Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

I love how we now have people distancing themselves from the idea Malachi has anything to do with this, when for two years they insisted he was an intricate part of the whole affair. Yet they still claim "BUT we still know for sure it is NOT MJ". You would think their rejecting their own thesis -- or at least 50 % of it -- would teach them not to be so confident about the other half.
 
The more I listen to the unreleased tracks, the less I like what people involved did with the album Michael!
I'll always love Best Of Joy and Much Too Soon but it makes me wonder what it would had been if John McClain + company would had respected Michael's vision... :sigh:
 
It's obviously Malachi. Interesting that as time creeps on the believers edge closer and closer to the non-believers side. Already started making concessions. In my opinion that is a good thing and not meant to put anyone down. It's great. Keep searching and seeking the truth. That's what we all want.
 
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
The more I listen to the unreleased tracks, the less I like what people involved did with the album Michael!
I'll always love Best Of Joy and Much Too Soon but it makes me wonder what it would had been if John McClain + company would had respected Michael's vision... :sigh:
Click to expand...

What a difference, isn't it?? Like night and day. BAD25 is everything the 'Michael' album should have been. Untouched, beautiful, raw, classic, REAL Michael Jackson.
 
kreen said:
I love how we now have people distancing themselves from the idea Malachi has anything to do with this, when for two years they insisted he was an intricate part of the whole affair. Yet they still claim "BUT we still know for sure it is NOT MJ". You would think their rejecting their own thesis -- or at least 50 % of it -- would teach them not to be so confident about the other half.
Click to expand...

I'm still sticking to my belief that it's Malachi.
 
Remember, we also had the guy that recorded Jason's voice for years say that he believes that it's Jason on the songs.
 
I also believe Jason Malachi sang in those tracks, they doesn0t sound nothing like Michael0s voice.

No matter the dissapointment with MICHAEL right now, I'm so excited about The BAD 25 tracks! :dancing:
 
kreen said:
That's exactly it. The anti-Cascio people have been flooding the Internet for two years now with audio comparisons between the Cascio singer and Malachi, claiming that it was obvious that it was the same person, that anybody with ears could hear that, and that you had to be crazy not to realize it. And now they'd simply go, "oh well we never said it was Jason Malachi; we only said it wasn't MJ". No way : somebody will have to apologize for all the times I've had to read the words "vibrato", "snort" and "Cupeta" these part two years -- IF it turns out to be Porte on that "too bad" line.
Click to expand...

kreen said:
I love how we now have people distancing themselves from the idea Malachi has anything to do with this, when for two years they insisted he was an intricate part of the whole affair. Yet they still claim "BUT we still know for sure it is NOT MJ". You would think their rejecting their own thesis -- or at least 50 % of it -- would teach them not to be so confident about the other half.
Click to expand...


No kidding, the one who claimed it was a wrecked MJ singing, now claims it's James Porte. What a U-turn.
 
kreen, the only person who has said now that it does not matter if it is Malachi or another impersonator, as long as it is not MJ, is Bumper, and he has maintained that position all along (as well as some other doubters like Arklove and love is magical, I believe). There are doubters who feel certain it is Malachi, but also several who have said 'I don't know who it is, I just know it is not Michael'. Like MusicMan, my position is still the same: I think it is Malachi.

And it is true that this discussion has always been about whether this is MJ or not. Hence the fact that the terms 'believers' (it is MJ) and 'doubters' (it is, at least mostly, not MJ) have been used to describe the two camps, rather than 'MJ believers' and 'JM believers', or something to that extent. Doubters who change their opinion about who is impersonating MJ on those songs do not change their opinion on this core issue, as they still think it is not MJ. Believers who now go from 'it is MJ' to 'it could be Porte on at least half the song' are switching positions in the debate though. Which is why I have been quite surprised by what some believers have been saying over the past couple of days. Dare I say welcome to the dark side? ;)
 
kreen said:
That's exactly it. The anti-Cascio people have been flooding the Internet for two years now with audio comparisons between the Cascio singer and Malachi, claiming that it was obvious that it was the same person, that anybody with ears could hear that, and that you had to be crazy not to realize it. And now they'd simply go, "oh well we never said it was Jason Malachi; we only said it wasn't MJ". No way : somebody will have to apologize for all the times I've had to read the words "vibrato", "snort" and "Cupeta" these part two years -- IF it turns out to be Porte on that "too bad" line.
Click to expand...

First of all there are no "anti-Cascio people", there are only Michael Jackson fans & anti-fake songs (whoever made them) people.
Those comparisons were made to show similarities that Cascio singer shares with Jason Malachi, and those similarities are apparent even to a regular ear. There were also comparisons made to show differences between Cascio singer and Michael Jackson comparing Michael's vocal habits (like vibrato) with Cascio singer's vocal habits. But in this whole period not one believer made one comparison to show that Cascio singer could be Michael Jackson, because that is impossible, differences are enourmous and believers can hear them too, they just don't want to admit it.
And once again that whole talk about "too bad" being Porte (meaning that he sings the whole song) started because Korgnex said so without any proof.
 
Last edited:
kreen said:
I love how we now have people distancing themselves from the idea Malachi has anything to do with this, when for two years they insisted he was an intricate part of the whole affair. Yet they still claim "BUT we still know for sure it is NOT MJ". You would think their rejecting their own thesis -- or at least 50 % of it -- would teach them not to be so confident about the other half.
Click to expand...

I've never said that it is Jason Malachi 100%. I always had my opinion that it is NOT Michael Jackson and that it sounds like Jason Malachi a lot and that it could be him. That's my opinion from day 1 and I've never changed it. I think many of us have that opinion since the start.

But there are some members here like Stella who is 100% sure that it is Jason Malachi and he's telling that from the start and he did not change his opinion.

On the other hand you have you and few other believers who did change their mind and now they think that maybe it is not Michael Jackson after all. But it's very stupid of you to change your opinion just because someone like Korgnex said so. That proves that you are very gullible and that you will believe in whatever people tell you to believe like Eddie Cascio, John Branca or Korgnex in this case.
 
SoCav said:
Believers who now go from 'it is MJ' to 'it could be Porte on at least half the song' are switching positions in the debate though. Which is why I have been quite surprised by what some believers have been saying over the past couple of days. Dare I say welcome to the dark side? ;)
Click to expand...

As you divided the doubters into three groups as "it doesn't matter who", "it's Malachi" and "I don't know who it is but it's not Michael" , you have to divide the believers into groups as well. Although there have been a group of people who said "it's all Michael", there's also been another group that has been talking about composite leads with Porte such as Korgnex and me. There's also a group that believed it to be partially Michael.

As I told before I had sent Bumper Porte's "Exotic Dancer" asking about accent and pronunciation more than a year ago and I was discussing composite tracks, layering etc with TPIMaster again more than a year ago and I probably bored everyone with the repeating Paula Abdul lawsuit reference. So some of the stuff coming from the believers that you are reading isn't as surprising as you make it sound like if you consider every different opinion presented.

Personally for me nothing changed in my position. I just found out that Porte can sound close to Michael which if true only strengthened my position.
 
It's 100% Jason Malachi on the lead vocals of all 12 Cascio songs. Said it since minute 1.
 
Believers seem to forget that when we discussed the "too bad" part in "Monster" in 2010, when the doubters were pointing out the obvious discrepancy that it is the lead vocal singing it and that that lead vocal is NOT Michael Jackson, all the believers have defended the idea that it WAS Michael Jackson and gave a bunch of excuses why he sounded like that or even worse simply affirmed that there was no difference between that lead vocal and other MJ's songs.

So two years before Korgnex mentioned that "too bad" is sung by James Porte, the doubters pinpointed it from the start by saying it is NOT MJ. Why all of sudden Korgenx is believed and not the doubters when they said it from the very beginning?
 
ivy said:
As you divided the doubters into three groups as "it doesn't matter who", "it's Malachi" and "I don't know who it is but it's not Michael" , you have to divide the believers into groups as well. Although there have been a group of people who said "it's all Michael", there's also been another group that has been talking about composite leads with Porte such as Korgnex and me. There's also a group that believed it to be partially Michael.

As I told before I had sent Bumper Porte's "Exotic Dancer" asking about accent and pronunciation more than a year ago and I was discussing composite tracks, layering etc with TPIMaster again more than a year ago and I probably bored everyone with the repeating Paula Abdul lawsuit reference. So some of the stuff coming from the believers that you are reading isn't as surprising as you make it sound like if you consider every different opinion presented.

Personally for me nothing changed in my position. I just found out that Porte can sound close to Michael which if true only strengthened my position.
Click to expand...

It is extremely difficult to be objective with voice habits based only on one song you sent me. Especially when music prevents the ear to clearly hear the voice. I had to listen continuously to Jason Malachi's two whole albums in order to detect some typical things he uses in his songs with his voice before posting the little common things he shares with the Cascio lead singer.

p.s. Sent me the link again and tell me where he's from and where has he been living lately.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Believers seem to forget that when we discussed the "too bad" part in "Monster" in 2010, when the doubters were pointing out the obvious discrepancy that it is the lead vocal singing it and that that lead vocal is NOT Michael Jackson, all the believers have defended the idea that it WAS Michael Jackson and gave a bunch of excuses why he sounded like that or even worse simply affirmed that there was no difference between that lead vocal and other MJ's songs.

So two years before Korgnex mentioned that "too bad" is sung by James Porte, the doubters pinpointed it from the start by saying it is NOT MJ. Why all of sudden Korgenx is believed and not the doubters when they said it from the very beginning?
Click to expand...

And what is very interesting to me is that all believers are very gullible. Korgnex said that without providing any evidence and all of the sudden all believers think that it is James Porte.

I don't believe that it is James Porte. And even if it is James Porte that would mean that he is the lead vocalist which contradicts believers thesis that the lead vocalist is Michael Jackson.
 
OnirMJ said:
And what is very interesting to me is that all believers are very gullible. Korgnex said that without providing any evidence and all of the sudden all believers think that it is James Porte.

I don't believe that it is James Porte. And even if it is James Porte that would mean that he is the lead vocalist which contradicts believers thesis that the lead vocalist is Michael Jackson.
Click to expand...

Exactly! In the end, it all points to IT'S NOT MICHAEL JACKSON.

What's changed exactly? lol
 
OnirMJ said:
On the other hand you have you and few other believers who did change their mind and now they think that maybe it is not Michael Jackson after all.
Click to expand...

Uh? Never did I claim it was ONLY MJ singing on the Cascio songs : I've always believed what the booklet says, which is that it's MJ and James Porte. I've never even tried to ascertain what parts and what words are MJ versus Porte : I don't have bionic ears like you guys, which are capable of finding subtle nuances between mixed-up, multi-tracked, stacked up vocals of two people sounding the same. Like the "too bad" line : if you'd asked me before Korgnex's assertion whether that was MJ or Porte, I would have said, "sounds like it's MJ, but if you tell me Porte sounds like MJ, it could be him too".
 
Well, all in all kreen you are saying you can't tell the difference between MJ and that other vocalist, presumably JP. That has been the whole point: fans do know the difference between MJ's voice and someone else's voice. So fans do know when it is NOT MJ singing, no bionic ears needed for that. Just trained MJ fans' ears accustomed to MJ's voice.
 
kreen said:
Uh? Never did I claim it was ONLY MJ singing on the Cascio songs : I've always believed what the booklet says, which is that it's MJ and James Porte. I've never even tried to ascertain what parts and what words are MJ versus Porte : I don't have bionic ears like you guys, which are capable of finding subtle nuances between mixed-up, multi-tracked, stacked up vocals of two people sounding the same. Like the "too bad" line : if you'd asked me before Korgnex's assertion whether that was MJ or Porte, I would have said, "sounds like it's MJ, but if you tell me Porte sounds like MJ, it could be him too".
Click to expand...

Booklet does not say that. It says LEAD VOCALS: Michael Jackson. BACKGROUND VOCALS: Michael Jackson and James Porte. And that is the official story and the story that Eddie Cascio and Teddy Riley said on the Oprah Show. Even Estate's statement was that "forensic musicologists" listened to the a cappella vocals and compared them with a cappella vocals from previously known Jackson songs.

"In addition, at the request of John Branca and John McClain, Howard Weitzman retained one of the best known forensic musicologists in the nation to listen to the a cappella vocals and compare them with a cappella vocals from previously known Jackson songs. This expert performed waveform analysis, an objective scientific procedure, and found that all of the vocals were the voice of Michael Jackson.

Sony Music conducted its own investigation by hiring a second well-respected forensic musicologist who also compared the raw vocals from the Cascio tracks against known vocals of Jackson's and found that it was Jackson's voice on both sets of the compared vocals."

You can also listen to Breaking News accapella (if you can't hear that on released or leaked tracks). There is only one (1) voice on the lead vocals, not "mixed-up, multi-tracked, stacked up vocals of two people sounding the same". There is another voice on the background vocals but we are talking here about the lead vocals. So you have to choose what are your beliefs. It can only be one lead singer. Is it James Porte? Is it Michael Jackson? Or is it impersonator (Malachi...).
 
Last edited:
There is no shame in simply saying "I can't tell". Not everybody will be able to. That's just the human race for you.
 
OnirMJ said:
Booklet does not say that. It says LEAD VOCALS: Michael Jackson. BACKGROUND VOCALS: Michael Jackson and James Porte. And that is the official story and the story that Eddie Cascio and Teddy Riley said on the Oprah Show. Even Estate's statement was that "forensic musicologists" listened to the a cappella vocals and compared them with a cappella vocals from previously known Jackson songs.

"In addition, at the request of John Branca and John McClain, Howard Weitzman retained one of the best known forensic musicologists in the nation to listen to the a cappella vocals and compare them with a cappella vocals from previously known Jackson songs. This expert performed waveform analysis, an objective scientific procedure, and found that all of the vocals were the voice of Michael Jackson.

Sony Music conducted its own investigation by hiring a second well-respected forensic musicologist who also compared the raw vocals from the Cascio tracks against known vocals of Jackson's and found that it was Jackson's voice on both sets of the compared vocals."

You can also listen to Breaking News accapella (if you can't hear that on released or leaked tracks). There is only one (1) voice on the lead vocals, not "mixed-up, multi-tracked, stacked up vocals of two people sounding the same". There is another voice on the background vocals but we are talking here about lead vocals. So you have to choose what are your beliefs. It can only be one lead singer. Is it James Porte? Is it Michael Jackson? Or is it impersonator (Malachi...).
Click to expand...

This kind of analysis is neither scientific nor objective.

A scientific and objective analysis would require much more precaution in order to remove all the doubt that there may be.

They did not do their job towards that aim at all.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Well, all in all kreen you are saying you can't tell the difference between MJ and that other vocalist, presumably JP. That has been the whole point: fans do know the difference between MJ's voice and someone else's voice. So fans do know when it is NOT MJ singing, no bionic ears needed for that. Just trained MJ fans' ears accustomed to MJ's voice.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're right, I'm not a fan : you obviously are though. Thanks for reminding me of my identity as a non-fan : that gives me the time to cancel my Bad25 preorder.
 
Alright, here is the continuation of my email conversation with the sound engineer Angelo Montrone, in which he specifically addresses the vocal similarities between producer James Porte and Michael Jackson. Again reproduced with his permission.



Hello again,

This is fascinating; thank you so much.

With your permission, I will copy our complete correspondence on the MJ Forum I am a member of; I will also send you the link.

As you might be aware, the controversy regarding those songs is that many people claim that James Porte and Eddie Cascio never had any MJ vocals; not even guide vocals. When MJ died, they simply hired an impersonator to record their tracks, and it is those fake vocals -- according to many -- that are now on the official "Michael" album. That is why I insisted on the very precise point of whether they had told you anything -- before MJ's death -- that implied either that they had MJ's rough vocals in the can, or on the contrary that they didn't have any MJ vocals yet.

If you should remember any additional detail regarding this issue -- or if you ever obtain more information from Eddie Cascio and James Porte, who have both been mostly silent on the controversy -- please do not hesitate to share with me, as this is a maddeningly frustrating situation for MJ fans and music lovers in general.

Thank you again for your time.


Bernard Couture


****


Hi Bernard,

Yes, you can reprint my letter on your forum.

My impression is that there were MJ vocals in existence and that probably those are what was used with various enhancements. I understand why people question it. The vocals on that album are not what people are used to hearing. Some of his vibratos sound off etc, but again if they were doing digital enhancements to make the best of rough vocals that could have been it, maybe MJ just wasn't singing his best because he was just learning the song etc.

What I find amusing about these arguments is that no one ever mentions the fact that Porte himself is a great MJ impersonator. If they were going to fake the tracks, which I don't think they did, Porte would have done it himself.

That's why I take a 95% stance that they are probably real and reserve that last 5% for the slim possibility that some of it could have been faked. When I was working on the roughs, it was almost eery that the vocals already sounded a lot like MJ but were sung by Porte to sound like MJ (they definitely were not MJ, ultimately I could hear that). So first I have these tracks that are eerily sounding like MJ but aren't, then 2 weeks after I submit them MJ passes away, and then there is the whole controversy around the potentially fake vocals, and all along we had joked that Porte could make a living as an MJ impersonator!

I think it's cool that you guys are searching for some truth in all this which is why I'm happy to share some information. Most people who worked on that album are probably more concerned with covering their own asses than revealing what they know.

Regards,

Angelo
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
This kind of analysis is neither scientific nor objective.

A scientific and objective analysis would require much more precaution in order to remove all the doubt that there may be.

They did not do their job towards that aim at all.
Click to expand...

I know that. I doubt that any such analysis were performed at all. I was just pointing out to kreen that it is only one voice on the lead vocals.
 
Ultimately there is really not much to be gained from his responses. He seems none the wiser about these tracks than your average forum member. All he can really seem to add is merely another opinion. An opinion of a man who claims Porte can sound "eerily like MJ". Now this is just me talking, but I've never come across an impersonator that sounds anywhere near close to being "eerily" close to MJ. I doubt Porte would be any exception.
 
kreen said:
Alright, here is the continuation of my email conversation with the sound engineer Angelo Montrone, in which he specifically addresses the vocal similarities between producer James Porte and Michael Jackson. Again reproduced with his permission.



Hello again,

This is fascinating; thank you so much.

With your permission, I will copy our complete correspondence on the MJ Forum I am a member of; I will also send you the link.

As you might be aware, the controversy regarding those songs is that many people claim that James Porte and Eddie Cascio never had any MJ vocals; not even guide vocals. When MJ died, they simply hired an impersonator to record their tracks, and it is those fake vocals -- according to many -- that are now on the official "Michael" album. That is why I insisted on the very precise point of whether they had told you anything -- before MJ's death -- that implied either that they had MJ's rough vocals in the can, or on the contrary that they didn't have any MJ vocals yet.

If you should remember any additional detail regarding this issue -- or if you ever obtain more information from Eddie Cascio and James Porte, who have both been mostly silent on the controversy -- please do not hesitate to share with me, as this is a maddeningly frustrating situation for MJ fans and music lovers in general.

Thank you again for your time.


Bernard Couture


****


Hi Bernard,

Yes, you can reprint my letter on your forum.

My impression is that there were MJ vocals in existence and that probably those are what was used with various enhancements. I understand why people question it. The vocals on that album are not what people are used to hearing. Some of his vibratos sound off etc, but again if they were doing digital enhancements to make the best of rough vocals that could have been it, maybe MJ just wasn't singing his best because he was just learning the song etc.

What I find amusing about these arguments is that no one ever mentions the fact that Porte himself is a great MJ impersonator. If they were going to fake the tracks, which I don't think they did, Porte would have done it himself.

That's why I take a 95% stance that they are probably real and reserve that last 5% for the slim possibility that some of it could have been faked. When I was working on the roughs, it was almost eery that the vocals already sounded a lot like MJ but were sung by Porte to sound like MJ (they definitely were not MJ, ultimately I could hear that). So first I have these tracks that are eerily sounding like MJ but aren't, then 2 weeks after I submit them MJ passes away, and then there is the whole controversy around the potentially fake vocals, and all along we had joked that Porte could make a living as an MJ impersonator!

I think it's cool that you guys are searching for some truth in all this which is why I'm happy to share some information. Most people who worked on that album are probably more concerned with covering their own asses than revealing what they know.

Regards,

Angelo
Click to expand...

Please kreen ask him does he know who Jason Malachi is and send him this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrB0ditWv4Y

Thanks.
 
WildStyle said:
Ultimately there is really not much to be gained from his responses. He seems none the wiser about these tracks than your average forum member. All he can really seem to add is merely another opinion. An opinion of a man who claims Porte can sound "eerily like MJ". Now this is just me talking, but I've never come across an impersonator that sounds anywhere near close to being "eerily" close to MJ. I doubt Porte would be any exception.
Click to expand...

James Porte sounds nothing like Michael and nothing like the Cascio lead vocalist. Listen to the verses on All I Need. That is one voice. No one else is mixed in. It is a totally different voice to the one on the backing vocals in the chorus. Also, these songs aren't composed of bits and pieces. They are complete vocal tracks. Angelo Montrone also only heard 4 songs. I suggest someone send him some of Jason's music, some Michael's most recent recordings, Hold My Hand for example, Porte's private dancer and the comparisons and see what he says. His email is on his site.

And with regard to KYHU, let's not forget Duwayne Starling.
 
WildStyle said:
Ultimately there is really not much to be gained from his responses. He seems none the wiser about these tracks than your average forum member. All he can really seem to add is merely another opinion. An opinion of a man who claims Porte can sound "eerily like MJ". Now this is just me talking, but I've never come across an impersonator that sounds anywhere near close to being "eerily" close to MJ. I doubt Porte would be any exception.
Click to expand...

Including the one on the Cascio tracks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top