Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

kreen said:
Actually, there are funny anecdotes and stories from the sessions : MJ singing in a PVC pipe, recording vocals sitting on a stool in the shower because there wasn't enough room in the basement for all the equipment. Pro-fake people just choose to ignore as lies everything Eddie Cascio says.

I wonder why.
Click to expand...
Even if Eddie released photos, lyrics, videos some people will say "The songs are still bad" or "MJ would have never released these songs" as if they knew it all.
 
I do not believe that the Cascio Tracks are Michael, and if they indeed were, They are completely unfit for any sort of release.
 
André89;3602528 said:
First of all, I can't really imagine Michael walking around the Cascio home looking messed up and/or bald. The man used to wake up before his wife in order to apply his makeup, for Gods sake. Even in his PJ's, his hair was flawless. He cared about his appearance.

But to be frank, I do not have the faintest idea how Michael looked during these alleged recordings, and neither do you. Point is, the scenario you just described is pure speculation. No one knows how Michael looked during the alleged sessions because there are no pictures. No videos. No handwritten lyrics. No demos. No funny anecdotes or stories from the recording process. Nothing.

I wonder why.
Click to expand...

HE wasn't wearing make up all the time, not at home anyway and neither a wig.HE WASN'T BALD.
And those anectodes are crap.Lies told by liars and cheaters.
 
Last edited:
It's so nice to not have listened to those awfully fake songs for a long time now.
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
Even if Eddie released photos, lyrics, videos some people will say "The songs are still bad" or "MJ would have never released these songs" as if they knew it all.
Click to expand...
For me personally; Michael is gone. He has no influence whatsoever about what is released in his name and some songs I like and others I don't. That is something the fans have no influence on and have to accept. That is what The Estate is for. They have to keep Michael 'alive'. I realize and I can see the importance of that. I also realize not everyone feels this way. We are all fans in different ways. But....I think we can ALL AGREE about the fact that the songs at least have to be sung by him!!!

kreen said:
Actually, there are funny anecdotes and stories from the sessions : MJ singing in a PVC pipe, recording vocals sitting on a stool in the shower because there wasn't enough room in the basement for all the equipment. Pro-fake people just choose to ignore as lies everything Eddie Cascio says.

I wonder why.
Click to expand...
It's not that hard. It's all because we don't hear Michael.
 
kreen said:
So any song that MJ sang for which there is no recorded footage is fake? Funny.

By the way, you guys do realize that while staying at the Cascios', MJ was probably not exactly looking his best, in terms of putting on makeup and his wig and everything? There's several pictures in Frank Cascio's book where MJ's nose is all messed up -- not ready for prime time! Not sure he would have liked to be filmed in that situation.
Click to expand...
Frank wasn't hesitant to put a (not very complimentary) picture of Michael on his Twitter page (I thought it was Twitter). I haven't read the book, so I don't know what pics are in the book. But in those three months..they never filmed? Ok, out of respect to Michael. If he didn't want that, I understand. But in those three months they never took one picture? Okies... hard to believe. And Frank isn't Eddie. Maybe Eddie took a picture once, but decided to keep it to himself. Who knows. But it makes things very vague and hard to believe.
 
Last edited:
ADKIc3mAnX said:
Even if Eddie released photos, lyrics, videos some people will say "The songs are still bad" or "MJ would have never released these songs" as if they knew it all.
Click to expand...

See, you're confusing opinion on authenticity with personal taste again. Yes, even if evidence is brought to light that proves beyond reasonable doubt that Michael Jackson is singing lead vocals on these songs (and NOT just through copy-pastes) then that doesn't suddenly make everyone love the songs, nor does it mean that they suddenly become good songs. Crap is still crap, and it is in the eyes (or ears) of the beholder. Personally, I don't mind listening to Monster for the composition, but the vocal delivery and the lyrics are terrible and sound almost like a satire of an MJ song. That is my personal opinion of the songs themselves, and even if they are proven to be him, I will still carry that opinion. You seem to hope that there will not only be proof locked away somewhere, but this "proof" will suddenly change everyone's personal opinion of these songs to your own.

An understatement at the very least, but not every loves the Cascio tracks as you do, and no amount of proof will change how someone likes or dislikes the tracks on a subjective level. You're dealing with people who are incredibly well-informed and have based their opinions on their own personal taste. An MJ fan doesn't HAVE to like everything which has his name slapped on it.
 
Yeah, I assume working with Michael Jackson is something you would want to immortalize in the form of a picture or a video. At least to have it in your personal archive. You know, show it to your kids and to the people who don't believe you...

And to the people who think you're a scammer. More specifically, when they accuse you of not only lying about working with Michael Jackson on a bunch of songs over a short period of time but fabricating such false songs and selling them over large amounts of money.

This might not technically prove anything, but still... its interesting.
 
Personally, I don't need any more evidence for Cascios. I've listened almost all MJ solo era songs. When I hear MJ in radio or TV or whatever, I can immediately tell it is Michael. While I remember first time listening to Breaking News and Monster.. I thought, ''is it some joke?'' after I just knew it was titled as Michael Jackson. It certainly didn't sound like Michael. Also, I dislike those songs as musical compositions in general as well. While I can clearly hear Michael in recent songs like Hold My Hand, This Is It, in Cascios, I just can't hear him. Yes, there are few bits (some screams ''hoo's'' etc), but I believe those are just pasted in.
 
MJJLatvia said:
While I can clearly hear Michael in recent songs like Hold My Hand, This Is It...
Click to expand...

Actually, as far as I know, This Is It is from the late 70s/early 80s. From the Thriller sessions specifically, if I recall correctly.
 
T.N.A. said:
Actually, as far as I know, This Is It is from the late 70s/early 80s. From the Thriller sessions specifically, if I recall correctly.
Click to expand...

Really? I had no idea. Anyway, I made my point.
 
kreen said:
Actually, there are funny anecdotes and stories from the sessions : MJ singing in a PVC pipe, recording vocals sitting on a stool in the shower because there wasn't enough room in the basement for all the equipment. Pro-fake people just choose to ignore as lies everything Eddie Cascio says.

I wonder why.
Click to expand...

I do not see those as funny anecdotes. More like "yeah, we know the vocals sound strange, and these are our reasons for it". I understand that the word excuses are banned from this thread, so let's go with "reasons".

ADKIc3mAnX said:
Even if Eddie released photos, lyrics, videos some people will say "The songs are still bad" or "MJ would have never released these songs" as if they knew it all.
Click to expand...

Well, the songs are bad. And I am 100 % certain that Michael wouldn't have released those tracks in their current state. But Michael is gone and has no control of what is being released in his name. That doesn't mean it is/isn't him on the vocals. Eddie has this far released no such evidence, and therefore this brings little to the debate.

claudiadoina said:
HE wasn't wearing make up all the time, not at home anyway and neither a wig.HE WASN'T BALD.
Click to expand...

As a matter of fact, Michael did wear a wig during the last decade, and further back as well. Not trying to prove a point or anything, but it was brought up in the conversation, and he did. And I'm fine by it. I think he looked good. It was his choice.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how many people are hoax-believers here... Even the slightest thought of the death hoax theory may have a link to our opinions here.

Although I myself am not a beLIEver think some of the theories have influenced us. Some people still think MJ is the same as Jason (!) and others believe MJ had Jason record the tracks ON PURPOSE for publicity!

Teddy Riley himself is a beLIEver too. Although many Cascio track-doubters criticize him for even going into the death hoax theory, some believers and neutral say "Teddy can believe what he wants".

Also what seems puzzling is the One More Chance Ford Remix. DJ Ford said that he just edited MJ's voice, but the voice is clearly different from anything we've heard from MJ.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTNp6Rw5H4E

If it is MJ singing, then that could mean Cascio tracks could be MJ Malachi'ed LOL However I still think it's R. Kelly since it is possible he made a demo.
 
Jesta said:
See, you're confusing opinion on authenticity with personal taste again. Yes, even if evidence is brought to light that proves beyond reasonable doubt that Michael Jackson is singing lead vocals on these songs (and NOT just through copy-pastes) then that doesn't suddenly make everyone love the songs, nor does it mean that they suddenly become good songs. Crap is still crap, and it is in the eyes (or ears) of the beholder. Personally, I don't mind listening to Monster for the composition, but the vocal delivery and the lyrics are terrible and sound almost like a satire of an MJ song. That is my personal opinion of the songs themselves, and even if they are proven to be him, I will still carry that opinion. You seem to hope that there will not only be proof locked away somewhere, but this "proof" will suddenly change everyone's personal opinion of these songs to your own.

An understatement at the very least, but not every loves the Cascio tracks as you do, and no amount of proof will change how someone likes or dislikes the tracks on a subjective level. You're dealing with people who are incredibly well-informed and have based their opinions on their own personal taste. An MJ fan doesn't HAVE to like everything which has his name slapped on it.
Click to expand...
I understand you think the songs are what you call "Crap" but calling them "Fake" with no creditable proof what so ever is not right in my opinion.

And why are we not questioning Hollywood Tonight ? I mean before many doubters said that the Jackson family said it wasn't MJ singing well Paris claims that Michael doesn't sing on Hollywood Tonight why isn't that questioned ? Why only songs that were produced by Eddie ?
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
I understand you think the songs are what you call "Crap" but calling them "Fake" with no creditable proof what so ever is not right in my opinion.
Click to expand...

But where is proof that they ARE real? I don't think there is any strong proof which would convince me. I guess there also theoretically isn't proof they are fake, so that's under a question. But for me one thing is clear - I don't hear Michael in them. IMO.
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
And why are we not questioning Hollywood Tonight ? I mean before many doubters said that the Jackson family said it wasn't MJ singing well Paris claims that Michael doesn't sing on Hollywood Tonight why isn't that questioned ? Why only songs that were produced by Eddie ?
Click to expand...

Why would anyone question HT? MJ's voice is processed, but can still be recognized instantly. Moreover, we have proof that this is MJ (Vogel's article, demos).
 
Frankyboy5 said:
I wonder how many people are hoax-believers here... Even the slightest thought of the death hoax theory may have a link to our opinions here.

Although I myself am not a beLIEver think some of the theories have influenced us. Some people still think MJ is the same as Jason (!) and others believe MJ had Jason record the tracks ON PURPOSE for publicity!

Teddy Riley himself is a beLIEver too. Although many Cascio track-doubters criticize him for even going into the death hoax theory, some believers and neutral say "Teddy can believe what he wants".

Also what seems puzzling is the One More Chance Ford Remix. DJ Ford said that he just edited MJ's voice, but the voice is clearly different from anything we've heard from MJ.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTNp6Rw5H4E

If it is MJ singing, then that could mean Cascio tracks could be MJ Malachi'ed LOL However I still think it's R. Kelly since it is possible he made a demo.
Click to expand...
This has been discussed before on MaxJax, last summer. I strongly believe that Ford actually fooled people OR simply didn't know it was R Kelly instead of MJ on his remix.

The singer singing in the Ford remix is ABSOLUTELY NOT MJ.

How do I know? I've studied the song and the thing is that,

In OMC original version, there are R. Kelly vocals, right. Well, in this remix, these R Kelly vocals are present, even louder than in the original version WITHOUT any of the MJ vocals that you can hear around at the same time R kelly's vocals can be heard.

Also, the style in the Ford remix is so R. Kelly. I've mailed Ford a few times, gotten an answer, with no proof. He simply told me a story he has been telling everyone else who's been asking.


"Hi ******,
I was hired to do the production by SONY Records and THEY are the ones who released it. It is not for me to prove or disprove. I can tell you that R. Kelly's production company sent me the full Pro-Tools Masters and I can assure you that it IS Michael Jackson singing. There were many, many takes to choose from and lots of out-takes. I have been a record producer for 20 years, and I also had the perspective of hearing the A Capella unprocessed and without effects. I am fully confident that Michael is the one singing. The final vocal sounds processed and strange because of the Time-Stretching program I used to change the timing of the vocal. Michael's instructions were that he wanted to dance in the music video, so he wanted the song BPM changed to something he could dance to. Because of the tempo of the original song, I believe I ended up producing it in half-time, which also accounts for a lot of vocal manipulation to make that work. Time-Stretching programs were in their infancy back then and they really didn't sound as good as they do today, which is virtually free of artifacts.

I hope this helps clear up the debate."


I then replied him, showing my analysis (different lines in the songs doesn't match, etc) and I kept on asking:


"Hello and thank you for the quick response.

I don't want to suggest you've been misled or anything, but please read on.

For example in the intro of your remix, MJ goes "aha, alright" - this doesn't sound processed like the later vocals and sounds just like Michael. That means that line is un-processed?

Next line is "This time". In the original version, MJ clearly does a "DAH", while in your remix, the person singing does something like "ah, tah" - NOT "DAH". This means that you have removed the "DAH" and replaced it with something else?

A few lines later in your remix, the person singing goes "hoooo noooo", BUT in the original version, MJ clearly sings "hoooold on". What does this mean?

Next line after the "hooo noo" in your remix, the person singing sings "shelter" without any "dah", while in the original version, MJ clearly does a strong "DAH". Again, what does this mean? That you removed the "dah"?

One line in your remix, he sings "I don't care what it takes, whyyy" while in the original version, MJ sings "I don't care what it takes, noooo, whyy".

There is an "aow" in your remix which no way belongs to Michael and is identical to the ones R. Kelly does when he imitates Michael (see the leaked song "You Are My World" where R. Kelly does guided vocals for Michael: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVRaMGNiuxs ).

I could go on forever in how many "dah's" are missing, how many words that aren't sung in each of them, stuff being replaced, R. Kelly signatures, etc. It doesn't make sense. What could make sense is that it's R. Kelly doing guided vocals, it's that simple.

But now to the most interesting part: Towards the end in the original version, you can hear MJ doing ad libs: "yeahyeah....yeahyeah...I can't stop, loving you!" WHILE R. Kelly is ALSO doing ad libs: "Tell her this for mee.... one more chance in love, yeah". You can clearly hear him, although he is "buried" underneath MJ's ad libs. Now listen to this. In your remix, these ad libs that R. Kelly does in the original version are amplified and can be heard very clearly BUT you CAN'T hear the ad libs MJ does in the original version! They aren't there. Do you see what I mean?

Now I do know that you said there are many takes of this song. But is it possible that you maybe made a mistake and picked R. Kelly's vocals or at least, most of his vocals (If you mixed takes with takes)?"


He then chickened out,

"Sir,

I have been kind enough with my time and I am not, nor have I ever been interested in this debate.
You have asked for my opinion, so here it is again: Michael IS indeed the singer on the "One More Chance" track.

Ford"










 
These vocals are clearly no MJ's and so R Kelly's but just like in the Cascio songs debate some people prefer to believe what they are being told by officials insted of just listen to the song, analyze it and think logically.
People please, have more faith in your ears.
 
Last edited:
yes pentum,me too...i remember we discussed that matter before on max jax last summer when korgnex(if i recall right,and sorry if it wasn't you korgnex) showed ford remix and asked us if it is MJ or not(as an example from him that processing can change MJ sound),then the discussion about it began.....
 
Pentum said:
I then replied him, showing my analysis (different lines in the songs doesn't match, etc) and I kept on asking:

He then chickened out,
Click to expand...

just about this part: I know you said he "chickened out" but actually your email doesn't consider his first response. He said there were many takes and out takes meaning he didn't necessarily use the original take but you kept comparing it to the original. So he might have felt you didn't read what he wrote and writing him back in a really long way asking something he already answered.

discussions are give and take, people do not feel the need to response to strong rejections or total disapprovals.
 
Exactly, ivy. He had access to demo recordings.

Lawrence Fordyce / FORD said:
Hello Korgnex,

I am absolutely confident that the recording is Michael Jackson. On the original master there are sections the end of takes where Michael laughed and said something or gave instructions to the producer. The voice is Michaels. [...]

Ford
FORD Productions, LLC
www.producerford.com
www.fordandthepsychonauts.net
www.fordproductions.com
www.myspace.com/djford
www.facebook.com/dj.producer.ford
www.twitter.com/fordproductions

Peaceman Music
President
www.sirivanmusic.com
ford@peacemanmusic.com

And the Author of...
Becoming God
A Journey to Higher Consciousness
www.becominggod.org
www.myspace.com/becoming_god
Click to expand...
 
I have used time-stretching several times and although it leaves ugly artifacts, it does not make the voice unrecognizable.

Not sure why Ford believes this is Michael, but there is no way I believe it is.
 
SoCav said:
Not sure why Ford believes this is Michael, but there is no way I believe it is.
Click to expand...

Care to read?

On the original master there are sections the end of takes where Michael laughed and said something or gave instructions to the producer. The voice is Michaels.
Click to expand...
 
Korgnex said:
Care to read?
Click to expand...
Care to change your tone?

I read that, but am not sure what to make of it. Like I said, I do not really believe the time-stretching argument because of my own experience with that form of editing (even back in the day when the programs, according to Ford, were not as good). It leaves ugly artifacts, but it just does not change the voice like this. All this, from my perspective, leaves me with a voice that sounds nothing like Michael Jackson but everything like R. Kelly, without an explanation that seems plausible for me. Given all this, I just find it hard to believe that this guy really thinks this is Michael (which is why I wrote that).

If Ford got so many different takes, maybe they included takes of MJ and of MJ talking, but maybe he picked a R. Kelly take, thinking it was Michael? I know that sounds very difficult to believe as well, but it still makes more sense to me than that the guy singing on that remix is Michael Jackson.
 
ivy said:
just about this part: I know you said he "chickened out" but actually your email doesn't consider his first response. He said there were many takes and out takes meaning he didn't necessarily use the original take but you kept comparing it to the original. So he might have felt you didn't read what he wrote and writing him back in a really long way asking something he already answered.

discussions are give and take, people do not feel the need to response to strong rejections or total disapprovals.
Click to expand...
If he mixed different takes, he might have taken the wrong take and picked R Kelly's vocals, and fucked them up.

This is no way MJ singing and it's kind of sad to see that people just believe this because the remixer says so without any proof when it clearly does not sound like MJ, not MJ's style and sounds just like R Kelly singing.

Also Ivy, why take Ford's side? I am just curious. Is it because he just says so? Is it because you believe someone can produce such different voice like in the Cascio songs (according to believers) ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top