some people all of a sudden thinks it sounds more like Michael now is just playing their own heads..


The gap in the picture is the first verse and chorus blanked out after the mix..


breakingnewscomparison.jpg



If anyone wants me to go through this step by step and don't belive my picture evidence, just shout out...
 
You (copy and paste) keep on (end copy paste) breaking the news!

It's kind of catchy in a backwards way. I'm being serious here. Despite the blatant copy and pasted vocals, I'd say it would be cool if it was intentional. Kind of like the Leave Me Alone video's effects.
 
cppounders said:
OK then... go ahead and continue to delude yourself into thinking that it's not Michael, and allow one of the final songs he ever put down on paper and recorded to be tarnished BY YOU.




:mat: So listen up, bud. It's ok to have an opinion, and it's ok to disagree, but do it respectfully. I had respect for you in my post, yet you cannot afford the same common courtesy to anyone yourself. Last time I checked you weren't an executor, and that's something I can be grateful for.
Click to expand...

Why dont you lead by example?:scratch:You just said I was deluding myself and followed it up with telling me to put forth my opinion respectfully? :doh:

I certainly havent called anyone deluded like you just have.
 
Nighty said:
One of my first posts regarding the topic. Anyways..
All I want to point out is that the supposedly "new" version of Breaking News on MichaelJackson.com is not different from the original upload from this monday at all..
I recorded the original stream monday morning and re-recorded the "new" one about an hour ago, since so many claim that it's "newly mixes/EQ" or whatnot. Since I have a history of making DIY acapellas I figured I could try one of the DIY methods to see what happens. Technicaly, what happens when you mix 2 sounds/waveforms that are identical, they cancel each other out, turning into complete silence.. So I figured if the "new" version is mixed differently, some sounds will stay put - if it's the same mix as this monday it will turn into a straight line of silence.. And yeah, here's the result - I only recorded about a minute of the "new" mix (first verse and first chorus) into the old mix (from this monday) and it turned silent... So conclusion - there's no difference in the mix from this monday, it's the same file so the fact that some people all of a sudden thinks it sounds more like Michael now is just playing their own heads..


The gap in the picture is the first verse and chorus blanked out after the mix..


breakingnewscomparison.jpg



If anyone wants me to go through this step by step and don't belive my picture evidence, just shout out...
Click to expand...
Why are the bits that aren't a straight line slightly different?
 
Re: How is BN damaging (or going to damage) MJ's Legacy?

jemini515 said:
It's not whether the song is good or bad, it's whether material can be released under the brand "Michael Jackson" that Michael Jackson the human being potentially had very little to do with. It opens up the door for even worse; it's a slippery slope. What if I wrote a song inspired by Michael's style, sang it myself, produced it myself, and then got a legal license to throw in some "whoo"s and "hee hee"s from previous recordings? It's an extreme example, but I think we can agree that that would be MY song, not a Michael Jackson song. He shouldn't have his name associated with crap post-mortem.... the estate should be looking out for his interests, artistic not only financial.

I see where other fans are coming from, I really do, and I hope future generations discover and love MJ. But I want them to love the artwork that the real Michael, the human being who left us in 2009, created and stood behind.
Click to expand...

It's a valid point. The key question is I guess whether we would like to hear new music from Michael Jackson in one form or another, with all the caveats (that you also stated). Or let the body of music that exists now be the final legacy of MJ.

I honestly don't know which would be better. Although I agree with you that finishing songs with a large amount of speculation is a very grey area, at best.
 
Nova said:
Why are the bits that aren't a straight line slightly different?
Click to expand...

Cause as I stated in my post, I only re-recorded the first verse and first chorus of the "new" mix - so as soon as the fist chorus ends, the mix ends and goes back to the monday mix. I can do the whole song if needed, that's no problem, but I promise you it's gonna end up with the same result..


Edit: if you're talking about the volume difference it's because I recorded them at different occasions so one of the files is higher in volume, nothing else..
 
Nighty said:
Cause as I stated in my post, I only re-recorded the first verse and first chorus of the "new" mix - so as soon as the fist chorus ends, the mix ends and goes back to the monday mix. I can do the whole song if needed, that's no problem, but I promise you it's gonna end up with the same result..
Click to expand...
I see.
 
Nighty said:
Cause as I stated in my post, I only re-recorded the first verse and first chorus of the "new" mix - so as soon as the fist chorus ends, the mix ends and goes back to the monday mix. I can do the whole song if needed, that's no problem, but I promise you it's gonna end up with the same result..


Edit: if you're talking about the volume difference it's because I recorded them at different occasions so one of the files is higher in volume, nothing else..
Click to expand...

Wouldn't recording at different volumes alter the accuracy of your findings?
 
Nighty said:
All I want to point out is that the supposedly "new" version of Breaking News on MichaelJackson.com is not different from the original upload from this monday at all..
Click to expand...
And what if it's just the kb/s quality different?

I've downloaded both files (monday and one hour ago) using same method (ripping video with software that grabs brightcove's link and converting it to 256 kb/s):
- two songs really sound different on headphones (sennheiser). In the new one the background sounds are clearly more powerful (the voices at the beginning sound clear (where the speaker says' biographer', the tambourine for example is more hearable and so on)
- two files being different size (7.85mb (new) vs 7.84mb (old) )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top