Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

Milka said:
But it's almost 80 %, it's funny, I had 77.8 as well, lol. And at the same time I also figured out how the test works, at least found some of their "tricks" and lost concentration in the middle of the test ("What??? Still 18 to go? This is boring!"). I'm not a musician and don't play any instruments, so almost 80 is a bit too much or the test is easier than they think. Or I am that good, lol. I guess you are not a musician either? Or are you?
Click to expand...
I had pretty much the same experience. Let's just go with the second alternative, and say we are that good :p And no, I'm not a musician either :)
 
Garden said:
Hi teli, did you do the same test?
Results with e-mail was for brain test lol!
Click to expand...

Milka said:
teli-mj, I didn't even get an email and didn't have to put in my address anywhere? At the end of the test you are asked for a few things like if you are male or female and your age and as far as I remember (I did the test about a week ago) then you just have to click "show result" or something.
Click to expand...

Yes,i know. I took the wrong test. Something about pitch discrimination. I was confused.:blushing:


Oh, and i just did the test (finally) and my results were 80.6%. So, everybody should believe me when i say that there's something fishy with those Cascio song. The results don't lie!!:rogerfriedman:
 
Last edited:
StellaJackson said:
The MJ songbook registration doesn't actually credit Michael for vocals, it credits him for performance. Cascio and Porte are both credited for the same thing.
Click to expand...

What does "performance" actually cover, anyway?

Aside from vocals, I assume instrumentation can count as a "performance." But what if I didn't sing or play an instrument on the sound recording, but I did set up the recording equipment and act as the song's producer, would I be eligible for a performance credit in that case?

Sorry in advance if my question doesn't make sense. I'm ignorant on this subject.
 
Calisto said:
What does "performance" actually cover, anyway?

Aside from vocals, I assume instrumentation can count as a "performance." But what if I didn't sing or play an instrument on the sound recording, but I did set up the recording equipment and act as the song's producer, would I be eligible for a performance credit in that case?

Sorry in advance if my question doesn't make sense. I'm ignorant on this subject.
Click to expand...

If you snapped your fingers once in the background then you can be credited with performance. This is why I think thy put MJ's name on it. It would be impossible to disprove that he had been involved in the writing or in the performance in some form, even if there are no vocals. Like you said, they registered the demos that had been recorded by Porte and that they hoped MJ would sing and put MJ on all the credits too until they knew they what they were going to do with them.
 
teli-mj said:
I took the test but i don't understand the results that came with the e-mail :unsure:
Click to expand...
Haha, I think you took the brain test that is sneakily promoted mid-page. :) I did the same thing. Kept wondering why they were including so many control variables. :lol:

Milka said:
("What??? Still 18 to go? This is boring!").
Click to expand...
It was! This is how I felt as well. They were not exactly the most inspiring sounds, were they? :lol:

I got 88.9% correct btw. I have never received musical training but have played some instruments.

Just wondering though: to what extent do you guys think tone-deafness relates to the recognition of a singer's voice? I think it is a natural gut reaction for all of us (both believers and doubters) to think that people on the other side must not have a good musical ear. I have indeed wondered whether a general form of musicality would reliably predict what side of the debate people would be on. It might be, it might not. However, tone deafness seems to be quite a different thing than voice recognition. I could imagine that they are correlated, but have no idea if they are. Does anyone know more about this? Does tone-deafness (or indeed general musicality for that matter) really apply to our debate here in any way?
 
Last edited:
StellaJackson said:
I was in this room pushing buttons.

2remy5c.jpg
Click to expand...

But this room is very impressive--better than the Cascio room. You have won!! Michael did record in your studio. I will give you 20 million for all the songs.
 
Petrarose said:
But this room is very impressive--better than the Cascio room. You have won!! Michael did record in your studio. I will give you 20 million for all the songs.
Click to expand...

Done. Your going to love the authenti-ti-ti-ti-ticity in them.
 
^^don't forget to quickly go and register the songs Stella and add the appropriate names on the registration. Also, have a top expert in the field on standby in case there is a need to have the songs authenticated. Good luck.
 
Petrarose said:
^^don't forget to quickly go and register the songs Stella and add the appropriate names on the registration. Also, have a top expert in the field on standby in case there is a need to have the songs authenticated. Good luck.
Click to expand...

MOST IMPORTANT! Keep the results and names of the expert secert. Thats the best way to convince people. Hell screw that, just lie and say you did it. The pictures enough evididence for me. Wow. thats some picture. Are you the one that owns the MJ song "I took a shower (and washed my hair thoughly"?????
 
StellaJackson said:
If you snapped your fingers once in the background then you can be credited with performance. This is why I think thy put MJ's name on it. It would be impossible to disprove that he had been involved in the writing or in the performance in some form, even if there are no vocals. Like you said, they registered the demos that had been recorded by Porte and that they hoped MJ would sing and put MJ on all the credits too until they knew they what they were going to do with them.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

Unfortunately, there really doesn't appear to be anything publicly available that points to these 12 songs being authentic. The registrations themselves, as well as the timeline in which they were submitted, only create further questions.
 
Last edited:
SoCav;3618487 said:
Haha, I think you took the brain test that is sneakily promoted mid-page. :) I did the same thing. Kept wondering why they were including so many control variables. :lol:


It was! This is how I felt as well. They were not exactly the most inspiring sounds, were they? :lol:

I got 88.9% correct btw. I have never received musical training but have played some instruments.

Just wondering though: to what extent do you guys think tone-deafness relates to the recognition of a singer's voice? I think it is a natural gut reaction for all of us (both believers and doubters) to think that people on the other side must not have a good musical ear. I have indeed wondered whether a general form of musicality would reliably predict what side of the debate people would be on. It might be, it might not. However, tone deafness seems to be quite a different thing than voice recognition. I could imagine that they are correlated, but have no idea if they are. Does anyone know more about this? Does tone-deafness (or indeed general musicality for that matter) really apply to our debate here in any way?
Click to expand...

I don’t think tone deafness is extremely different from voice recognition because when you listen to music or recognize another language you use mostly your temporal lobe and other parts of the brain too, but mostly the temporal lobe.

I've also got your exact result: 88.9%, and I’m not a musician but I used to be a dancer and to be a good dancer you need good ears. I had ballet training since I was 5, and that makes me an example of the so-called “Mozart effect” that says that exposure to music (or more specifically, classical music) since early years can have cognitive benefits to musical training. Now, it’s a big myth that it can improve your intelligence :D but yes, like any other physical or mental training received in the early years, obviously can improve your performance in that area.

Now, in my opinion I don’t think this test can show a meaningful difference in the results of doubters and believers since we are talking about a modified voice that can fool anyone: doubters or believers.

Our big example here is Paris.
MJ’s own daughter can’t recognize him in Hollywood Tonight. And that kid was exposed to his voice and music literally since she was born, maybe even before that!

She is also the result of the “Mozart effect” if you will but multiplied by 10 maybe, for this specific case : )

If these songs are really MJ the same that happened to Paris could happen to us, doubters.
If these songs are indeed JM or another singer, well the same could happen to the believers.

I’m trying to be impartial here, but hey I’m still a doubter :p
 
The day Breaking News premiered, a user on another forum posted the following:

Vanilli said:
THIS JUST IN: JASON MALACHI JUST CLOSED HIS YOUTUBE ACCOUNT!!!!
Click to expand...

Anyone know if this is true, or if Jason even had a YouTube account back in 2010? The message was originally submitted at 7:23 AM, which would be 10:23 AM in Jason's time zone.
 
Last edited:
SoCav said:
Haha, I think you took the brain test that is sneakily promoted mid-page. :) I did the same thing. Kept wondering why they were including so many control variables. :lol:


It was! This is how I felt as well. They were not exactly the most inspiring sounds, were they? :lol:

I got 88.9% correct btw. I have never received musical training but have played some instruments.

Just wondering though: to what extent do you guys think tone-deafness relates to the recognition of a singer's voice? I think it is a natural gut reaction for all of us (both believers and doubters) to think that people on the other side must not have a good musical ear. I have indeed wondered whether a general form of musicality would reliably predict what side of the debate people would be on. It might be, it might not. However, tone deafness seems to be quite a different thing than voice recognition. I could imagine that they are correlated, but have no idea if they are. Does anyone know more about this? Does tone-deafness (or indeed general musicality for that matter) really apply to our debate here in any way?
Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned, this test is good, but not complete. I am aware I made some judgmental mistakes as I hesitated with some melodies. If we listen again we surely could get better and better, unless some people are really tone deaf. But as far as I am concerned, I had already had a check up at the doctor's (ORL) and he tested all the frequencies on me, the result was above average (probably due to the frequency of spoken languages).

So my ears are just fine, I am pretty sure when I detect something odd in the Cascio tracks.

love is magical said:
Guys, finally, I'm going to see Immortal tomorrow night. Ive had very rough March. This show is a nice break.
Click to expand...

That's great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You've deserved it :)
 
Calisto said:
The day Breaking News premiered, a user on another forum posted the following:



Anyone know if this is true, or if Jason even had a YouTube account back in 2010? The message was originally submitted at 7:23 AM, which would be 10:23 AM in Jason's time zone.
Click to expand...

As I said Calisto, I also remember this.
 
Can't wait til Thursday !



Just found this video




You guys should read the description of this video
 
Last edited:
^The guy's explanations in the description are nothing new imo.

*'The songs were heavily processed.' I still challenge anyone to make an existing Michael vocal sound even remotely like the voice on the Cascio tracks using Melodyne. If it was all due to Melodyne, this should be possible, right?

*"Of course the unfinished vocal outtakes of a 47 year old MJ won't sound like the perfect final takes of a 27 year old MJ." Then why did Michael sound totally like himself in the TII rehearsals? Or on any demo of his we have ever heard, for that matter?

*"The vocals were recorded in a very basic home studio at the Cascio home with poor sound isolation. Different equipment/room means different sound quality." Then why does he sound completely fine on WBSS 2008? And why has he always sounded like himself in whatever kind of environment we heard him sing, such as here:

http://youtu.be/7LoLU2CcYb0?t=5m44s

*"Yes, his family has voiced their disbelief of it being sung by MJ, but how often were they involved in the actual recording and mixing process in the studio? They, like most people, probably only heard the perfect final drafts of his songs."
3T recorded with Michael in the past and Taryll was involved in this project.

*"Some are claiming that the voice on the song is Jason Malachi. Jason Malachi is a good impersonator and can replicate Mike's vocal techniques pretty well. However, there are many parts of this song where every other word is cut from a different take. If they hired Malachi, there would be no need to do this as he could've recorded those lines straight through."
How does he know? I can think of a myriad of potential reasons why they could not have recorded those lines straight through. How about: JM is a pretty bad singer (see his live performances), so they were forced to use several takes. Or: they recorded him several times and cut-and-pasted the parts where he sounded most like Michael? Or: JM only did a few rough takes. Who knows. In any case, I do not find this argument convincing whatsoever. It does not explain in any way why Jason Malachi's vocal characteristics are all over the song.

*"Nonetheless, having examined the acappella's waveform at length, I can say the entire song's lead vocals are sung in the same person's voice."
What is the guy even saying here? That there is only one lead vocalist on Breaking News? Or does he mean that it is all Michael? If the latter, with what other acapella did he compare the vocals? Without further details, this statement does not carry any weight whatsoever.
 
Took that little test thingy.
I got 86.1% Correct. Yay for me?
 
With everybody getting high results in the test, I have to doubt the test's accuracy, lol. And when I said musician I meant if you play any instrument, if you started as a child, self taught or without training doesn't matter (dancing counts as well). So I expected lucilla to get a high result. And I'm quite mad at myself now, haha, I should have taken it more seriously and should have paid more attention instead of getting bored in the middle, I probably would have gotten 80 or above as well. Damn!

IvoDT, if you are not a musician, you must be a wunderkind.

SoCav: "Of course the unfinished vocal outtakes of a 47 year old MJ won't sound like the perfect final takes of a 27 year old MJ."

I hear this comment in all kinds of contexts, and I think it's stupid, because 47 or 50 is not 90. When people make him sound like an old man, I guess people saying that in whatever context must be 25 or younger.
 
Milka said:
IvoDT, if you are not a musician, you must be a wunderkind.
Click to expand...

That must be it! =P

Nah, but seriously. I'm not a musician but would love to be one.
As for the test, I don't take it seriously.
 
The test is not difficult. If some people are really tone deaf, it'd be probably difficult for them. If you closely pay attention to the melodies you can clearly say if it is the same or different. Some melodies are just a bit too long when you listen to them for the first time to memorize them, then to compare them. But if people retried doing the test over and over again, they'd have time to get familiar with the melodies and properly compare them with the alternative melody and get 100%. Not remembering a melody doesn't mean people are tone deaf.

Anyway it was fun doing it.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
The test is not difficult. If some people are really tone deaf, it'd be probably difficult for them. If you closely pay attention to the melodies you can clearly say if it is the same or different. Some melodies are just a bit too long when you listen to them for the first time to memorize them, then to compare them. But if people retried doing the test over and over again, they'd have time to get familiar with the melodies and properly compare them with the alternative melody and get 100%. Not remembering a melody doesn't mean people are tone deaf.

Anyway it was fun doing it.
Click to expand...

Yes, some were too long for my tired little brain. But it's not just about memorizing, if you are tone deaf, you can memorize all you want, you just won't hear the difference, you'll memorize it wrong basically.

And yes, if you do it over and over again, if you are not totally tone deaf, you will get better. That's why I didn't try again, knowing that I only paid attention for about half the test, I thought either I'll get bored a lot sooner and the result will be lower or it'll be higher and I won't know if that's just because my ears are already a bit "trained" from the test. I also think you can use it to train your ears.

And the relevance for the Cascio discussion? If most of you had only gotten 50 %, I would not take you seriously in this discussion. ;)
 
Milka said:
Yes, some were too long for my tired little brain. But it's not just about memorizing, if you are tone deaf, you can memorize all you want, you just won't hear the difference, you'll memorize it wrong basically.

And yes, if you do it over and over again, if you are not totally tone deaf, you will get better. That's why I didn't try again, knowing that I only paid attention for about half the test, I thought either I'll get bored a lot sooner and the result will be lower or it'll be higher and I won't know if that's just because my ears are already a bit "trained" from the test. I also think you can use it to train your ears.

And the relevance for the Cascio discussion? If most of you had only gotten 50 %, I would not take you seriously in this discussion. ;)
Click to expand...


I am not talking to you unless you argue with me :D






....




Kidding ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top