Have your opinions changed? (Cascio Tracks)

[startinsomethin87]

When Breaking News premiered, my first thought was that it wasn't Michael. Granted, I'd heard as much from a few folks before I listened to the track, so my thinking at the outset wasn't as objective as it could've or should've been.

But now, a month later, I don't know what to think. Every bit of my heart wants the voice on those three Cascio tracks to be Michael's, but it just doesn't feel right. I know this viewpoint goes against all the tests Sony has done and all the producers who've testified it's Michael voice. Quite frankly, it's a pretty asinine stance to take. I mean, why would these people try to pull such a sham? It makes no sense.

But at the same time, the voice on the Cascio tracks also doesn't make any sense. Why is this voice/style of singing on Breaking News, Monster and Keep Your Head Up only on those songs? Clearly it's different from the other seven tracks on Michael. Words aren't sung the way Michael typically sings them. The vibrato is whimpering and whispery. It sounds, frankly, like someone trying to sing like Michael.

Listen as closely and as hard as you can to these vocals, then compare them to a song recorded around the same time, such as Hold My Hand or WBSS 2008. I'm sorry, but there's just no way those voices are the same.

Maybe I'm wrong. God, I HOPE I'm wrong. Maybe it's the just the way the songs were recorded. The studio did seem pretty rough-looking, being in a basement and all. I'm certainly no audio expert, and for all I know that kind of stuff can affect a recording.

So, in short, my skepticism remains. It is admirable the Cascios put their credibility on the line this week by going on Oprah. It makes it that much harder for me to be skeptical.

Finally, I'd just like to say for the record that I get absolutely no joy out of my protest of the authenticity of these songs. For those of you who think we skeptical fans are just rabid conspiracy theorists, I assure you that, while I can't speak for others, I certainly am not. I am not one to shake things up, and this whole mess has left me very perturbed.

I am just a fan whose ears, having listened to Michael's phenomenal voice for more than a decade, do not recognize the one that is on these tracks.

 

[Graf]

When Breaking News premiered, my first thought was that it wasn't Michael. Granted, I'd heard as much from a few folks before I listened to the track, so my thinking at the outset wasn't as objective as it could've or should've been.

But now, a month later, I don't know what to think. Every bit of my heart wants the voice on those three Cascio tracks to be Michael's, but it just doesn't feel right. I know this viewpoint goes against all the tests Sony has done and all the producers who've testified it's Michael voice. Quite frankly, it's a pretty asinine stance to take. I mean, why would these people try to pull such a sham? It makes no sense.

But at the same time, the voice on the Cascio tracks also doesn't make any sense. Why is this voice/style of singing on Breaking News, Monster and Keep Your Head Up only on those songs? Clearly it's different from the other seven tracks on Michael. Words aren't sung the way Michael typically sings them. The vibrato is whimpering and whispery. It sounds, frankly, like someone trying to sing like Michael.

Listen as closely and as hard as you can to these vocals, then compare them to a song recorded around the same time, such as Hold My Hand or WBSS 2008. I'm sorry, but there's just no way those voices are the same.

Maybe I'm wrong. God, I HOPE I'm wrong. Maybe it's the just the way the songs were recorded. The studio did seem pretty rough-looking, being in a basement and all. I'm certainly no audio expert, and for all I know that kind of stuff can affect a recording.

So, in short, my skepticism remains. It is admirable the Cascios put their credibility on the line this week by going on Oprah. It makes it that much harder for me to be skeptical.

Finally, I'd just like to say for the record that I get absolutely no joy out of my protest of the authenticity of these songs. For those of you who think we skeptical fans are just rabid conspiracy theorists, I assure you that, while I can't speak for others, I certainly am not. I am not one to shake things up, and this whole mess has left me very perturbed.

I am just a fan whose ears, having listened to Michael's phenomenal voice for more than a decade, do not recognize the one that is on these tracks.

Yep...I'm with you on this....part of me is like "Nah...Sony would never do something like this." ...But then when I listen to a Monster I think "Uh...this doesn't sound completely like Michael." They are good songs to me as well, but I really don't know what to think about it fully.

 

[azsummergirl]

When Breaking News premiered, my first thought was that it wasn't Michael. Granted, I'd heard as much from a few folks before I listened to the track, so my thinking at the outset wasn't as objective as it could've or should've been.

But now, a month later, I don't know what to think. Every bit of my heart wants the voice on those three Cascio tracks to be Michael's, but it just doesn't feel right. I know this viewpoint goes against all the tests Sony has done and all the producers who've testified it's Michael voice. Quite frankly, it's a pretty asinine stance to take. I mean, why would these people try to pull such a sham? It makes no sense.

But at the same time, the voice on the Cascio tracks also doesn't make any sense. Why is this voice/style of singing on Breaking News, Monster and Keep Your Head Up only on those songs? Clearly it's different from the other seven tracks on Michael. Words aren't sung the way Michael typically sings them. The vibrato is whimpering and whispery. It sounds, frankly, like someone trying to sing like Michael.

Listen as closely and as hard as you can to these vocals, then compare them to a song recorded around the same time, such as Hold My Hand or WBSS 2008. I'm sorry, but there's just no way those voices are the same.

Maybe I'm wrong. God, I HOPE I'm wrong. Maybe it's the just the way the songs were recorded. The studio did seem pretty rough-looking, being in a basement and all. I'm certainly no audio expert, and for all I know that kind of stuff can affect a recording.

So, in short, my skepticism remains. It is admirable the Cascios put their credibility on the line this week by going on Oprah. It makes it that much harder for me to be skeptical.

Finally, I'd just like to say for the record that I get absolutely no joy out of my protest of the authenticity of these songs. For those of you who think we skeptical fans are just rabid conspiracy theorists, I assure you that, while I can't speak for others, I certainly am not. I am not one to shake things up, and this whole mess has left me very perturbed.

I am just a fan whose ears, having listened to Michael's phenomenal voice for more than a decade, do not recognize the one that is on these tracks.

perfectly, wonderfully--and respectfully--said. i agree.

 

[Pretty_Young_Thriller]

When Breaking News premiered, my first thought was that it wasn't Michael. Granted, I'd heard as much from a few folks before I listened to the track, so my thinking at the outset wasn't as objective as it could've or should've been.

But now, a month later, I don't know what to think. Every bit of my heart wants the voice on those three Cascio tracks to be Michael's, but it just doesn't feel right. I know this viewpoint goes against all the tests Sony has done and all the producers who've testified it's Michael voice. Quite frankly, it's a pretty asinine stance to take. I mean, why would these people try to pull such a sham? It makes no sense.

But at the same time, the voice on the Cascio tracks also doesn't make any sense. Why is this voice/style of singing on Breaking News, Monster and Keep Your Head Up only on those songs? Clearly it's different from the other seven tracks on Michael. Words aren't sung the way Michael typically sings them. The vibrato is whimpering and whispery. It sounds, frankly, like someone trying to sing like Michael.

Listen as closely and as hard as you can to these vocals, then compare them to a song recorded around the same time, such as Hold My Hand or WBSS 2008. I'm sorry, but there's just no way those voices are the same.

Maybe I'm wrong. God, I HOPE I'm wrong. Maybe it's the just the way the songs were recorded. The studio did seem pretty rough-looking, being in a basement and all. I'm certainly no audio expert, and for all I know that kind of stuff can affect a recording.

So, in short, my skepticism remains. It is admirable the Cascios put their credibility on the line this week by going on Oprah. It makes it that much harder for me to be skeptical.

Finally, I'd just like to say for the record that I get absolutely no joy out of my protest of the authenticity of these songs. For those of you who think we skeptical fans are just rabid conspiracy theorists, I assure you that, while I can't speak for others, I certainly am not. I am not one to shake things up, and this whole mess has left me very perturbed.

I am just a fan whose ears, having listened to Michael's phenomenal voice for more than a decade, do not recognize the one that is on these tracks.

:clapping:

 

[BabeBeMine]

You might not admit it now, but i think had 2000 Watts and Butterflies came out after Michael's passing fans would say its Jason from youtube. Because MJ had not sang Butterflies style songs on History or Blood on the Dance floor.

I can see fans saying Mike doesn't sing ne yo soul

 

[ScrEAm.Jack5on]

after seeing these creeps called cascios on oprah i am even more convinced that this is a pure lie.

you can tell when people are lieing, as on the oprah show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHOt3zhyZvc

come on, who would ever believe that? the whole family is a bunch of liars, just like the arvizos.

I can't believe you said that.

even as nice as the cascios during his stay there, turn evil.

During his stay there?

They were close friends since the 80s, til the day he died and beyond, for over 20 years. Michael's children spent the first Chistmas without their father with the Cascio family.

 

[ScrEAm.Jack5on]

You might not admit it now, but i think had 2000 Watts

People keep talkin about 'if 2000 watts was released now', but the thing is, that argument doesn't make sense. that song is in a deeper register than we're used, so yeh obviously you'd question it, but the thing is you can't compare 2000 watts to Breaking News & Monster because those two songs are supposed to be in Michael's usual range, how we're used to hearing him, but they still sound strange.

..and on 2000 watts he still pronounces the words in his own way.. ie treble 'trebo'

anyway, thats not to say i think the songs are 'fake'.

 

[CherubimII]

The album "Michael" is 100% Michael. :give_rose:

 

[Superstition]

People keep talkin about 'if 2000 watts was released now', but the thing is, that argument doesn't make sense. that song is in a deeper register than we're used, so yeh obviously you'd question it, but the thing is you can't compare 2000 watts to Breaking News & Monster because those two songs are supposed to be in Michael's usual range, how we're used to hearing him, but they still sound strange.

..and on 2000 watts he still pronounces the words in his own way.. ie treble 'trebo'

Excellent point.

 

[Arklove]

People keep talkin about 'if 2000 watts was released now', but the thing is, that argument doesn't make sense. that song is in a deeper register than we're used, so yeh obviously you'd question it, but the thing is you can't compare 2000 watts to Breaking News & Monster because those two songs are supposed to be in Michael's usual range, how we're used to hearing him, but they still sound strange.

..and on 2000 watts he still pronounces the words in his own way.. ie treble 'trebo'

anyway, thats not to say i think the songs are 'fake'.

i completely agree about the way he pronounces things....same with on Much Too Soon....he says..'tabo' instead of 'table'...those are so unique to him....i look for that type of thing right away

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

No were not and thats rather ridiculous to say.

Let me be more specific... the wack a$$ producers and money hungry folks behind the scenes of this project are the ones to blames as well as the media because they just going to promote what sells, they dont care about accuracy or crediblity. Media as being people like Oprah, news channells etc.. people only looking for fluff and not REAL facts.

Fans have been bitching about the songs (which they have every right to do since we are fans of Michael Jackson) because some of the songs on this new album are not him. Do you honestly think fans are just trying to find something to complain about? We look forward to material from Michael but not stuff that basically is disrespecting his art and legacy. They had no business completing unfinsihed tracks. They should have only been releasing finished works done by Michael and I dont think fans are wrong for voicing their opinion on it especially if it aint Michael singing on the tracks. Its disrespectful to Michael, to his fans and his legacy. Michael would not want this.

Uhmm, yes we are...You don't believe it's Michael, despite having any proof to prove otherwise. But yet we continue to have people being rude to one another, and we continue to have this same discussion, all because people don't want to believe it's Michael.


Then people say, "Well I trust my ears..." You trust your ears, and that they're always right, yet you can't tell the difference between a digitally altered vibrato and a natural one? Yea, the untrained ear is a very convincing argument.

 

[DarkMJ]

No.
Singing and vibrato are not Michael.
aside some "shouting" which is known

 

[BabeBeMine]

It's to the point now where fans are questioning other tracks as well which makes this a whole big mess now. Michael's nephew sure did screw this one up.

Is he upset because his own career has stalled?

Once you throw it out there it ruins the whole album now.

 

[Superstition]

Uhmm, yes we are...You don't believe it's Michael, despite having any proof to prove otherwise. But yet we continue to have people being rude to one another, and we continue to have this same discussion, all because people don't want to believe it's Michael.


Then people say, "Well I trust my ears..." You trust your ears, and that they're always right, yet you can't tell the difference between a digitally altered vibrato and a natural one? Yea, the untrained ear is a very convincing argument.

There is no proof that the vibrato is digitally altered. It certainly sounds that way, but how do you know the vibrato wasn't that shaky to start with and then the whole vocals weren't worked on?

That vibrato can be achieved through digital tweaking, but it can also be sung in such a fashion.

 

[Hess]

Until proven otherwise there is no reason to claim it is not MJ.

Innocent till proven guilty - This is a MJ album and the songs are very MJ-ish.

So until you can prove it is not MJ I see no reason to scream so much about fake vocals. Surely it is MJ.

 

[yaazgurl]

Wholeheartedly agree. I don't see how he could have expected a different outcome. People have gone beyond the cascio tracks saying other songs are not him. It was naive at best to think fans would only doubbt three of the songs.I

It's to the point now where fans are questioning other tracks as well which makes this a whole big mess now. Michael's nephew sure did screw this one up.

Is he upset because his own career has stalled?

Once you throw it out there it ruins the whole album now.

 

[Calotte12]

Until proven otherwise there is no reason to claim it is not MJ.

Innocent till proven guilty - This is a MJ album and the songs are very MJ-ish.

So until you can prove it is not MJ I see no reason to scream so much about fake vocals. Surely it is MJ.

I agree with this

 

[souldreamer7]

I don't get people thinking that if 2,000 Watts,Shout etc. was released after 06.25.09 that it would be questionable.. I can bet for sure that I would know it's Michael Jackson.

 

[BabeBeMine]

Question?


1. Where is there evidence of the Cascio's ever lying on MJ

2. Who did MJ call three days before his death? Members of his own family or the Cascio's?

3. Have the Cascio's ever drove by MJ's house wanting to say hello, only to have armed security guards saying... ummm nope nope...Well this happen to several of MJ's family members. Why? Because he's closer to the Cascio's then his own family. Michael during his later years only dealt with his family once every BLUE MOON... Outside of his mother


Majority of Michael''s own family said they last spoke with him at there parents reunion in May 2009

So i choose to believe the family MJ prefered to spend quality time with during his later years.


Did MJ go to Tito or Jackie's basement and record? NOPE....Tito does have a studio, i hope you know that... But the kind of pop wasn't there...I wonder why


I thought MJ and 3t were close? How come he wasn't at Tito's studio in 2007?

 

[suzynyc]

^ It's Porte on JackSON I think. I think it's meant to sound deformed as the song is expressing his detachment from his own name when hearing it uttered by the media. A deformation that has nothing to do with who he really is. So the weird sound of his name serves a purpose.

Are we sure it's not Teddy Riley speaking that part? Because the credits listed on the Best Buy site say "featuring Teddy Riley" on Breaking News. And when I heard Teddy speak on Oprah he sure enough sounded like the "Breaking News" guy, lol. I'm losing my mind.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Michael...54&skuId=1641971&st=michael jackson&lp=6&cp=1

 

[Kirshach]

Until proven otherwise there is no reason to claim it is not MJ.

Innocent till proven guilty - This is a MJ album and the songs are very MJ-ish.

So until you can prove it is not MJ I see no reason to scream so much about fake vocals. Surely it is MJ.

to many of us the songs are very MJ-ish, but some of the vocals are not
please, pipe down and don't post the same in every thread,
we already understood that you strongly believe it's MJ, but let everybody has his own opinion

and about proving...
if you say so, I can make a record and say that this is MJ singing, how would you prove it's not him? I'm MJ then! Innocent 'til proven guilty, as you said
think twice about your arguments before to tell them

 

[butterflies]

You might not admit it now, but i think had 2000 Watts and Butterflies came out after Michael's passing fans would say its Jason from youtube. Because MJ had not sang Butterflies style songs on History or Blood on the Dance floor.

I can too. I think the only thing that doesn't sound exactly like him is the vibrato, but he could change that. His transitions and falsetto in KYHU are the same.
Listen to how different Ghosts, Morphine, Who is it, Give in to me sound compared to She's out of my life, I just can't stop lovin you, Beat it, etc. Michael could do that. I think his voice also sounds different in Hollywood Tonight, but it's still him. He was so talented he could sing in different keys, used all different emotions and could sing any style of music.

 

[Kirshach]

He was so talented he could sing in different keys, used all different emotions and could sing any style of music.

Different keys, but timbre and pronunciation... I don't know
Also, Michael resonated high notes beautifully from the nature, it was like a gift. But the voice on Cascio's tracks resonates very bad on high notes comparing to low ones. Just check the second verse of Monster, it's really obvious there:

He’s coming at ya
Coming at ya rather too fast
Mama say mama got you in a zig zag

also, Paparazzi got you scared like a monster, monster, monster sounds really dry

But somehow in Hollywood Tonight and Best Of Joy Michael's voice sound perfect on high notes.

Although I must say I do like Monster, and I'd want it to be Michael. At least because I see how non-fans react on it. I checked one of Russian 50 cent fan boards, and most of it's members say that they haven't heard such an awesome song in there latter years.
But I trust my ears better then anything, so I can't convince myself

 

[chocomarker]

Also, Michael resonated high notes beautifully from the nature, it was like a gift. But the voice on Cascio's tracks resonates very bad on high notes comparing to low ones. Just check the second verse of Monster, it's really obvious there:

He’s coming at ya
Coming at ya rather too fast
Mama say mama got you in a zig zag

also, Paparazzi got you scared like a monster, monster, monster sounds really dry

But somehow in Hollywood Tonight and Best Of Joy Michael's voice sound perfect on high notes.

yup, its very obvious that the person singing monster, breaking news, kyhu is having a VERY HARD time with the high notes. it makes you think the whole time "oh my god, is he going to make it??" - and when you here best of joy or another day you here the true MJ, his voice jumping around from low to high with such an ease and joy to listen at.

plus the disgusting vibrato that is identical to jason malachi's. sorry, but just listen to jason malachi's sheepish vibrato after every line in his songs and the sheepish vibrato in monster, breaking news, KYHU - somehow only present in these songs and not in "best of joy" which was recorded 2009 or "wanna be startin something 2008" from thriller 25 which was also recorded at the cascio studio...

listen to his voice in "Wanna be startin something 2008" and then to KYHU... it's such a pain in the ear and such a pain in the heart, because the difference is obvious and makes me throw up that sony AND the estate is really playing this game.

 

[caleb20003]

Different keys, but timbre and pronunciation... I don't know
Also, Michael resonated high notes beautifully from the nature, it was like a gift. But the voice on Cascio's tracks resonates very bad on high notes comparing to low ones. Just check the second verse of Monster, it's really obvious there:

He’s coming at ya
Coming at ya rather too fast
Mama say mama got you in a zig zag

also, Paparazzi got you scared like a monster, monster, monster sounds really dry

But somehow in Hollywood Tonight and Best Of Joy Michael's voice sound perfect on high notes.

Although I must say I do like Monster, and I'd want it to be Michael. At least because I see how non-fans react on it. I checked one of Russian 50 cent fan boards, and most of it's members say that they haven't heard such an awesome song in there latter years.
But I trust my ears better then anything, so I can't convince myself

I agree with the Monster track I think its a really good song with a great beat, just spoils it that it is not 100% MJs lead vocal.

and if it does turn out to be MJ on all these tracks then I personally will be dissapointed that his voice had turned into a poor impersonation of itself, demo or not.

We really could do with Will I Am pulling out some of the vocals from their work together (wherever the vocals are), that would confirm everything I think.

It would be interesting also if someone could grab a vocal from 'this is it' that sounded similar to this 'new voice' I certainly didn't hear it.

 

[chocomarker]

Oprah Interview:

Oprah: "what can you say to prove this is michael's voice?"

Eddie Cascio: "I can tell you that it IS michael's voice. He recorded right there in my basement. it was a homestudio and it worked, i was pushing the buttons, he was right there directing .. that's michael jackson!"

now thats how you convince people! good job eddie!

 

[L.T.D]

You might not admit it now, but i think had 2000 Watts and Butterflies came out after Michael's passing fans would say its Jason from youtube. Because MJ had not sang Butterflies style songs on History or Blood on the Dance floor.

I can see fans saying Mike doesn't sing ne yo soul

Butterflies!? Are you kidding me? His voice is instantly recognisable in that and its one of his greatest vocal performances ever! 200 Watts I could maybe understand... but no way Butterflies.

 

[room_downstairs]

I still am honestly unsure... I have my doubts, but I trust the Cascios implicitly. They always stood by Michael in the most difficult times of his life, respected his privacy and gave him the freedom to be himself as part of their family. I feel they are being truthful.

At the end of the day though, for me if there is any doubts about the tracks then they shouldn't have been included. It would have been easier to release an album's worth of material where there was no question about authenticity whatsoever.

 

[Hess]

Butterflies is a wonderful MJ song. Not a very typical MJ song - but fantastic.

 

[L.T.D]

Butterflies is a wonderful MJ song. Not a very typical MJ song - but fantastic.

Exactly. It is a masterpiece, and whether you think its MJ on these songs or not. It clearly isnt MJ at his best. So to compare Butterflies to that just shocks me.....