Latest on MJJC

Monster - The Great Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Mystic said:
Monster is one of the best on the album in my opinion and I hope it's released as the next single, with 50 promoting it. Get dancers, make an epic dance routine, and perform.
Click to expand...

I so agree. Where i'm from the hiphop stations love it. Since the album has come out i've been hearing guys here BLAST it with their BIG SPEAKERS. Yall should hear it BANGIN' with all the bass and what not.

I love this part: lmao

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH Whyyyyyyyyyyyy ya thank they're satisfied with and allllllllll you givvve? OOOOOOOOOOO :clapping:you give em' ur all they're watchin' u fall and they eat ya souuuuuuuuul LIKE A VEG-TA-BLE!!!!!!!!!!
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

KOPV said:
IDK how we can have a TRUE DEBATE thread without facts to back up people that are saying its not him aside from.. "I hear" "I hear" if this was a debate compition they could not even make this a topic..

There at least evidance to use within a debate that it IS.. but there isn't for that it is NOT..
Click to expand...

Where are your evidence please show us

aside from "Sony says that" teddy says that" Cascios says "

Give demos or videos this is evidence
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

BabeBeMine said:
When it comes to a CLUB BANGER and a track that non fans will like, then yes its one of MJ's best songs in years. MJ has not had a great club dance track in years.

The beat destroys 2001 Unbreakable and all of the faster tracks on invincible
Click to expand...

:hysterical::hysterical:

I prefer laughing out loud
Please dont get me wrong
i dont know if nighmare or dream or i dont know what
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jan
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Monster=fake MJ vocals (just as the rest of the Cascio tracks)
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

^ I think you have said that in almost all your posts now.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

^These threads are new, so I have to say it one more time, if it's ok with you
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

^It's ok with me, it's just not very exiting to read for the zillionth time. This 'debate' could use something new, imo.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Roosje said:
^It's ok with me, it's just not very exiting to read for the zillionth time. This 'debate' could use something new, imo.
Click to expand...

Something new? Like a Michael Jackson vocal? There's a novel idea...
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

No. Something new as in new ideas, musings and interpretations of this controversy. A stance on what we should do as a fan community, what DO we expect from Sony, will there be a court case, how reasonable is it to have opinions without proof? Just adressing the subject in a little more interesting, more indepth manner, instead of just OMG 100 % FAKE!!, which is just boring to read time after time after time....
 
Last edited:
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Roosje said:
No. Something new as in new ideas, musings and interpretations of this controversy. A stance on what we should do as a fan community, what DO we expect from Sony, will there be a court case, how reasonable is it to have opinions without proof? Just adressing the subject in a little more interesting, more indepth manner, instead of just OMG 100 FAKE!!, which is just boring to read time after time after time....
Click to expand...

We should spread the word like these fans are doing:

http://www.fakemichael.com/

The videos on there are absolutely damning.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

That site should be updated a bit more though.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Of all the debatable tracks, I find Monster to have the least MJ in it.

I do however think verse one is sung by him.

It's a shame really as it's not a bad track at all.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

edited
 
Last edited:
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

I'm unsure about that song. The ad-libs sound very strange.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

edit, double post
 
Last edited:
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Smooth, I would really appreciate it if you explained this post you made after the Streaming of Breaking News...

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/sh...postcount=2950

"^ It's felt like the twilight zone.

For those who are interested, I spoke with my source on the phone for over 30 minutes tonight regarding this whole mess. This is coming straight from Sony: the vocals are over 50% not MJ's, they did hire an impersonator to run over the majority of MJ's pre-existing vocals and tried to hide it with production.

The remaining Cascio tracks including "Monster" are all in the same boat with some MJ vocals and some imposter vocals. There will be a big meeting tomorrow at Sony where they will discuss the future of this album. More to come..."
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

For those who replied to my comment!!

If there was SOLID evidence of anything there would be no reason to debate.. But with evidance of somesort each side would bring up a case.. As minor as they are..

Man on Trial (a meat butcher)

If this was a murder case, and we were on the other side of the wall and heard the yelling..

1. side would be saying: Well there was dna testing and it came out it was person A (vocal testing done)

2. Those who sold the knife state they sold it to person A (Sony stating it is MJ)

3. co workers worked with the person A states it is person A's movements due to the stab wounds are go along with A's (the butchers) cutting patterns (producers stating it is his voice)


that is evidance...

WE (those who were on the other side of the wall) state it cannot be person A because we heard the yelling and it was definatly not him..

That would be the only piece of evidance we would have to bring to the table..

They rebuttle:

We could not hear the voices through the wall in its clearity because of sound distortion etc.. And all we keep saying is.. BUT BUT I heard the voice and it wasnt him.. And the window was open so the voice would have been clear..

As minor as people think the evidance is stating that it is Michael.. at least they have enuff to bring up a case.. If we stated that the voice we heard was not person A we could not even be gaurentied it would be used in court..
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

To be honest, when I initially heard the vocals, they didn't sound like MJ, but I wasn't sure. I'm not a professional musician and I don't have a great ear.

I do however run often with MJ's music blasting on my IPOD and I decided to listen to the new album during my run. It wasn't until then that it really hit me that this song (and the other two Cascio songs) are not MJ. When MJ is on my IPOD I not only hear his voice but I FEEL his voice permeating through my bones, energizing me as I go. The vocals on Monster did nothing for me. I like the song and it's fun to listen to, but it's not MJ.

Again, I'm not a professional, but I do know one of two things is true:
1) This is not MJ or
2) They butchered his voice beyond recognition when they produced this song

Of the two I think the first is the truth b/c there are tons of MJ demos out there and while they may not have the quality of a final recording, I've never doubted any of them were MJ. If it really was MJ there would have been no need for them to butcher his voice. Maybe a few tweaks here and there, but not a complete butchering.

The question is why did they do it then? I'm not really sure. I've heard some say they wanted a more modern uptempo song. Maybe, but then why include Keeping Your Head Up? And it's hard to believe that they couldn't have found other Jackson songs that they could have modernized?

Maybe they just want to put out as many Jackson albums as possible, and the only way to spread them out is to include some fakes. Whatever the detailed reasons may be, no doubt greed was a key factor.

I work for a large corporation and the one thing I've learned about corporate America is that a company will often push the bar to see what it can get away with. If they can include some fakes, and still makes tons of money, believe me, they'll do it. My guess is they're testing the waters right now to see what they can get away with. They don't care about artistic integrity.

Either that or it was just pure negligance.

I wish I could 'un'-buy the three Cascio songs. Not b/c they are bad songs, but b/c they were sold under a false pretense. Again, I have no proof that an imposter was used, but I know when I run that it's not Michael I hear. And to me, a computerized distorted version of MJ is just as bad as an imposter. It's the same thing. It's fake.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Its to the point now where if i were Sony id just release the remainder of the available songs to itunes and call it a day. No more albums where the label has to hear the fans complaining all day evrrrday. Fans been complaining since Blood on the Dance Floor album. You got non fans doubting "hollywood tonight", "best of joy"

Instead of allowing non fans to comment on ITUNES...You SMAM it with your comments. You can tell because of the username which relates to michael jackson and the same old fake fake fake...Your not even giving non fans a chance to comment.

Why dont you make comments on MJ forums, and allow non fans to post comments on itunes. Can you do that? or do you have to SPAM everywhere
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

I have to say out of all the tracks on the new album i am totally addicted to Monster, Its so refreshing and i don't care if its MJ or not , at the end of the day its a great song that could have been the next Thriller if MJ was still here to make a mega video for the single.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

Screamin said:
i don't care if its MJ or not
Click to expand...

How can you not care? I agree the song is good and would be fun to listen to even if it's not MJ.

But the point is, it is being advertised as MJ. If it's not MJ, then that is fraud. I'm sure MJ wouldn't appreciate Sony fraudulently using his name for profits, especially given his history with Sony.

That is why people are upset. Nobody would have a problem with the song if it was on someone else's CD.

I'm not saying that I know for a fact that Sony is committing fraud (none of us know), I'm just saying it matters a lot if those vocals are MJ or not for reasons of integrity.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

MJFan07 said:
How can you not care? I agree the song is good and would be fun to listen to even if it's not MJ.

But the point is, it is being advertised as MJ. If it's not MJ, then that is fraud. I'm sure MJ wouldn't appreciate Sony fraudulently using his name for profits, especially given his history with Sony.

That is why people are upset. Nobody would have a problem with the song if it was on someone else's CD.

I'm not saying that I know for a fact that Sony is committing fraud (none of us know), I'm just saying it matters a lot if those vocals are MJ or not for reasons of integrity.
Click to expand...

Which means you have grounds to sue. Which no one has done yet.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

AnnieRUOkay89 said:
Which means you have grounds to sue. Which no one has done yet.
Click to expand...

You keep waving that over people's heads as if it's an easy alternative. Are you aware of that posters financial situation? Of their personal situation? Get off your high horse and stop talking down to people.

It's a fraud. And a con. I don't have to sue every corrupt business in the world to prove that. Do I? There are no weopans of mass destruction in Iraq, so should I sue the American government.

What a ridiculous statement!

That everyone should sue Sony if they believe it's a fraud? I wish I had your time and money, in that case, because that's what i'd do.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

KOPV said:
For those who replied to my comment!!

If there was SOLID evidence of anything there would be no reason to debate.. But with evidance of somesort each side would bring up a case.. As minor as they are..

Man on Trial (a meat butcher)

If this was a murder case, and we were on the other side of the wall and heard the yelling..

1. side would be saying: Well there was dna testing and it came out it was person A (vocal testing done)

2. Those who sold the knife state they sold it to person A (Sony stating it is MJ)

3. co workers worked with the person A states it is person A's movements due to the stab wounds are go along with A's (the butchers) cutting patterns (producers stating it is his voice)


that is evidance...

WE (those who were on the other side of the wall) state it cannot be person A because we heard the yelling and it was definatly not him..

That would be the only piece of evidance we would have to bring to the table..

They rebuttle:

We could not hear the voices through the wall in its clearity because of sound distortion etc.. And all we keep saying is.. BUT BUT I heard the voice and it wasnt him.. And the window was open so the voice would have been clear..

As minor as people think the evidance is stating that it is Michael.. at least they have enuff to bring up a case.. If we stated that the voice we heard was not person A we could not even be gaurentied it would be used in court..
Click to expand...

Perfectly put! ^^^ This Post For The Win!
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

AnnieRUOkay89 said:
Which means you have grounds to sue. Which no one has done yet.
Click to expand...

I only paid $3 for those songs. I don't have much to sue over. But that doesn't make what they did right.

The only ones with really a valid justification to sue (according to how the courts will look at it) is the MJ Estate, which in my opinion are in on it. Remember, the estate is not the family.

The only other entity that has any legal justification for suing would be the consumer, but each consumer only spent a small amount of money, so it would have to be a very organized class action suit. Those are not easy to put together. That is not to say that someone in the fan community won't start up a fund raiser and set up such a suit but that takes lots of time, organization, and money. It wouldn't happen overnight.
 
Re: Monster - The Great Debate

samhabib said:
You keep waving that over people's heads as if it's an easy alternative. Are you aware of that posters financial situation? Of their personal situation? Get off your high horse and stop talking down to people.

It's a fraud. And a con. I don't have to sue every corrupt business in the world to prove that. Do I? There are no weopans of mass destruction in Iraq, so should I sue the American government.

What a ridiculous statement!

That everyone should sue Sony if they believe it's a fraud? I wish I had your time and money, in that case, because that's what i'd do.
Click to expand...


First of all, the bolded no one, was in reference to those who are most vocal about it and have yet to do anything, The Jacksons. Not that certain fan, but of course, you rather jump to conclusions than to ask someone what they meant by that.


At the end of the day, it's all about what have you done for me lately? What have the master doubters done for their followers? Which was what I was getting at, sorry you just happened to misunderstand that.


MJFan07 said:
The only ones with really a valid justification to sue (according to how the courts will look at it) is the MJ Estate, which in my opinion are in on it. Remember, the estate is not the family.
Click to expand...

That's the farthest from the truth and that's not really how fraud works. The family has a legal right to sue, should they have the substantial proof to support their claim. Once the Jackson's launch that initial lawsuit, and judge rules in support of them, the fans can then legally sue for refunds from the recording company that committed such fraud.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top