AlwaysThere
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 5,657
- Points
- 113
Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"
I just don't see how this makes sense.
Being forced to "Frankenstein" an incomplete Michael Jackson song would not cause the vocals to sound any different. The album cut of "Hollywood Tonight," for example, was put together using a song that was only about seventy percent finished: the bridge and third verse were never recorded, and there weren't many usable ad-libs. There were many instances were Teddy Riley was forced to chop things together to make the vocals sound more complete than they really were. Lo and behold, that song, even with some sort of odd vocal filter, still sounds undoubtedly like Michael Jackson. It was unnecessary to add vocal ticks, shouts, yelps or any of Michael's trademarks, simply because they were already present on the original vocal track.
If Eddie had guide vocals from Michael (even though every Cascio song has two full verses, numerous choruses, a full bridge section and many usable ad libs, a milestone that most unissued songs do NOT have), certain attributes would have been present on the original vocal tracks (headphone bleed, foot stomps, et al). The fact that they weren't, and they had to be edited in afterwards, is suspicious.
Money. That's all it is. In 1994, one of Michael's ex-housekeepers agreed to claim that she walked in on Michael molesting a child to Hard Copy; the actual logistics of the story would change depending on how much she was paid. (I believe it was $500,000 for her to say Michael's hands were in the boy's pants.) If a woman is willing to make a claim on CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, how is it difficult to believe that three guys would attempt to pass off four Jason Malachi songs as Michael Jackson?
The only parties that would have anything to do with the lie would be Malachi, Porte and Cascio, which really isn't that hard to believe. Especially when you consider that, of everyone involved with the recordings, Porte has said absolutely nothing publicly. Malachi was likely paid a hefty sum of hush money, which is very plausible to believe. Stuart Brawley was, according to Birchey, blacklisted by Michael, so that's called revenge. (People have sought out revenge on Michael many times in the past, as we surely all know.) Teddy Riley made some suggestive comments on his Twitter that imply that he thinks the songs are fake. Roger Friedman is just a prick who likes to downgrade anything and everything Michael Jackson; anything he says is essentially discredited immediately.
There is no ACTUAL PROOF (recorded evidence) to say that Michael isn't on these songs; you are right about that. But there is enough reasonable doubt for fans to believe that he isn't.
But couldn't this be reconciled simply with the original, simple theory : Eddie had a bunch of guide vocals from MJ, and he set out to make presentable songs out of them. So the reason they sound the way they do is not because it's not MJ, but only because the original MJ in there has been "frankensteined" out of recognition.
I just don't see how this makes sense.
Being forced to "Frankenstein" an incomplete Michael Jackson song would not cause the vocals to sound any different. The album cut of "Hollywood Tonight," for example, was put together using a song that was only about seventy percent finished: the bridge and third verse were never recorded, and there weren't many usable ad-libs. There were many instances were Teddy Riley was forced to chop things together to make the vocals sound more complete than they really were. Lo and behold, that song, even with some sort of odd vocal filter, still sounds undoubtedly like Michael Jackson. It was unnecessary to add vocal ticks, shouts, yelps or any of Michael's trademarks, simply because they were already present on the original vocal track.
If Eddie had guide vocals from Michael (even though every Cascio song has two full verses, numerous choruses, a full bridge section and many usable ad libs, a milestone that most unissued songs do NOT have), certain attributes would have been present on the original vocal tracks (headphone bleed, foot stomps, et al). The fact that they weren't, and they had to be edited in afterwards, is suspicious.
You know what I mean? How could Eddie assemble this super-team of expert liars and fraudsters -- Porte, Malachi, and now Brawley, and maybe Friedman, and maybe Riley -- and no one ever told him "you're nuts man, I want no part in this, and I'm telling the world if you ever try to carry this out".
Money. That's all it is. In 1994, one of Michael's ex-housekeepers agreed to claim that she walked in on Michael molesting a child to Hard Copy; the actual logistics of the story would change depending on how much she was paid. (I believe it was $500,000 for her to say Michael's hands were in the boy's pants.) If a woman is willing to make a claim on CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, how is it difficult to believe that three guys would attempt to pass off four Jason Malachi songs as Michael Jackson?
The only parties that would have anything to do with the lie would be Malachi, Porte and Cascio, which really isn't that hard to believe. Especially when you consider that, of everyone involved with the recordings, Porte has said absolutely nothing publicly. Malachi was likely paid a hefty sum of hush money, which is very plausible to believe. Stuart Brawley was, according to Birchey, blacklisted by Michael, so that's called revenge. (People have sought out revenge on Michael many times in the past, as we surely all know.) Teddy Riley made some suggestive comments on his Twitter that imply that he thinks the songs are fake. Roger Friedman is just a prick who likes to downgrade anything and everything Michael Jackson; anything he says is essentially discredited immediately.
There is no ACTUAL PROOF (recorded evidence) to say that Michael isn't on these songs; you are right about that. But there is enough reasonable doubt for fans to believe that he isn't.