Michael - The Great Album Debate

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
I think one important thing to realize that different people might have different approaches to stuff. Matt Forger might love to talk about Michael and Eddie might not.

kreen mentioned the 2008 thread I was mentioning before about Angelikson in which Eddie was refusing to answer questions directly.

I did form some opinion based on my interactions - with Frank.

If you remember before Frank's book was released media had picked up the mention of drugs. It had angered people and many people were commenting negatively about Frank and his book.

I contacted Frank and asked him if he was aware of the ongoing negativity surrounding his book. He told me No. He explained to me it was actually something he learned from Michael. He mentioned Michael did not read to many of the things written about him and if he did he would go crazy. He told me that he had followed the same thing and he did not read the forums for comments. Assuming this also applies to Eddie this discussion here or on other forums might be something totally irrelevant to him. He might even be totally unaware of it.

Frank explained himself to me in great detail. I asked if I can write about what he told me and he said no. He knew his intentions and he also knew regardless of what he say some people's opinion would not change. Again very similar to what Michael did, he didn't have the need or want to correct anything and everything that was being said about him. The same approach might apply to Eddie as well.

Also I saw some saying that the hating and attacks on family wasn't that much or it wasn't significant but it was. On a unrelated time while talking about an unrelated subject, Frank mentioned some fans - by names / nicknames - and mentioned how they harassed his family - not himself but his family especially mother & father. These were the people that Frank wanted absolutely nothing to do with. So I'm sorry to say but here everyone also needs to put partial blame on themselves for not getting answers and not having a communication. Some behavior really hurt our chances. I as Ivy might try to get a Q&A through MJJC and seem reasonable and friendly by my approach but it doesn't make them forget other parties and their behavior.

Weren't the Cascios on a talk show to talk about Michael? (Oprah or somebody)
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
Arklove;3723341 said:
I don't know how to separate quotes either, so I'll just answer in general a few of your points.

I know almost nothing about legalities, but if they are so confident that these songs are real, why would Eddie/James be told to say nothing more?

I'm not saying their silence is an indication of guilt, but it certainly doesn't ease the situation that these songs are real.

See, the thing is, Privacy and Shout don't need any further information (although it would be nice just for interest sake, I know I'm not alone in saying that most MJ fans want to hear all sorts of details about his music). The reason they don't need further information is because these songs are without a doubt MJ. Even if he wasn't alive when they were released, they are still undoubtedly MJ. I don't see the vocal issue you seem to have with these songs. If fans have issues with the vocals, then maybe they don't know his voice very well? I'm not trying to offend anyone, but come on. Just sayin'.

Check this thread out, look at the details about the songs from BAD25, it's just icing on the cake, great information that all fans love to read about. No one demanded the information, but there it is. Same with All In Your Name with Barry Gibb, no one demanded that a studio footage be released, but Barry did it anyway. But why nothing for 3 (9 ?pending) songs that were apparently good enough to release on the first posthumous MJ album?

http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...l-Capone%94-Matt-Forger-the-secrets-of-BAD-25

If we were to receive an abundance of information about the Cascio songs, it won't necessarily PROVE that it's MJ singing, but it'd be a step in the right direction to know that he at least had some heavy involvement. It's just that at any given time, you can almost always find information about MJ's music. Why not for 12 songs? If it were one or two, ok then no big deal. But even then, with the vocals so unlike MJ, then it'd be one or two too many.

But like I said, when you pair vocals that a large amount of fans doubt, with NO information about ANY of those songs, THAT is a red flag. Why didn't Eddie want to discuss these songs with Joe Vogel? Or James Porte for that matter? Eddie has "professional prospects", remember? That'd help his resume, no? I just find it strange. He works with the greatest entertainer that ever lived and he doesn't want to discuss it? Ok then.

If Eddie didn't want the fans' unwarranted attention, then why go on Oprah? Why do that 'Michael' album special? He had to have expected that if he releases songs that need a forensic to figure out who's singing, and especially if we've never seen a single trace of what these reports even are, then there will sure as hell be more ongoing questions that need to be answered.

Why not do a Q&A with MJJC? I believe Ivy's been trying to arrange that with no luck? I mean, the questions are controlled and selected. It doesn't even have to be questions about the VOCALS per se, although no doubt fans will ask, but even just more detail about the songs? Notes Michael had? His vision for the songs? The directions he wanted to take? Why nothing like this?

I personally think there are a whole lot more than 'a few thousand hard-core fans'. There are likely a hell of a lot more than that who don't bother discussing any of it on a forum. I know tons of fans who are doubters who have never discussed it on a forum. It doesn't mean they are any more over it than we are. And if I know a ton, chances are a lot of other doubters on this forum know a ton as well, as so on and so forth.

It's not a conspiracy, at least for me. I just want more transparency about a large amount of songs that have mysteriously appeared and sound completely unlike MJ has ever sounded.

Look what happened when Breaking News was first streamed. EVERYONE on this forum were up in arms. Has that EVER happened with any other MJ song? And then what happened? People were somehow appeased when the Estate released that statement. Yet, all anyone had to go on was what they were hearing. After that statement, what, somehow their hearing changed?

You can say some were influenced that the songs were fake via the Jacksons tweets, but if you flip it, then you can also say fans were persuaded by that statement from the Estate as well.

I too wish we would get all of that info regarding the Cascio songs -- heck, I wish we would get it also regarding the Invincible sessions -- I know this is off-topic, but it maddens me that Rodney Jerkins and the Darkchild team can't be bothered to do a song-by-song analysis of the Invincible album, and give us info on MJ's contributions and everything. Ivy, maybe you could use your contacts to organize this Q&A with Darkchild on this board?

But as for Eddie, an important point to remember is that if he was crafty, scheming, dishonest and clever enough to come up with this whole hoax and make it work – then he could just as easily write a whole book about his supposed sessions with MJ, and give a ton of “believable” details, and it still would be a complete lie. So it’s really one of those situations where he’s damned if he does, and damned if he don’t.

People are asking for nothing less than video of MJ recording the songs. Gee, isn’t that setting the bar a little high? Did they usually record MJ while he was at their house? One assumes that when MJ was there, he didn’t bother putting on the whole “MJ look” (make-up, wigs, etc.) that he used in his public appearances. There’s also the fact that no one knew those sessions would end up being so historical/infamous/controversial. It’s like asking somebody why they didn’t write down their last conversation with their wife before she died in a car accident: they didn’t know it was their last conversation.

Basically, just because an event was not recorded doesn’t mean it never happened.

And they MAY have video of MJ in the studio. But for some reason are not putting it out. They may be working on a Cascio Box Set with DVD as we speak!
 

Arklove

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
18,071
Points
83
Location
Canada
Weren't the Cascios on a talk show to talk about Michael? (Oprah or somebody)

Yes, the whole family was on Oprah. Nothing was said about the songs other than, 'It's Michael'

Eddie seemed to have lost his memory about those songs on the show cuz he spent all of the time talking about how Michael took out the garbage and enjoyed turkey dinner and candy. But he never went into any detail about the songs, he was very vague. So he's been like that since the very beginning.
 

Arklove

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
18,071
Points
83
Location
Canada
kreen;3723398 said:
I too wish we would get all of that info regarding the Cascio songs -- heck, I wish we would get it also regarding the Invincible sessions -- I know this is off-topic, but it maddens me that Rodney Jerkins and the Darkchild team can't be bothered to do a song-by-song analysis of the Invincible album, and give us info on MJ's contributions and everything. Ivy, maybe you could use your contacts to organize this Q&A with Darkchild on this board?

But as for Eddie, an important point to remember is that if he was crafty, scheming, dishonest and clever enough to come up with this whole hoax and make it work – then he could just as easily write a whole book about his supposed sessions with MJ, and give a ton of “believable” details, and it still would be a complete lie. So it’s really one of those situations where he’s damned if he does, and damned if he don’t.

People are asking for nothing less than video of MJ recording the songs. Gee, isn’t that setting the bar a little high? Did they usually record MJ while he was at their house? One assumes that when MJ was there, he didn’t bother putting on the whole “MJ look” (make-up, wigs, etc.) that he used in his public appearances. There’s also the fact that no one knew those sessions would end up being so historical/infamous/controversial. It’s like asking somebody why they didn’t write down their last conversation with their wife before she died in a car accident: they didn’t know it was their last conversation.

Basically, just because an event was not recorded doesn’t mean it never happened.

And they MAY have video of MJ in the studio. But for some reason are not putting it out. They may be working on a Cascio Box Set with DVD as we speak!

Well, I do agree that there is probably no video of MJ recording the songs. But we probably believe that for completely different reasons ;)

kreen, it's just that there is NOTHING. We all know there are a lot of missing pieces of this entire puzzle and if the songs were real, we'd see those pieces coming together. But it's still all disjointed 2 years later.

Cascio box set with DVD...wouldn't that be something? :D
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
Yes, the whole family was on Oprah. Nothing was said about the songs other than, 'It's Michael'

Eddie seemed to have lost his memory about those songs on the show cuz he spent all of the time talking about how Michael took out the garbage and enjoyed turkey dinner and candy. But he never went into any detail about the songs, he was very vague. So he's been like that since the very beginning.
well if i heard a beautiful singing voice in my house, even it it was the voice of a nobody, i'd wanna go check it out and comment on it. Either Michael never did any recording in that house, or Eddie is mum for a significant reason.
 

Arklove

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
18,071
Points
83
Location
Canada
well if i heard a beautiful singing voice in my house, even it it was the voice of a nobody, i'd wanna go check it out and comment on it. Either Michael never did any recording in that house, or Eddie is mum for a significant reason.

Well, that's what we want to know. If Michael sang those songs, why doesn't he want to talk about it?
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
@144,000 I guess leaving this thread did not work. Welcome to the club

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

For all of the rest

what YOU would do, doesn't mean it's what other people will do - people are different, there's no standard of behavior. it's plain and simple as that.

Also yes you need to consider a lot of factors some of which is mentioned by kreen

let's give some examples. Look to Karen Faye, she was quick to talk about the bad evil AEG, mentioning how Michael felt desperate and he would be required to work at a fast food joint. When Murray's defense lawyers wanted her to testify to show that Michael was desperate enough to self medicate she went into hiding.

Look to Jacksons. They were also very quick to mention all the addiction and intervention stuff but now avoiding AEG when they are trying to depose them about interventions, even book drafts that wasn't published. They are using anything including public tweets.

Some might argue that it is actually smart to stay silent in regards to such controversial subjects which might include some sort of legal consequences now or later. It doesn't show innocence or guilt, it's just smart.

You are looking to this from a personal perspective. You are thinking that if you saw Michael recording something you would share it with everybody but you are ignoring the rest of the factors. What if you started to share but a group of people were calling you a liar and a fraud sending you hate tweets and curses? Would you continue to share it even though the harassment you receive? What if there was some legal consequences such as imagine the studio owner could sue you for breaking confidentiality would you say "screw it I'm still talking"? So you should realize that in real life there could be some very valid reasons for not talking which again doesn't mean any innocence or guilt.

Also knowing that there are several members of Jackson family wanting to remove Executors it makes sense that they too maintain their silence and proof to where it matters - the court. Jacksons - AEG case is a really good example that fights are supposed to be won in a court of law and not in public opinion. If the judge throws out the leaked emails from evidence that would be a significant lesson for everyone.

There's a lot more to this than just what the fans want and expect. In a realistic fashion you need to realize that.

Also I wanted to add that I'm no longer pursuing Eddie for a Q&A. I haven't pursued it for quite some time now. I don't think this is something he's interested in. Knowing that there's the Birchey trial and his defense including Cascio tracks I don't think anyone with a half brain would give any public statements in this topic. Similarly the existence of Anti-Estate Jacksons makes me think that this won't be a matter that Estate will address either.
 

WildStyle

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,754
Points
38
Still nobody has answered my questions. Why? Because there are no answers. Little strange though isn't it? To say the least. Every odd and suspicious thing about these tracks... it's a long list. And with only Eddie Cascio to vouch for them. I just think believers should perhaps question things a little more.
 

144000

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
10,310
Points
0
Location
united states
@144,000 I guess leaving this thread did not work. Welcome to the club

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

For all of the rest

what YOU would do, doesn't mean it's what other people will do - people are different, there's no standard of behavior. it's plain and simple as that.

Also yes you need to consider a lot of factors some of which is mentioned by kreen

let's give some examples. Look to Karen Faye, she was quick to talk about the bad evil AEG, mentioning how Michael felt desperate and he would be required to work at a fast food joint. When Murray's defense lawyers wanted her to testify to show that Michael was desperate enough to self medicate she went into hiding.

Look to Jacksons. They were also very quick to mention all the addiction and intervention stuff but now avoiding AEG when they are trying to depose them about interventions, even book drafts that wasn't published. They are using anything including public tweets.

Some might argue that it is actually smart to stay silent in regards to such controversial subjects which might include some sort of legal consequences now or later. It doesn't show innocence or guilt, it's just smart.

You are looking to this from a personal perspective. You are thinking that if you saw Michael recording something you would share it with everybody but you are ignoring the rest of the factors. What if you started to share but a group of people were calling you a liar and a fraud sending you hate tweets and curses? Would you continue to share it even though the harassment you receive? What if there was some legal consequences such as imagine the studio owner could sue you for breaking confidentiality would you say "screw it I'm still talking"? So you should realize that in real life there could be some very valid reasons for not talking which again doesn't mean any innocence or guilt.

Also knowing that there are several members of Jackson family wanting to remove Executors it makes sense that they too maintain their silence and proof to where it matters - the court. Jacksons - AEG case is a really good example that fights are supposed to be won in a court of law and not in public opinion. If the judge throws out the leaked emails from evidence that would be a significant lesson for everyone.

There's a lot more to this than just what the fans want and expect. In a realistic fashion you need to realize that.

Also I wanted to add that I'm no longer pursuing Eddie for a Q&A. I haven't pursued it for quite some time now. I don't think this is something he's interested in. Knowing that there's the Birchey trial and his defense including Cascio tracks I don't think anyone with a half brain would give any public statements in this topic. Similarly the existence of Anti-Estate Jacksons makes me think that this won't be a matter that Estate will address either.

What? No giving me satisfaction by putting me on ignore? Didn't know i was so see-able in this big throng.
And if people didn't react relatively similarly in many situations, Oprah wouldn't be a rich woman with a vastly popular talk show.
There are a vast number of people on here, who are feeling the same vibe about the situation about Michael allegedly recording at the Cascios...the doubters..and the other side is refuting it. So there are similar reactions on either side, according to their view on the debate. Being fans shouldn't disqualify them from some of the basic human tendencies of even the Cascios. I'm sure the Cascios were/maybe still are fans of Michael Jackson.
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
And Frank is totally unbiased. LOL

did you even read my post?

my opinion formed wasn't about the authenticity , it was about how he approached to reading the comments and responding to them.

and for the record : he never addressed authenticity with me and he had no effect to my already long formed opinion as I only met him 1 year after the release of the songs.


What? No giving me satisfaction by putting me on ignore?

why would I put you on ignore when I enjoy your posts very much?
 

Paw

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
73
Points
0
Sorry?I don't know how to insert video. Please somebody help me.

http://youtu.be/PAu2bsV9CiQ

Guess where did this band (Guy) record this song's vocal part?



































SHOWER

I have an irrelevant question for everyone here: did you (believers or doubters) do your fact-checking before spreading something told by somebody (credible or not) as cold hard fact? Or did you just copy it without checking because of the same view you shared?
 
Last edited:

Arklove

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
18,071
Points
83
Location
Canada
[YouTube]PAu2bsV9CiQ[/YouTube]

^^ We're not doubting that vocals can be recorded in the shower. But to use that to explain why MJ sounded like a completely different person is far fetched in my opinion.

Wouldn't he sound like he recorded in a shower? Does it sound like that to you? I'm just curious. I just don't think it'd make him sound like someone else.
 
Last edited:

Paw

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
73
Points
0
I remember some fans complained that recording in shower was something like impossible, while it is the best place for recording if you don’t have much money for a professional studio.

And I don't think Eddie used this as excuse or proof, he just shared an anecdote in the documentary of Making of Michael. :)
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Showers aren't the best place to record because it creates an uncontrollable reverb and echo. That can affect the vocals actually.


2n7nynr.jpg


and see the difference of reverb. Go to 1:15 and listen with without reverb and then the added reverb

 

Jesta

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,192
Points
0
Oh, I forgot to mention one thing: In Bad 25, Matt Forger shows us that MJ recorded background vocals in the Hayvenhurst shower. The Way You Make Me Feel's background harmonies were definitely recorded in there... Or at least they were for the demo of the song.
 

BUMPER SNIPPET

Guest
did you even read my post?

my opinion formed wasn't about the authenticity , it was about how he approached to reading the comments and responding to them.

and for the record : he never addressed authenticity with me and he had no effect to my already long formed opinion as I only met him 1 year after the release of the songs.

Again, what an unbiased person to form an opinion on the approach of the angry fans.
What's going on on Twitter and other social networks has nothing to do with this thread here.

Now he publishes stories in a book although MJ explicitely told him not to ever do it. Eddie labels and sells something utterly negative for MJ and the fan community causing unprecedent controversy claiming that MJ would love that.

And here, we have your gutted posts in which you literally defend their attitude for not contributing in any way about something that THEY caused. It's just beyond my comprehension.

You can defend Eddie's decision to remain silent all you want, but you have no right to judge Michael Jackson's fans' anger because of what he did and because of his lack of contribution to answer fans' questions. This remains a Michael Jackson board, not a Cascio board, and the fans have total right to primarily put Michael Jackson above anyone else, including the Cascios who you seem to defend regardless of their lack of total contribution.

Frank decides to interact with you. He refuses to you to be quoted on this board. Well, are we supposed to say "thanks"?

I mean, don't you, Frank, Eddie, or anyone else, actually understand who and what caused MJ's fans's ongoing anger? To me siding with the Cascios is like siding against MJ. We the fans are the ones who cherish, collect and buy MJ's products. The Cascios are on the other side of the barre, they have been selling... God knows what. It makes me sick.
 
Last edited:

Pentum

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
7,219
Points
83
Location
Norway
Showers aren't the best place to record because it creates an uncontrollable reverb and echo. That can affect the vocals actually.


2n7nynr.jpg


and see the difference of reverb. Go to 1:15 and listen with without reverb and then the added reverb

The voice didn't change , just saying.
 

StellaJackson

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
2,736
Points
63
WBSS2008, is the shower vocals. -.-

Well in the Thriller 25 booklet they are credited as additional backing vocals for WBSS 08 and in the making of Michael documentary he clearly states that "this is where Michael recorded those backing vocals". So I would hazard a guess that your right. I think Eddie let slip exactly what Michael did record there, which is of course the WBSS vocals and nothing else. He makes no mention of lead vocals because of course, none were recorded there. No other stories either. Very revealing what he says in that documentary. More so than people realise.
 

AlwaysThere

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
4,829
Points
113
Showers aren't the best place to record because it creates an uncontrollable reverb and echo. That can affect the vocals actually.

Exactly. It's easy to tell the difference between songs recorded in a place with uncontrollable reverb/echo and in a professional studio. And from all of the high-quality Cascio snippets/full songs we've heard, NONE of the songs had that effect.
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
Now he publishes stories in a book although MJ explicitely told him not to ever do it. Eddie labels and sells something utterly negative for MJ and the fan community causing unprecedent controversy claiming that MJ would love that.

Ok, here's what doubters don't seem to realize in their anger. I LIKE Monster, Breaking News and, to a lesser extent, KYHU. What you see as three songs that were a trojan horse of hatred and scandal, I see as three MJ songs I'm glad we have, even though they're part MJ, part post-production work. And I'm not alone in enjoying those three songs.

AND I know that if those three songs had NOT been released, for the precise reasons we now claim they shouldn't have been (incomplete, lame vocals, in need of too much work, etc.), fans would be clamouring for them to be released, saying that they didn't care about all of those things.

Eddie did the right thing in letting us hear those songs : they're what MJ sang in 2007, until proof to the contrary, proof which could easily be obtainable if the Cascios/Estate were sued.
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
StellaJackson;3723613 said:
Well in the Thriller 25 booklet they are credited as additional backing vocals for WBSS 08 and in the making of Michael documentary he clearly states that "this is where Michael recorded those backing vocals". So I would hazard a guess that your right. I think Eddie let slip exactly what Michael did record there, which is of course the WBSS vocals and nothing else. He makes no mention of lead vocals because of course, none were recorded there. No other stories either. Very revealing what he says in that documentary. More so than people realise.

Right, because a man who came up with the greatest hoax in the history of mankind, and lied his way into fooling a record company and the whole world that he had 12 Jackson songs, could not have also lied on TV about MJ recording wherever he wanted to pretend he did.

The most amazing thing is that, when you think about it, what is unbelievable is the idea that MJ would NOT record more, if he did record the WBSS vocals with Eddie. Once we admit that MJ did record music with Eddie in his home studio, and that he did spend 6 weeks with him in 2007, then it stands to reason that he MUST have used the studio again: why would a musician with time on his hand not record with a musician friend when the studio is free, right there in the house, and he’s already used it before?

It’s like imagining an Olympic swimmer staying for 6 weeks in a hotel with a pool, and never once going swimming.

In a parallel universe where Eddie had not revealed the existence of his songs, there would probably be a conspiracy theory on this very board that he MUST have MJ recordings in his possession, but is keeping them to himself to sell them at a later price one day.
 

Chamife

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
1,123
Points
0
Location
The Netherlands
kreen;3723659 said:
Ok, here's what doubters don't seem to realize in their anger. I LIKE Monster, Breaking News and, to a lesser extent, KYHU. What you see as three songs that were a trojan horse of hatred and scandal, I see as three MJ songs I'm glad we have, even though they're part MJ, part post-production work. And I'm not alone in enjoying those three songs.

AND I know that if those three songs had NOT been released, for the precise reasons we now claim they shouldn't have been (incomplete, lame vocals, in need of too much work, etc.), fans would be clamouring for them to be released, saying that they didn't care about all of those things.

Eddie did the right thing in letting us hear those songs : they're what MJ sang in 2007, until proof to the contrary, proof which could easily be obtainable if the Cascios/Estate were sued.
He would have done the right thing if he would've let us hear the songs when we still could recognize Michael on them. The originial recordings. Not a voice altered to the extent that it's far from Michael's. And if it was that bad, he shouldn't have released it to the world at all. I disagree with Elapentela on this. Some things are sacred. Not everything has to be shown to the world. There's such a thing as respect, especially from a friend.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the latest Matt Forger interview:

Emotion is something that has always been very important in Jackson’s songs. In the 2004 The One documentary, Jill Scott explains she realized the importance of such emotional input in his work: “but it’s the choices that he makes when singing a song, he emotes. That’s a gift”. So even when he sings random lyrics on demos, one can feel he is looking for the best spots and moments in the melody to introduce genuine and heartfelt emotion.

Jill Scott perfectly describes what is missing on the Cascio songs.

I feel Michael couldn't do it any other way, whether he was sick, tired or whatever. That was his way of singing. I miss that emotion and I've said that from my first post on this subject.
 
Last edited:

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Exactly. It's easy to tell the difference between songs recorded in a place with uncontrollable reverb/echo and in a professional studio. And from all of the high-quality Cascio snippets/full songs we've heard, NONE of the songs had that effect.

you can also try to remove the reverb. and perhaps you should go and do a search about it. if you did you will see that actually removing the reverb is a pain in the ass and it does really negatively affect the vocals. remember processing?


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

@bumper - this is me ignoring you. I don't respond to people that cannot be civil and turn it to a personal attack fest.
 

Lucilla

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
3,363
Points
0
Location
Neverland since 1991
kreen;3723659 said:
Ok, here's what doubters don't seem to realize in their anger. I LIKE Monster, Breaking News and, to a lesser extent, KYHU. What you see as three songs that were a trojan horse of hatred and scandal, I see as three MJ songs I'm glad we have, even though they're part MJ, part post-production work. And I'm not alone in enjoying those three songs.

I think believers also have to realize that the fact that some may like those songs doesn't magically erase all those ‘red flags’ that people were talking about in this thread.
 

elapentela

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
188
Points
0
Chamife;3723707 said:
He would have done the right thing if he would've let us hear the songs when we still could recognize Michael on them. The originial recordings. Not a voice altered to the extent that it's far from Michael's. And if it was that bad, he shouldn't have released it to the world at all. I disagree with Elapentela on this. Some things are sacred. Not everything has to be shown to the world. There's such a thing as respect, especially from a friend.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the latest Matt Forger interview:

Emotion is something that has always been very important in Jackson’s songs. In the 2004 The One documentary, Jill Scott explains she realized the importance of such emotional input in his work: “but it’s the choices that he makes when singing a song, he emotes. That’s a gift”. So even when he sings random lyrics on demos, one can feel he is looking for the best spots and moments in the melody to introduce genuine and heartfelt emotion.

Jill Scott perfectly describes what is missing on the Cascio songs.

I feel Michael couldn't do it any other way, whether he was sick, tired or whatever. That was his way of singing. I miss that emotion and I've said that from my first post on this subject.


You always have right to have an opinion...
 

elapentela

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
188
Points
0
Lucilla;3723743 said:
I think believers also have to realize that the fact that some may like those songs doesn't magically erase all those ‘red flags’ that people were talking about in this thread.

For me personally all those 'red flags' are presented exactly the same way the media use to do trying to convince everybody that MJ's behaviour match the profile of the pedophile. Many people are buying this but not all fortunatelly
 

kreen

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,014
Points
63
Chamife;3723707 said:
He would have done the right thing if he would've let us hear the songs when we still could recognize Michael on them. The originial recordings. Not a voice altered to the extent that it's far from Michael's. And if it was that bad, he shouldn't have released it to the world at all. I disagree with Elapentela on this. Some things are sacred. Not everything has to be shown to the world. There's such a thing as respect, especially from a friend.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the latest Matt Forger interview:

Emotion is something that has always been very important in Jackson’s songs. In the 2004 The One documentary, Jill Scott explains she realized the importance of such emotional input in his work: “but it’s the choices that he makes when singing a song, he emotes. That’s a gift”. So even when he sings random lyrics on demos, one can feel he is looking for the best spots and moments in the melody to introduce genuine and heartfelt emotion.

Jill Scott perfectly describes what is missing on the Cascio songs.

I feel Michael couldn't do it any other way, whether he was sick, tired or whatever. That was his way of singing. I miss that emotion and I've said that from my first post on this subject.

If one listens to the Cascio tracks with an open mind, that is, admitting that MAYBE it is MJ, they will find a lot of nice things about them. They are not so devoid of emotion and cleverness as some say. They were just never given a fair chance by some people.

Take BN for instance. If it is a fake song, then obviously it's worthless. But if maybe, just MAYBE, it is a MJ vocal and lyric, you have the first time ever MJ sings about himself in the third person. And if Eddie's anecdotes are not lies, then you have MJ making fun of journalists, the way he apparently liked to do around friends. So there's a lot of MJ's personality in there.
 
Top