Michael - The Great Album Debate

[Garden]

@ Bumper I don't know if Michael was always and consequently using the same pronounciations. He was amazingly good in shaping his vocals to interact perfectly and to be one with the music and the rhythm and the spirit of the song and the moment in it. Man In The Mirror is a jewel of his art of vocal creativeness. And that includes pronounciation. Someone made a humoristic sketch about it, wasn't it Chris Tucker? And Bumper, what about "Annie-oa'ye-woaki". Haha, on a certain board there is/was a thread about misheard vocals and it is sometimes super hilarious what people understand wrong. @ Chamife, we don't know how much of it Michael co-wrote, do we? (OT : Ik vind dat hamstertje zooo leuk! Maar het rent niet? ,I adore little hamsters!)

 

[love is magical]

And here we have, in one short sentence, everything that is wrong with the anti-Cascio position. Never mind that such a hoax would be impossible to think of and carry out, never mind that it would be impossible to keep everybody involved quiet, never mind that no lawsuit has been filled by the very people who would know and would care if there had been a hoax, never mind that nothing fits -- the dates, the personalities involved, the aftermath, never mind all of that : if "you listen with your heart", you will know those Cascio songs form the greatest, most improbable and most successful fraud in the history of modern music.

Correct me if I'm wrong. But, I seem to remember that you also had doubt after listening to Breaking News. The above mentioned are reasons why you are convinced that the songs are genuine. Fine. It's totally okay to change your mind and weight in other information before reaching a conclusion.

Now, it seems to me that you are absolutely convinced that the songs are authentic. So, there shouldn't be any shade of doubt in your mind. And, what's about this thread that keeps you coming back? Not picking on you. I'm just curious. If I'm 100% satisfied with the explanations given by the Estate and the lack of actions from the Jackson thus far, I'll just enjoy the tracks. I also would not spend so much of my time on topics I find ridiculous. For instance, if there is a thread about Authenticity of Invincible. I surely would not dignify it by reading and responding. I have never read anything in the death hoax thread for the same reason.

Do you think azsummergirl lacks logic? Do you think she can't reason? Trust me, many of us have considered the things you mentioned in your post. We are still here because the logics aren't consistent with what our ears are telling us. I've read Frank's book. I actually think the Cascios are lovely people. But still, I cannot convince myself that these tracks are 100% Michael's.

 

[Garden]

double post

 

[love is magical]

@ Chamife, we don't know how much of it Michael co-wrote, do we? (OT : Ik vind dat hamstertje zooo leuk! Maar het rent niet? ,I adore little hamsters!)

We don't. Michael might not even write a single word, but would still get a writer credit. Actually, the song's value becomes higher when the name Michael Jackson is attached to them. They can claim Michael as one of the cowriters, as long as the Estate does not refute such claim.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

@ Bumper I don't know if Michael was always and consequently using the same pronounciations. He was amazingly good in shaping his vocals to interact perfectly and to be one with the music and the rhythm and the spirit of the song and the moment in it. Man In The Mirror is a jewel of his art of vocal creativeness. And that includes pronounciation. Someone made a humoristic sketch about it, wasn't it Chris Tucker? And Bumper, what about "Annie-oa'ye-woaki". Haha, on a certain board there is/was a thread about misheard vocals and it is sometimes super hilarious what people understand wrong. @ Chamife, we don't know how much of it Michael co-wrote, do we? (OT : Ik vind dat hamstertje zooo leuk! Maar het rent niet? ,I adore little hamsters!)

Yes, but with Cascio songs the singer does all odd things and never spouses the music. There's complete arythmia and opposite to what MJ had been doing.

The singer's pronunciation is influenced by his dialect, not by the music.

There's nothiong wrong with Annie are you pk pronunciation. Typically MJ's.

 

[Chamife]

@ Chamife, we don't know how much of it Michael co-wrote, do we? (OT : Ik vind dat hamstertje zooo leuk! Maar het rent niet? ,I adore little hamsters!)

Nope, we don't. And because the lyrics are very amateuristic (IMO), it only fuels suspicion Michael had nothing to do with them.

Ja, the little hamster is because I realize I'm going round in circles in what I say....

So you like hamsters? Here, a hamster cupcake for you:

 

[love is magical]

^^ I want cupcake too. :lmao:

 

[ivy]

I said it was Jason Malachi within very few minutes of the stream.

yes but you are an exception because we classify you as an expert on Malachi's voice. But how about the other people who didn't know or listen to Malachi at all and simply took the word of other people?

Me too. Especially when I heard the word "stalking" (stocking) in the song Monster. It struck me immediately and I posted it immediately in the forum (I think it was in the Mosnter thread at that time).

Didn't breaking news streamed before Monster leak? So you didn't read or write anything about the Breaking News until some time later you heard Monster?

 

[Chamife]

Yes, but with Cascio songs the singer does all odd things and never spouses the music. There's complete arythmia and opposite to what MJ had been doing.


The singer's pronunciation is influenced by his dialect, not by the music.

There's nothiong wrong with Annie are you pk pronunciation. Typically MJ's.

Yes, total opposite. It's too studied and controlled. He tries though..

^^ I want cupcake too. :lmao:

Hope this one isn't too scary for you to eat:

 

[love is magical]

yes but you are an exception because we classify you as an expert on Malachi's voice. But how about the other people who didn't know or listen to Malachi at all and simply took the word of other people? Didn't breaking news streamed before Monster leak? So you didn't read or write anything about the Breaking News until some time later you heard Monster?

If people are so easily influenced, then why would they chose to believe anonymous fans and the Jackson's, rather than the Estate? What make the T's became more reliable all of a sudden? After the tremendous success of TII, the Estate was revered by fans at that point.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

yes but you are an exception because we classify you as an expert on Malachi's voice. But how about the other people who didn't know or listen to Malachi at all and simply took the word of other people?



Didn't breaking news streamed before Monster leak? So you didn't read or write anything about the Breaking News until some time later you heard Monster?

I didn't write anything when BN streamed for the following reason:

I was happy to finally hear (well sort of hear) a brand new MJ song. So I had nothing to say. I have certainly not thought of a fraud or any kind of inappropriate action. The vocals seemed extremely odd, but I tried to convince myself that it was normal. At that time I haven't even seen any fans' reaction actually as I haven't been neither discussing the vocals nor daring to suspect anything wrong.

In fact later in the evening, when my wife came back from work I wanted her to listen to the song as well. We listened to it and she turned to me and said "was that MJ???" When I heard her doubting it, I realized I wasn't alone. Then I came to the thread here and found out that a whole bunch of fans had exactly the same reaction which was: WTF????


I thought I was living a nightmare. Soon after SONY saw fans' reaction they claimed they streamed the wrong mix. I was finally relieved. My wife too. So we listened to the new streaming, but the vocals were exactly the same.

Anyway despite my doubts, I don't recollect having posted anything about it. Soon after I heard Monster (without 50c rap) and my reaction was "OMG, please no!" Again the same vocals!!! Back then I didn't know the song was one of the Cascios, I heard it on a hiphop blog.

So again people were complaining about the same thing I had been complaining to myself. From then on I haven't stopped posting in this and other related threads to post and try to understand how some fans hear MJ, when I after 25 years of daily listening for the first time in my life couln't hear the voice of a man I've been listening to on vynils, cassettes, video tapes, radio, cds, dvds, blu rays, games, and any kind of support.

At one point I was trying to make up excuses to myself regarding the oddity in the voice and thought maybe they used the parallel technology as far as the stereo is concerned (the technology that French radio stations from France use).

But, all in all I had to admit to myself that all I was doing was making up excuses when in reality I just couldn't hear the same singer as on any other MJ song. The fact that I had trouble to hear him made me a doubter despite the fact that I wantezd to hear Michael.

I just can't lie to myself. I don't hear Michael.

 

[Lucilla]

yes but you are an exception because we classify you as an expert on Malachi's voice. But how about the other people who didn't know or listen to Malachi at all and simply took the word of other people?

Are you saying that we believe what we believe because of Pentum?

In my case I've never payed attention to Malachi's voice before, simply because I don't like impersonators and I don't listen to them.

When I first heard that JM could be in those tracks, I thought "Naah, Why him? Why not other impersonator? Wouldn't that be too obvious?"

But when I heard JM voice I couldn't' deny the similarities with the Cascio tracks.
I still can't.

And I'm not saying that I'm 100% sure is JM in those tracks, I'm saying that I can't deny the incredible similarities.

I sure don't think that makes me "gullible".

 

[Arklove]

Personally, I don't really care WHO that is singing those songs...I just know I don't hear Michael, and I'm positive it's not him....It just so happens that the vocals are pretty much identical to Jason Malachi, and so far off from MJ, that it's hard to ignore...

I had heard vaguely of Jason Malachi, but I never heard his voice before this whole debate started...Actually, it annoyed me when people automatically said, 'It's Jason Malachi!' right away (sorry Pentum ), but I just didn't want to believe that it could possibly be someone else other than Michael...

 

[ivy]

I understand your point. This is about the concept of "planting the seed of doubt."

Yes. Also I do research and they say how you ask a question makes all the difference. For example if you ask a neutral question (what do you think about this?) you get balanced answers (good and bad), when you ask negative or positive questions the answers get skewed.

I'm also trying to say that when the negativity is introduced with the authenticity debate, the reactions became skewed and started to show more negativity. Such as a copy paste scream on another song may not bother anyone, when a similar copy paste scream on a Cascio song can receive high dislike. That's the effect of a negative introduction to responses and emotions.

When Joe Jackson said body-double was used (seed of doubt), many people dismissed such claim.

Many is the key word but not all. And I clearly stated that I'm not talking about you, me or bumper or socav or Garden etc personally. There are people that believe Michael wasn't at the O2 announcement, there are also some people that believe Joe's claims and that AEG used other people , body doubles so that Michael would look thicker. There are people that believe such things even though we might not. Similarly you might not be affected by what other people are saying but it doesn't mean that some other people weren't influenced.

 

[ivy]

If people are so easily influenced, then why would they chose to believe anonymous fans and the Jackson's, rather than the Estate? What make the T's became more reliable all of a sudden? After the tremendous success of TII, the Estate was revered by fans at that point.

Simply put - fans had 3 days (after the stream) and over a month before it to discuss it until Estate released a statement. Unfortunately Estate is not pro-active.

Are you saying that we believe what we believe because of Pentum?

not anyone personally but yeah there will be people that fits that description. don't you know any believers that later convinced that they hear Malachi?

 

[Lucilla]

In that case the same could happen for example with the believers who hate with a passion everything the Jacksons say/do.

I don't' understand why the believers are the ones who can not be influenced to believe here. But we doubters can be influenced.

 

[ivy]

I don't' understand why the believers are the ones who can not be influenced to believe here. But we doubters can be influenced.

and did I say that?

So nobody is saying that opinions was based on what is being written but what is being written had clearly introduced "is it Michael or not?" question to the minds of everyone.

In regards to the Cascio songs there could be people basing their opinions on what was said - by either party - rather than what they hear.

Yes Teddy's tweets contributed to that as well.

Similarly you might not be affected by what other people are saying but it doesn't mean that some other people weren't influenced.

my point?

Also I do research and they say how you ask a question makes all the difference. For example if you ask a neutral question (what do you think about this?) you get balanced answers (good and bad), when you ask negative or positive questions the answers get skewed.

I'm also trying to say that when the negativity is introduced with the authenticity debate, the reactions became skewed and started to show more negativity.

In short: We (means everyone) didn't approach this issue on a neutral basis, our reactions are skewed.

 

[love is magical]

In that case the same could happen for example with the believers who hate with a passion everything the Jackson say/do.

I don't' understand why the believers are the ones who can not be influenced to believe here. But we doubters can be influenced.

That's what I was trying to say. If people are easily influenced by what other said, then why the believers are not affected? Why the doubters chose to side with the Jackson's, instead of the Estate, on this matter?

In fact, I saw a swift change of opinion right after the release of the Estate's statement. If anything, I'd think the people who changed their minds afte the statement just chose to believe in a flimsy statement without any corroborative evidence than what they heard.

 

[Lucilla]

and did I say that?

my point?

Also I do research and they say how you ask a question makes all the difference. For example if you ask a neutral question (what do you think about this?) you get balanced answers (good and bad), when you ask negative or positive questions the answers get skewed.

I'm also trying to say that when the negativity is introduced with the authenticity debate, the reactions became skewed and started to show more negativity.

In short: We (means everyone) didn't approach this issue on a neutral basis, our reactions are skewed.

I sure agree with the negativity part

In fact, I saw a swift change of opinion right after the release of the Estate's statement. If anything, I'd think the people who changed their minds afte the statement just chose to believe in a flimsy statement without any corroborative evidence than what they heard.

Yes, I saw that too.

 

[kreen]

Correct me if I'm wrong. But, I seem to remember that you also had doubt after listening to Breaking News.

Yes, just like a ton of people, I was initially surprised by the song "Breaking News" : I was put off by the use of the third person in the lyrics, the vocals sounded overprocessed, and the initial 30-second sample, because it ended with a classic MJ "aooow", had led me to expect a classic MJ vocal. So my initial, emotional reaction was, "wait, this isn't MJ", and that reaction was obviously totally influenced by all of that talk from the Jacksons and those articles from Friedman regarding the accusation that the songs were fake. And what didn't help me -- and didn't help anyone actually -- was that the first thing I did was come on this forum and others, where everybody would get everybody else angry and over-excited and outraged about "fraud" and "those damn Cascios" and "that damn Teddy Riley".

The whole thing was a classic, textbook example of mass over-reaction based on first impressions, on disappointment ("Breaking News" was just not what we wanted), and on the hyperspeed with which Internet allows us to basically speak before we think things through.

And then, of course, my emotion subsided, and I realized the hoax theory made no sense. It is impossible. The Cascios could not have come up with such a fraud, and executed it, and kept everyone quiet, and fooled everybody. The official story explained everything much more clearly. And with every passing month, when it became obvious nobody was suing anybody, and the Jacksons would talk the talk but never walk the walk, and the Estate included "Monster" in the Immortal show, and Malachi was still working 9 to 5 as a security guard, and everything else : well it became clear the songs are authentic.

I keep coming back here and debating this for two reasons : first, because I think I have something to contribute to this debate, and second, because it's a shame that the anti-Cascio people keep trying to convince other MJ fans to reject 12 songs that MJ sang. In other words, if I was a new fan and came on this forum now, I might be led by the anti-Cascio camp to think those 12 songs are fake, and then I'd miss out on 12 important recordings, and maybe even on the whole Michael album. And that would be a shame, and silly.

 

[love is magical]

Yes, just like a ton of people, I was initially surprised by the song "Breaking News" : I was put off by the use of the third person in the lyrics, the vocals sounded overprocessed, and the initial 30-second sample, because it ended with a classic MJ "aooow", had led me to expect a classic MJ vocal. So my initial, emotional reaction was, "wait, this isn't MJ", and that reaction was obviously totally influenced by all of that talk from the Jacksons and those articles from Friedman regarding the accusation that the songs were fake. And what didn't help me -- and didn't help anyone actually -- was that the first thing I did was come on this forum and others, where everybody would get everybody else angry and over-excited and outraged about "fraud" and "those damn Cascios" and "that damn Teddy Riley".

The whole thing was a classic, textbook example of mass over-reaction based on first impressions, on disappointment ("Breaking News" was just not what we wanted), and on the hyperspeed with which Internet allows us to basically speak before we think things through.

And then, of course, my emotion subsided, and I realized the hoax theory made no sense. It is impossible. The Cascios could not have come up with such a fraud, and executed it, and kept everyone quiet, and fooled everybody. The official story explained everything much more clearly. And with every passing month, when it became obvious nobody was suing anybody, and the Jacksons would talk the talk but never walk the walk, and the Estate included "Monster" in the Immortal show, and Malachi was still working 9 to 5 as a security guard, and everything else : well it became clear the songs are authentic.

I keep coming back here and debating this for two reasons : first, because I think I have something to contribute to this debate, and second, because it's a shame that the anti-Cascio people keep trying to convince other MJ fans to reject 12 songs that MJ sang. In other words, if I was a new fan and came on this forum now, I might be led by the anti-Cascio camp to think those 12 songs are fake, and then I'd miss out on 12 important recordings, and maybe even on the whole Michael album. And that would be a shame, and silly.

Thanks for your response. I appreciate it.

When you listen to the tracks now, can you hear MJ?

I still can't. The technique is not there. The nuance is not there.

 

[Arklove]

Yes, just like a ton of people, I was initially surprised by the song "Breaking News" : I was put off by the use of the third person in the lyrics, the vocals sounded overprocessed, and the initial 30-second sample, because it ended with a classic MJ "aooow", had led me to expect a classic MJ vocal. So my initial, emotional reaction was, "wait, this isn't MJ", and that reaction was obviously totally influenced by all of that talk from the Jacksons and those articles from Friedman regarding the accusation that the songs were fake. And what didn't help me -- and didn't help anyone actually -- was that the first thing I did was come on this forum and others, where everybody would get everybody else angry and over-excited and outraged about "fraud" and "those damn Cascios" and "that damn Teddy Riley".

The whole thing was a classic, textbook example of mass over-reaction based on first impressions, on disappointment ("Breaking News" was just not what we wanted), and on the hyperspeed with which Internet allows us to basically speak before we think things through.

And then, of course, my emotion subsided, and I realized the hoax theory made no sense. It is impossible. The Cascios could not have come up with such a fraud, and executed it, and kept everyone quiet, and fooled everybody. The official story explained everything much more clearly. And with every passing month, when it became obvious nobody was suing anybody, and the Jacksons would talk the talk but never walk the walk, and the Estate included "Monster" in the Immortal show, and Malachi was still working 9 to 5 as a security guard, and everything else : well it became clear the songs are authentic.

I keep coming back here and debating this for two reasons : first, because I think I have something to contribute to this debate, and second, because it's a shame that the anti-Cascio people keep trying to convince other MJ fans to reject 12 songs that MJ sang. In other words, if I was a new fan and came on this forum now, I might be led by the anti-Cascio camp to think those 12 songs are fake, and then I'd miss out on 12 important recordings, and maybe even on the whole Michael album. And that would be a shame, and silly.

Sooooo....do you now hear Michael, or is it simply because this 'hoax' is impossible to pull off? Not once in your paragraph after you explained you had an emotional reaction did you mention that you actually hear Michael now....I just want to understand what this is about for you...

You seem to feel that everyone is influenced by others and what they say about these songs as opposed to what they actually HEAR (is this your contribution to this debate that you referred to?)

...Believers and doubters alike have their own minds and can think for themselves...Go figure..

If people want to come on this thread and start to believe it's not Michael simply because of what we're saying, then that's their problem, not ours....

 

[love is magical]

Lol... Arky and I think alike.

 

[Arklove]

Lol... Arky and I think alike.

This is true

And we clearly share a brain, according to some :fear:

 

[Lucilla]

Kreen, you just inaugurated the page 1666...

 

[love is magical]

You girls are hilarious. :lmao:

See, it doesn't need to be so intense all the time.

 

[Arklove]

:wild:

 

[Arklove]

@kreen, since you like to psychoanalyze

 

[Lucilla]

That's worthy of a psychological study :rofl:

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Regarding planting the seed of doubt, although some people are easily influenced, I just don't believe that in this particular case it is enough to plant the seed of doubt and influence the fans that easily.

Just to give an example:

-Damien Shields (from Australia?)
-Pentum (from Norway)
-Chamife (from the Netherlands)
-Arklove (from Canada)
-Onir (from Croatia)
-Claudionia (from Romania)
-Geso (from Greece)
-AZsummer girl (from the USA)
-Love is magical (from the USA)
-Samhabib (from the UK)
-Socav (from...?)
-Lucilla (from yet another country)
-TPI Master (from Belgium)



and the list goes on

We are all from different countries of different origins, different ages, we did not know each other prior to the release of the songs, many of us did not follow the tweeters or any kind of info or misinfo about the Cascios (did we care?) and what all brought us here is the undeniable fact that we independently came to the same conclusion:

we don't hear Michael Jackson.

How do you explain something like that?

p.s. Many were firmly defending the tracks including:

-Aniram (from the U.S.A.)
-Jesta (from the UK)
-KingMikeJ (from the UK)
etc...

After hearing some more tracks they became the doubters. Were they influenced by the doubters or were they capable of deciding for themselves whether they really hear MJ's voice or not, I'll leave that to psychological speculations.

But another fact is that after streaming BN, many fans did react very much the same way. When they said they streamed the wrong mix that's the moment when all of sudden people changed their mind and "heard" MJ's voice (influenced by the official statement of streaming the wrong mix?)

Later on when the Estate issued the official statement, many people opted to stick to what they said pushed by the "logic" of impossibility that anyone would dare to sell fake songs. Indeed, still today many people are unsure or don't know what to believe, yet they despite what they hear they opted to put faith in the Estate's/SONY's words.

As far as I am concerned, I've seen more people influenced by the Estate (who sooner or later anyway become doubters) than people being influenced by some tweets (that hey had never seen or heard about prior to the streaming of Breaking News).

Ultimately, can really one lie to him/herself about what one hears?