Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

The suggestion that KYHU sounds like the Mj of old, whatever that's supposed to mean, is one of the most ridiculous things I've read here. It shares zero similarities with Mj's voice. It sounds like a young white guy trying to impersonate Mj. Because that's what it is.

Ps - Jason has never been an Mj impersonator and has never advertised himself as such. It was because some of his stuff had been mistaken for Mj that Eddie hired him. Unfortunately there are people who simply can't tell the difference between Jason's own stuff and Michael. That's why there are still loads of people who think Let Me Let Go is Michael. Go look at all the old comments on the original youtube uploads and you'll find the very same arguments used as the Cascio tracks. Decades of listening to Mj, years of listening to Jason and understanding the very clear differences between the voices soon makes it easy to discern who is who. Every vocal trait of Mj's voice is absent from the Cascio tracks. Every vocal trait of Jason's voice including vibrato, accent, pronounciation, tone, snorts etc are present.
 
Last edited:
Can you guys refresh my memory on the One More Chance Ford Remix? Wasn't it billed as having MJ's vocals?

Also, why exactly has there been even no attempt to get a legitimate court case together. It's obvious that only something of that magnitude is going to inspire any development in this case; we can't just hope that the Estate and SONY aren't going to recall the tracks and admit their complete mistake unless something like that happens. I remember one time in 2010 someone contacted a musicologist... But that was the extent of it.
 
Last edited:
kreen said:
I followed the whole "Michael" saga as closely as anybody here, and I don't remember that we ever got the chance to hear a song without knowing in advance whether it was a Cascio track or not. The names of these songs had leaked before hand, so any snippet we heard of any song, we knew in advance whether it was from the Cascio sessions or not.
Click to expand...

And if you had followed it you would have seen that people were eager to hear MJ's new songs. Nobody actually cared whether they were recorded at the Cascio's or not. It's only from the moment that they couldn't recognize the vocals that people started to question what happened to the voice.

After streaming "Breaking News" everyone was "WTF"! But nobody blaimed directly the Cascios. Many were actually blaming SONY. And SONY even "admitted" they streamed the "wrong" mix. In reality I didn't hear much difference -if any- between their "wrong" mix and the "newer" one.

It's only when songs started to leak that among them there were some of them which didn't sound usual Michael, and their common point was that those songs came from the same source: the Cascios. That was the moment when people started to question the recordings at the Cascio's, and that was also the moment when millions of excuses were given why "MJ" sounded "differently":

PVC
sickness
age
and so millions other excuses that we are supposed to blindly accept without being actually given any real proof.
 
Jesta said:
Can you guys refresh my memory on the One More Chance Ford Remix? Wasn't it billed as having MJ's vocals?

Also, why exactly has there been even no attempt to get a legitimate court case together. It's obvious that only something of that magnitude is going to inspire any development in this case; we can't just hope that the Estate and SONY aren't going to recall the tracks and admit their complete mistake unless something like that happens. I remember one time in 2010 someone contacted a musicologist... But that was the extent of it.
Click to expand...
Maybe we can try contacting a good, ambitious lawyer who can make a name for himself with taking on a case like this. Will look good in his CV I think (if he wins).

And he can tell us if it will be feasible or not. If it's not or if there are too many doubts if it will be feasible, then it's no use to start the whole thing up.

Just an idea? I realize it's all easier said than done, but I don't know anything else there is left to do.
 
Chamife said:
Maybe we can try contacting a good, ambitious lawyer who can make a name for himself with taking on a case like this. Will look good in his CV I think (if he wins).

And he can tell us if it will be feasible or not. If it's not or if there are too many doubts if it will be feasible, then it's no use to start the whole thing up.

Just an idea? I realize it's all easier said than done, but I don't know anything else there is left to do.
Click to expand...

If we hire one, the Estate/SONY/Cascio will hire a pack of ambitious and already successful lawyers. And with no physical proof it would be hell of a challenge for a young ambitious lawyer.
 
Jesta said:
Can you guys refresh my memory on the One More Chance Ford Remix? Wasn't it billed as having MJ's vocals?
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe they are billed as having MJ's vocals. Actually, I think the Ford case is quite interesting because it has some similarities to the Cascio tracks.

This is the Ford remix (for those that do not know what we are talking about):


I remember having a discussion with Korgnex about this in this thread, I think earlier this year. Many here (myself included) felt that the vocals sound nothing like MJ and several people thought they sound like R. Kelly (I do not know R. Kelly's voice well so am not sure if it is him or not, but it certainly sounds like it could be).

Korgnex believed it was MJ because he exchanged messages with Ford himself, who claims they are indeed MJ's vocals. As far as I remember (please correct me if I'm off on this, Korgnex), Ford said that the vocals might sound a bit strange because he had to time-stretch them to fit the tempo of his remix and that because of this the pitch might have lowered.

I looked at the remix at the time and posted two snippets to address these claims. Firstly, the claim that the vocals sound off because they were lower in pitch. In this snippet, I upped the pitch. Presumably, the vocals should sound more like Michael now. Judge for yourself:
http://www.mediafire.com/?dls757vl7r4gz44

Secondly, Ford claimed that he had to time-stretch (alter the speed of) the vocals to make them fit the tempo of his remix. However, to my surprise I discovered that the tempo of his remix is identical to the tempo of the original song: it is simply in double time, which might create the perception that it is faster. To show this, I mixed the original song with the remix in the snippet below. You first hear the mix between the original and the remix, than the remix.
http://www.mediafire.com/?lhve0kpob54je3k

If I remember accuractely (again, correct me if I'm wrong), Korgnex's response to this was that Ford is a professional remixer and that if he says he used time-stretching, he would believe him.

As I said, I think there are some interesting similarities with the Cascio tracks. In both cases...
...We have vocals that do not sound like MJ to many of his fans and like a specific other singer to several of them (Jason Malachi vs R. Kelly).
...The vocals are billed as being MJ's.
...We have someone who was involved with the creation of the tracks stating that it is MJ (Eddie/Teddy vs Ford)
...These insiders admit that the vocals may sound strange.
...Technical explanations are given for this that do not seem to add up (pitch-correction vs time-stretching)
...Criticisms of these explanations by fans are disregarded/ignored by 'believers'

I think someone here (Pentum?) tried to reach out to R. Kelly via Twitter to ask him about this remix, but did not get a response.
 
SoCav said:
Yes, I believe they are billed as having MJ's vocals. Actually, I think the Ford case is quite interesting because it has some similarities to the Cascio tracks.

This is the Ford remix (for those that do not know what we are talking about):


I remember having a discussion with Korgnex about this in this thread, I think earlier this year. Many here (myself included) felt that the vocals sound nothing like MJ and several people thought they sound like R. Kelly (I do not know R. Kelly's voice well so am not sure if it is him or not, but it certainly sounds like it could be).

Korgnex believed it was MJ because he exchanged messages with Ford himself, who claims they are indeed MJ's vocals. As far as I remember (please correct me if I'm off on this, Korgnex), Ford said that the vocals might sound a bit strange because he had to time-stretch them to fit the tempo of his remix and that because of this the pitch might have lowered.

I looked at the remix at the time and posted two snippets to address these claims. Firstly, the claim that the vocals sound off because they were lower in pitch. In this snippet, I upped the pitch. Presumably, the vocals should sound more like Michael now. Judge for yourself:
http://www.mediafire.com/?dls757vl7r4gz44

Secondly, Ford claimed that he had to time-stretch (alter the speed of) the vocals to make them fit the tempo of his remix. However, to my surprise I discovered that the tempo of his remix is identical to the tempo of the original song: it is simply in double time, which might create the perception that it is faster. To show this, I mixed the original song with the remix in the snippet below. You first hear the mix between the original and the remix, than the remix.
http://www.mediafire.com/?lhve0kpob54je3k

If I remember accuractely (again, correct me if I'm wrong), Korgnex's response to this was that Ford is a professional remixer and that if he says he used time-stretching, he would believe him.

As I said, I think there are some interesting similarities with the Cascio tracks. In both cases...
...We have vocals that do not sound like MJ to many of his fans and like a specific other singer to several of them (Jason Malachi vs R. Kelly).
...The vocals are billed as being MJ's.
...We have someone who was involved with the creation of the tracks stating that it is MJ (Eddie/Teddy vs Ford)
...These insiders admit that the vocals may sound strange.
...Technical explanations are given for this that do not seem to add up (pitch-correction vs time-stretching)
...Criticisms of these explanations by fans are disregarded/ignored by 'believers'

I think someone here (Pentum?) tried to reach out to R. Kelly via Twitter to ask him about this remix, but did not get a response.
Click to expand...

I didn't follow the story about this remix, but these vocals are neither MJ's nor Cascio vocalist's.
 
What? There are people inhere who actually hear Michael Jackson as lead vocalist in this remix?
 
I have demonstrated several times how it's R Kelly singing in the remix. I can try to search my post later, it's in this thread
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
If we hire one, the Estate/SONY/Cascio will hire a pack of ambitious and already successful lawyers. And with no physical proof it would be hell of a challenge for a young ambitious lawyer.
Click to expand...

A hell of a challenge, yeah...I know, lol. He would have to be VERY ambitious. But maybe he/she can obtain info we as ordinairy fans can't.

We don't need much proof, the smallest piece is enough..:D
 
...lol the ford remix is nice sounded...by it has R Kelly on leads. The way he speaks is obvious.
 
As far as taking it to court, I would imagine that would be very expensive and time consuming. Regular people don't often feel up to the task of taking on billion dollar corporations.
 
WildStyle said:
As far as taking it to court, I would imagine that would be very expensive and time consuming. Regular people don't often feel up to the task of taking on billion dollar corporations.
Click to expand...

Well, I can always try to get some inquiries from laywers and sound them if they are interested and not unimportant: Under what financial conditions. If I don't get a reaction, I know enough (will write to more lawfirms). And if I do, cooperation from all 'doubters' (maybe not only here in this thread) is very much needed, as my understanding of the English language isn't sufficient and our collective knowledge needs to be combined.

The names of top-lawfirms I can find online.

There are bright people in this thread, please...if you think this is a pointless move or if you have suggestions, let me know ('believers' included).
 
SoCav said:
Blame Jesta.:shades:


I think I missed that. Would be interested in seeing it!
Click to expand...
Ah, you missed those? I SUCK at searching in this forum. Edit: You can't have missed this, it must be your memory ^^ You were even a part of the discussion.

Here's one post I found, but it doesn't go into details how only the Kelly ad libs from the original MJ version are the only vocals in the FORD mix at that timeline.

SoCav said:
I wanted to try to match the vocals of One More Chance (the original song) with the beat of the remix, just to see what kind of processing I would need to make the two match up and how the voice would then end up sounding. I had a look around and there does not seem to be an acapella for OMC, so I ended up trying it with the original mix as a whole. There is a long instrumental intro in the Ford remix, which I used to mix it with.

What I found is that no time-stretching is actually needed to make the released version match up with the remix. As Ford describes himself in his reply to Pentum:


This seems to be the case. The original mix and the Ford remix in half-time both have a tempo of exactly 81 bpm. I already got the impression while listening to the remix that the speed of the vocals did not seem very different from the original mix of One More Chance. I did not suspect that they would be identical, but they are. Thus, you do not need to change the tempo of the vocals at all to mix them with the Ford remix beat. I therefore do not get why he says he needed to use time-stretching, unless the demo takes he used had a very different speed (which seems unlikely). No changes in pitch were needed either.

Have a listen for yourself. Unfortunately you will hear some of the instruments from the original mix as well (there is an abundance of snare hits that I hope you can ignore :) ). I tried to EQ them out as much as possible but obviously you will still hear them.

You will first hear my mix of the beat of the Ford remix + the original. After that you hear the same section with the vocals from the Ford mix.
http://www.mediafire.com/?lhve0kpob54je3k
Click to expand...
R Kelly is doing different things than MJ. Doing these "ah, ta, ta" after he sings a sentence, which MJ does not do.

And seriously, there are 1 or 2 "aow" in this mix, which is CLEARLY NOT MJ FFS.

Listen to this, everyone: http://youtu.be/fG2HUIUA8q4?t=4m2s

Then listen to from this part: (and notice the "ta, ta" sounds he does after a word or a sentence, just like the singer in the FORD MIX:
http://youtu.be/L0qwFNZLKI4?t=2m14s

It doesn't get more obvious.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me try to find the other one that is about the ad libs

Pentum said:
Now that he said it's MJ, you believe him, Korgy?

I'm not saying it's not MJ, but if the Cascio songs leaked as Jason songs and you believed they were Jason, then later The Cascios and Sony shows up saying it's MJ. Would you then change your mind?

EDIT: Copy paste from MaxJax:

I honestly believe this is R. Kelly. It sounds too much like R. Kelly, and McNabb described it well. It's funny how I made a thread about this last night, haha, because it's kinda the same.

Listen to this. The R. Kelly vocals in MJ's One More Chance are "under" MJ's vocals towards the end. You can hear them, but MJ is singing over as well. But in the FORD remix, there are none of the "MJ vocals singing over", it's ONLY R. KELLY'S VOCALS FROM THE MJ OMC. The lead vocals sound more like R. Kelly than MJ as well, I think most people can agree on that.

http://soundcloud.com/pentum/omc-r-kelly-2http://soundcloud.com/pentum/omc-r-kelly-2

I do believe there are a few MJ vocals, it's hard to tell. The "ahaaaaa, alright" is 100% MJ, but overall, the lead vocals are IMO R. Kelly.
Click to expand...

Page: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...p=3428717&highlight=ford r. kelly#post3428717


If you're interested:

Pentum said:
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"
Click to expand...


Page: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...p=3603518&highlight=ford r. kelly#post3603518
 
Last edited:
I'm almost surprised that no-one has become dedicated to publicly showing the fraud of the Ford remix like they have with the Cascio tracks. After all, this happened under MJ's authority and I dare say that it's as damaging to his legacy than these tracks are.
 
Jesta said:
I'm almost surprised that no-one has become dedicated to publicly showing the fraud of the Ford remix like they have with the Cascio tracks. After all, this happened under MJ's authority and I dare say that it's as damaging to his legacy than these tracks are.
Click to expand...
I'm not, because no one cares much about his crappy mix. I don't think it's damaging his legacy either, because few people know about the mix.
 
Pentum said:
I'm not, because no one cares much about his crappy mix. I don't think it's damaging his legacy either, because few people know about the mix.
Click to expand...

But at the same time, this album is relatively unknown (outside of the fan-base, at the very least), as are the tracks. And I'd say that ANY kind of fraudulent vocals are damaging to his legacy.
 
1 remix released on a single of a song that hasn't got much attention vs 3 (12) songs released on the first posthumous album of Michael Jackson, causing controversity all over the news and people still talk about it.

Again, I don't believe the FORD remix damaged anything.
 
But the only people that still talk about it are us, the fans. No credible media outlet has talked about them since at least the beginning of 2011. And again, "Michael" is relatively obscure and didn't receive nearly as much attention as a regular album does.
 
Yes, but the damage has already been done - the fanbase clearly split (becoming better now), the album sold less, etc.

Then again. DAMAGE MJ's legacy? Little can do that.
 
I completely agree that extremely little can actually damage his legacy; certainly not the Cascio tracks. They've done nothing but had the same effect as watching Plan 9 From Outer Space and seeing someone impersonate (very poorly) Bela Lugosi. Of course, that's just my opinion.
 
The Ford remix issue isn't comparable in my opinion - Michael was here to disapprove if he felt the need to.
 
Guys, I'm starting to think that MAYBE, just MAYBE...those songs really are Michael :scratch:

Some of the arguments from the other side in the last several pages have been very convincing....






































Kidding ;)
 
So Michael thought that it was completely OK to have R. Kelly vocals on one of his singles and have it all credited under his voice?
 
MusicMan26 said:
The Ford remix issue isn't comparable in my opinion - Michael was here to disapprove if he felt the need to.
Click to expand...
Michael might not even have heard this remix. I strongly doubt he did. He obviously would tell it's not himself singing...

Arklove said:
Guys, I'm starting to think that MAYBE, just MAYBE...those songs really are Michael :scratch:

Some of the arguments from the other side in the last several pages have been very convincing....
Click to expand...
Haha, good try. I've been thinking about doing this several times this year :D
 
WildStyle said:
As far as taking it to court, I would imagine that would be very expensive and time consuming. Regular people don't often feel up to the task of taking on billion dollar corporations.
Click to expand...

Chamife said:
Maybe we can try contacting a good, ambitious lawyer who can make a name for himself with taking on a case like this. Will look good in his CV I think (if he wins).

And he can tell us if it will be feasible or not. If it's not or if there are too many doubts if it will be feasible, then it's no use to start the whole thing up.

Just an idea? I realize it's all easier said than done, but I don't know anything else there is left to do.
Click to expand...

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
If we hire one, the Estate/SONY/Cascio will hire a pack of ambitious and already successful lawyers. And with no physical proof it would be hell of a challenge for a young ambitious lawyer.
Click to expand...

Actually filing a lawsuit can be quite cheap. All is required is around $395 filing fee and you can represent yourself. A lot of small people have taken over big corporations - remember Erin Brockovich?

so it's not really an issue of money or big corporation. It all comes to the issue of evidence. Do you have any evidence that would stand in a court of law? Do you have anything that could force the company to settle and so on. So Bumper is right in that regard, it would be a challenge with all of these subjective evaluations.

The risk of starting a lawsuit without strong proof is that if you lose it in the end you can be held responsible for the other parties legal expenses and can face a counter lawsuit for malicious claims / defamation.

So if you have strong indisputable proof lawsuit are relatively easy, if you don't it's best to stay away.

The mention of lawsuit on this thread is only to show that there's not any indisputable proof. If there was Jacksons would be the first to rush to a court of law and try to remove the Executors with it or get money from Estate / Sony/ Cascios and so on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top