Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

eXceLOfFam1 said:
age is no excuse, im 21 and knew right away that there was something wrong with these songs, at first i tried to rationalize my thoughts into believing that MJ sang the cascio songs but logic says otherwise, there are too many undeniable signs, after hearing all 12 of them i dont see how anyone can believe it is him, that being said i actually like some of the tracks such as all i need and stay lol but once again age is no excuse, im 21 and know his material from J5 till invincible and after, so dont pardon this person on that note alone.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I'm 20, and I wasn't particularly impressed by the Cascio singer's effort in those songs. In fact, all the way back to the beginning, I wasn't even anticipating any posthumous releases. But I listened to BN anyway when it was first premiered, just to hear what Michael might have been working on in his last years, and boy, I almost thought it was a joke. I literally burst out laughing. Until of course, I found out it was the "real" thing and everyone else was being serious.

I think it really has to do with how people perceive things. Just like how some may rely on only tangible, concrete information, others might prefer theoretical information or insight. Whether a person is the former or the latter may, in my opinion, affect how they perceive Michael's voice or singing capabilities, and how they perceive the whole controversy. That's not to say that the former group will always be believers and the latter will always be doubters, or the other way around. There might be other things to take into consideration, such as experience in listening to Michael's voice, perhaps even knowledge of musicology or other related forms of studies. Whatever the case may be, I think that, when it comes to Michael's singing voice or even singing in general, I don't think that it is something that can easily be identified by scientific means. At least, not at the moment. I mean, I know a lot of emphasis has been put into researching vocal identification, but not much has been done in the singing voice identification category. For instance:

Quote: "Robust song identification from acoustic parameters has proven to be very successful (with accuracy greater than 99% in some cases) in identifying songs included in the database [3]. Artist identification is a much more difficult task, and not as well-defined as individual song identification. A recent example of an artist identification system is [4], which reports accuracies of approximately 50% in artist identification on a database of about 250 songs."...http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&s...sg=AFQjCNFFRyigx-1BUo-8OeT1ZC6byDQOLw&cad=rja
 
Can someone help me to refresh my memory?

A few month ago, Birchey said:

Firstly Michael was there for over 2 Months, yet they say they only have telephone vocals, secondly, if they did make them more presentable to Sony and at the same time tell them they did, and that they are from a telephone, why didn't they hand over any of the raw vocals? Its not like they were a secret to Sony/Riley.
Click to expand...

Did the Cascio say that Michael recorded the songs on the phone finally?
 
Chamife said:
[/b]
Yes, it's about knowing his abilities. At 20 you're old enough to know that, so to me it's not the age, but more the knowledge you have.
I realize I'm heading into dangerous territory now...:D, but as far as I'm concerned you can have all his music, own rare collectors-items, been to a lot of his concerts, and still don't know his voice. Also, being a fan for many years is not a measurement for recognizing as far as I'm concerned.

I love what you wrote in bold. I wish the people who are responsible for this did the same. Then they would realize you can't replace Michael with just a voice that's trying to sound like him. To me the Cascio singer is...well...just a singer with a specific sound. And there are lots of those. I don't think it's special.

I recommend also these YT's. Destiny Tour in London, 1979. Especially focus on the ad-libs (or improvisations) for all 'believers'.
http://youtu.be/Ct0zxC1PwiM
http://youtu.be/KwzDb7vuPUI
http://youtu.be/SSQpwTDGms8
http://youtu.be/7TCI9heTvlk
Click to expand...

However, I think it is. I have grown up on MJ and know his voice from someone elses.
 
IvoDT said:
Now for the doubters,
We as believers also have a hard time (imo). I really like the songs and really WANT to support them because just like some doubters we all wish MJ DID sing them, correct?
Click to expand...

yaaaaaaa . . . i have no problem admitting that not a single part of me wants that to be mj on those tracks. I don't WANT those songs to be him. they're horrible. i would be embarrassed if he was singing them. maybe that makes me biased--but i don't think so. The songs themselves are PART of the controversy. It's not just the voice--it's the quality of the tracks themselves. i know what michael's music sounds like, and it's not that bubblegum pop bull$h*t
 
btw - let me add a little note to this thread.

although this debate can get heated sometimes please do not insult other members. Neither saying a group of people are brainwashed nor saying a person is troll is acceptable. Similarly competing about who's a longer fan is unnecessary. Simply accept that other people might have a different opinion than you do and it doesn't make them the bad people.
 
Chamife said:
[/b]
Yes, it's about knowing his abilities. At 20 you're old enough to know that, so to me it's not the age, but more the knowledge you have.
I realize I'm heading into dangerous territory now...:D, but as far as I'm concerned you can have all his music, own rare collectors-items, been to a lot of his concerts, and still don't know his voice. Also, being a fan for many years is not a measurement for recognizing as far as I'm concerned.

I love what you wrote in bold. I wish the people who are responsible for this did the same. Then they would realize you can't replace Michael with just a voice that's trying to sound like him. To me the Cascio singer is...well...just a singer with a specific sound. And there are lots of those. I don't think it's special.

I recommend also these YT's. Destiny Tour in London, 1979. Especially focus on the ad-libs (or improvisations) for all 'believers'.
http://youtu.be/Ct0zxC1PwiM
http://youtu.be/KwzDb7vuPUI
http://youtu.be/SSQpwTDGms8
http://youtu.be/7TCI9heTvlk
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with everything you said. Length of being a fan is not a measurement. Different people become fans for different reasons. And, as we age, our appreciation is bound to change to a different level. The way I appreciate Michael's works is very different than the way I liked his works when I was 11 (when I first became a fan and didn't even speak English). As we grow, the way we perceive the world and interprete arts will change. If you are in early 20's now and you think you know Michael's music inside-out, trust me, 10 years later, you will still find yourself in awe and realize how little you knew when you were younger.

Michael Jackson was one of the most exceptional and unique vocalists and one of the most influential and powerful artists. It's so true that he can be imitated, but never duplicated. A sound-alike never manages to convey emotion like Michael did. So many times, he makes the world around me stop and gets me teary. He pulls my heartstrings with his soul. Also, he knew exactly what he wanted for his works. I can say with confidence that the Cascio tracks, in the condition they are in (before or after processing) is not what Michael Jackson wanted his music to be listened.
 
So as I was reading I'm a 20 year old high school graduate that is going to college for Law and Astrology but yet since I'm a believer anything I say makes me a troll.

Okay I am leaving this post and not coming back since MJ fans will not accept me so bye.

(Sucks to be a believer around others)
 
^^honest question: you can major in astrology?

you probably won't see this, if you're really leaving this thread. but seriously, you can major in astrology?
 
mjmax said:
Can someone help me to refresh my memory?

A few month ago, Birchey said:



Did the Cascio say that Michael recorded the songs on the phone finally?
Click to expand...

This is a difficult question because as you may know, Birchey had some legal problems. I will answer based on my knowledge of this. The Cascios had all their songs - all 12 of them, saved in ProTools, which is a music editing software. This is how they were given to Sony. Not on cd or anything like that, but saved in ProTools. Accompanying these 12 songs were some other files, including several of MJ's old beat boxes that had been cut together to make a new one. There was a file named "MJTelephone". I don't know what it contained. There were other files named "MJGrunts01" "MJGrunts02" etc. While we are on the topic, it was the research into the material from that ProTools session that revealed much of how the songs had been constructed. We were led to believe that these were all songs that Michael had recorded and had left no other takes etc because he was so happy with them. However, each songs, is cut together from multiple takes. In some instances, entire lines are put together from multiple takes. Therein lies the smoking gun. Jason wasn't perfect. These songs were recorded over and over again and the best (most convincing) bits from each take were spliced together. The software showed that the songs had been recorded on high quality equipment on a number of different microphones. They had all the hallmarks of being recorded in a good quality professional studio. This info also blew the whole processing excuse out the water. There is no processing on those original demos. That vibrato, those snorts and that pronounciation is what is coming naturally from the singers mouth. I hope all that answers your question and gives you some insight. Short answer: there is nothing in the songs that appears to have been recorded over the phone and it is unkown what the telephone files contains. I'm not sure why he said that the Cascio's only had telephone vocals. I haven't ever seen such a quote. Also, I'd like to add that I do not possess any of the above material and I do not condone the alleged act of stealing material on anyones part.
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
??? those tracks were recorded in Europe
Click to expand...

I still don't understand what you meant by this. I think it was you, not sure, who said something on youtube about the tracks being recorded in Europe. Might have been someone else. What's that all about?
 
love is magical said:
I absolutely agree with everything you said. Length of being a fan is not a measurement. Different people become fans for different reasons. And, as we age, our appreciation is bound to change to a different level. The way I appreciate Michael's works is very different than the way I liked his works when I was 11 (when I first became a fan and didn't even speak English). As we grow, the way we perceive the world and interprete arts will change. If you are in early 20's now and you think you know Michael's music inside-out, trust me, 10 years later, you will still find yourself in awe and realize how little you knew when you were younger.

Michael Jackson was one of the most exceptional and unique vocalists and one of the most influential and powerful artists. It's so true that he can be imitated, but never duplicated. A sound-alike never manages to convey emotion like Michael did. So many times, he makes the world around me stop and gets me teary. He pulls my heartstrings with his soul. Also, he knew exactly what he wanted for his works. I can say with confidence that the Cascio tracks, in the condition they are in (before or after processing) is not what Michael Jackson wanted his music to be listened.
Click to expand...
You say you agree that age is not a measurement, yet you say that you learn so much more as you age as a fan, using the example of how if you think you know a lot about Michael at 20, think about what you'll know in 10 years, which is exactly my point. I have learned even more and am in more awe of Michael Jackson every second of every day. Every time I hear another song or see another performance or even just his image alone, I am further enlightened, as I think we all are!

That's why I think some of these people just may need more time than others, or not, to realize that Michael isn't singing.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but even I who has been a fan of Michael Jackson and heard his voice since I was 3 years old, maybe younger, was fooled by the Cascio songs and Malachi at first.

Also when do peoples ears and hearing get completely fully developed? Does hearing and picking up different sounds change like taste-buds or other parts of your body changing? Do you ever perceive sound differently at different ages?
 
^^ I don't think it has anything to do with hearing ability....In my opinion, I think it's how often and how intently you listen to his voice...How much you familiarize yourself with it...I often lie in bed with a pair of earbuds and get lost in it all...I've done this most of my life.... Not just the music, but his voice....Almost like isolating his voice from the music and taking in all the little bits and pieces of his voice that weave in and out your ears...I'm not saying believers don't do this, but from what I've noticed since this debate started is that the doubters are able to point out the depths of his voice and all the nuances that make it unique....We often have discussions on how his voice has touched us, inspired us...We talk about the emotions we evoke and the magic we experience when we hear his voice and music...It's never, ever been 'just a song'...Michael's music, to me, is not something I have passively in the background playing...It just speaks to me, it's never just 'there'....It's like second nature to me...Part of my childhood and continues into my adulthood...And when something like that becomes THAT familiar and part of you, you instantly know when something just isn't right....
 
Last edited:
Arklove said:
I remember seeing it on this forum before a long time ago...I just remembered it recently and looked it up on tinypic :D
Click to expand...

OK, thank you!! :)


On-topic: As I've said before, I do not believe that fan age is relevant when it comes to knowing Michael's voice. I've been a fan for two and a half years, I've listened to his voice EXTENSIVELY in that time, in any format I can. It's not age, but dedication, i.e. casual vs. hardcore. But a situation like this calls for much, MUCH deeper analysis, in fact it's required that you delve into the very deep technical aspects of his voice. You don't have to be a fan of 10+ years to delve into his voice like that.
 
What do you mean? Because he mentions Sony? Seemed like the facial expression was to emphasize his point that you should start your own publishing company cause EMI and Sony will cheat you.
 
Aniram said:
What do you mean? Because he mentions Sony? Seemed like the facial expression was to emphasize his point that you should start your own publishing company cause EMI and Sony will cheat you.
Click to expand...

Cos he wishes he hadn't mentioned Sony. I was just looking at the body language. Also, just been doing a bit of research using his blog. He received a phone call from John Branca on October 18th 2010, Wetzemann on October 19th and another from John Campanelli, who is VP of marketing at Sony Music on October 20th. I'm still intrigued by his "I wish you'd call me a year and a half earlier" comment. Also, despite his apparent criticisms of big labels in that interview, he states just how much he loves Sony Music on the day of the Sony phone call. He states on Novemner 8th how much he likes Breaking News. This to me shows he was clearly in on it. If he wasn't, then his first reaction to Breaking News on that morning would be one of shock - like hang on, that's my Jason on there. But he loves the song.
 
Those were interesting comments. Also isn't he like Jason Malachi's manager or something?
 
age has nothing to do with it. Length of time as a fan has nothing to do with it. There's actually a really easy test to see if your perception is valid.

Q: does "fall in love" sound like michael jackson to you?

if you answer yes . . . you're not qualified to judge. regardless of how long you've been a fan or how old you are.
 
I agree about Fall In Love and Soldier Boy and stuff, but when the songs were first released, especially when it was just Breaking News with all the ad-libs and things thrown in there... They were stupid to do it but they did some smart things to cover their tracks sort of and make it more difficult for people. They did a great job at dividing the community, that was a success.

But I think age may have a little to do with it... people are always maturing, people mature at different levels. Maybe it's a mental age sort of thing. For some reason it seems like some people need time to get to know Michael's voice even more, grow as a fan deeper. I know I had to. I appreciate the controversy for that, I guess, I've realized even more how legendary of a performer Michael Jackson was.
 
azsummergirl said:
age has nothing to do with it. Length of time as a fan has nothing to do with it. There's actually a really easy test to see if your perception is valid.

Q: does "fall in love" sound like michael jackson to you?

if you answer yes . . . you're not qualified to judge. regardless of how long you've been a fan or how old you are.
Click to expand...

Surely no one could think that sounds like Michael. One problem though - Sony clearly did and that's what doesn't make sense. They must have listened to the songs before buying them. It starts to look more and more like complicity but I really have difficulty accepting that.
 
I think definitely Sony or the Estate at least realized they sounded shady and they have, for some reason, been released in order of most MJ-sounding to least MJ-sounding, as if on purpose. Breaking News, Monster, Keep Your Head Up, All I Need and Stay, Soldier Boy, Burn 2 Nite... they just go downhill until you hear the ones like Fall In Love and Ready 2 Win and you are completely ill.
 
Aniram said:
I think definitely Sony or the Estate at least realized they sounded shady and they have, for some reason, been released in order of most MJ-sounding to least MJ-sounding, as if on purpose. Breaking News, Monster, Keep Your Head Up, All I Need and Stay, Soldier Boy, Burn 2 Nite... they just go downhill until you hear the ones like Fall In Love and Ready 2 Win and you are completely ill.
Click to expand...

Good point but they did give Teddy Riley Burn 2Nite to work on for possible inclusion on the album. Imagine how much worse things would have been if that had been included.
 
you should stop attacking other members if you don't want this thread to be closed for a long time / for good.
 
I think it indeed is about hearing.

Imagine someone who loves nature. Everybody does, right? It's fall, you see the birds going south, you see the leaves changing colours, you can even smell fall. You watch everything closely and you love it. Then imagine someone, who can tell you which particular birds you just saw and that they're leaving later than normal because of the enduring warmth in the early fall. That someone shows you the one tree that doesn't fit because the colors of its leaves are due to fungus infection rather than fall itself. That person goes on and on and sees so much more than you have. Because that's just they way his eyes work - and of course because of his education. He knows what to look for. But even without education, and no matter how hard you concentrate - some just seem to notice so much more than you do. And this is not about opinions. ;)

I think you can translate that to art. Everybody loves music, right? But some things you miss because you are concentrating on different areas or just because you don't know what to listen to in detail. You can even listen to a short piece ten times then someone comes along and asks you "Did you hear that one little significant note there?". And you haven't before, but you do in the future. Some people hear that note right away. Maybe they miss something else instead. What I miss, e.g., is lyrics. I just don't get them, they don't come through the music. It takes ages to know what a song truly is about (of course I could just read the lyrics, but usually I don't, because I don't really care and also: I simply forget. because there is no primary sense for me to add the semantics of the lyrics to the complete impression). This is a major weakness. But it seems this weakness is evened out through the deeper perception of music, or at least I hope it is. ;)

It might have to do with different brain areas being active or developed. The funny thing is, however, that music and language seem to be quite related in terms of brain areas. I really can't explain that regarding my personal behavior.

I think starting to play musical instruments at a very early age does help and being able to sing. You're not just able to say "Well, this time the vers sounds different ... more passionate ...", but you can actually point out what the singer / producer did to achieve that effect - slightly different harmonies, minor changes in voice leading - whatever it might be. You can even transcribe and therefore better understand. You might be able to even 'feel' a specific singing technique because of certain qualities and so forth.


So some believers seem to really hear MJ on those songs. But providing more and more stuff, like Fall in Love etc. should make them reconsider everything. They are able to see a bigger picture. I am very impressed of KingMikeJ for expressing his intentions to think about the 3 released songs again - no matter what the outcome may be. Thank you for that.

It's not about being better or worse, though. Don't get me wrong. I know, most of you won't.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top