SoCav
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2005
- Messages
- 1,967
- Points
- 83
Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"
The stuff you say that I mentioned is not irrelevant at all (except for the pasta mention which was of course just a joke), even more so because these are all things that have been used by the people involved to explain the odd sounding vocals - and a lot of them are contradictory.
Again, my point was that both the pro- and anti- side do not have simple explanations going for them. Of course the only exception are the people who think his voice does not sound any different than usual. Then yes, you do have a very simple explanation. But even Eddie and Teddy Riley have admitted his voice sounds different.
I am perfectly familiar with Occam's razor.I don't think you and others understand how Occam's razor work.
The problem with your explanation is that the assumption that these are guide vocals is not well-supported. It does not matter how simple it is if it is not well-supported. Where's the proof? You say it is fact, but it is not at all. And it can easily be questioned. For instance, a. why are all vocals for these 12 songs fully recorded, when MJ generally recorded only the first verse and chorus first, b. why are there no traces of ad-libs? His complete recording history shows that MJ's demos are full with ad-libs, even more so than his final versions, c. why would he want the recordings destroyed because he was so happy with them, if they were only guide vocals. Etc. You have to make a lot of assumptions about MJ completely abandoning his usual recording habits in order to support your explanation. And then we did not even get to the processing argument yet, which can easily be debunked by anyone who has use the software they claim to have used before. If you do go with the guide vocal explanation, you still need to explain why/how MJ recorded guide vocals in a way that he never did before and that caused his voice to sound entirely different, just like how if a fraud is alleged it has to be explained how this was done.First there's a situation: Michael's vocals sound suspicious.
Second you explain why / how.
One explanation: Unfinished songs / guide vocals recorded in a home studio and processed for professional release sounds off.
(all that stuff you listed about food, london etc are irrelevant stuff. similarly hearsay and claims by others/fans isn't the point here) As you can see above isn't conditions / assumptions but facts. It's a home basement studio with no expert sound engineers/technicians. Eddie before and after Michael's death claimed they would continue to work on the songs, so did the Estate - hence unfinished. And songs get worked on for posthumous releases - hence additional work/processing being done on them.
The stuff you say that I mentioned is not irrelevant at all (except for the pasta mention which was of course just a joke), even more so because these are all things that have been used by the people involved to explain the odd sounding vocals - and a lot of them are contradictory.
Again, my point was that both the pro- and anti- side do not have simple explanations going for them. Of course the only exception are the people who think his voice does not sound any different than usual. Then yes, you do have a very simple explanation. But even Eddie and Teddy Riley have admitted his voice sounds different.
I didn't ask you to spell anything out. I even said specifically that I knew you were not talking about one specific explanation, and that I just developed this thought after reading your post. I don't appreciate the condescending tone either, btw.Now is it clear? I kinda wish you didn't make me to spell it out. I was deliberately talking about pyramids and moon landing and so on.
You are right, but I think we do have a decent hunch of what the Cascio side has to offer, given the contradictory explanations and lack of proof they have provided thus far. Yes, it is a hunch, but I do think it says something.My point is until we do not know what evidence each side has, many of these premises can actually be wrong.