The Great Debate - Poll of Polls

Do I believe It Is Michael On The Three Tracks In Question.

  • Yes

    Votes: 152 39.6%
  • No

    Votes: 135 35.2%
  • I Can Not Decide

    Votes: 24 6.3%
  • Maybe in Parts

    Votes: 73 19.0%

  • Total voters
    384
Status
Not open for further replies.

BUMPER SNIPPET

Guest
If I can add to some points



you shouldn't say "never sued" what if there wasn't grounds to sue? in that case you can't sue. It's not an option/decision to make.

What if???? I did not speculate here. I pointed out a fact whether there were grounds to sue or not. It's a fact.

Michael expressed his opinion about Sony and Mottola - that falls under freedom of speech. He didn't seek to do damages - such as a boycott or firing-, hence he couldn't be sued for defamation.

I am sorry? Holding a panel F*CK SONY is an opinion? Saying in front of people that Motolla is a devil. Accusing Motolla of harming Mariah Carey's reputation and health is just an opinion, when Michael clearly stated that Mariah Carey told him so? Encouraging people to believe that SONY kills music is just an opinion? This goes beyond a simple opinion.

Similarly even though Michael weren't happy with Sony's promotion etc but Sony satisfied the conditions of their contract there wouldn't be grounds to sue.

I see your statement here as a simple excuse. Although myself I am against going to court, it is undeniable that you can always go to court to settle your problems instead of shouting out how a company destroys artists taking advantage of them. When you blame, accuse and hold someone responsible for the destruction of music and/or artists, it is enough grounds to sue and seek the reparation of damage.



"as much as" - recording 2 songs versus working on 3 albums. I'm not sure whether it can be classified as the same level. Are we going to say Akon know as much as Bruce Swedien or Will.i.am knows as much as Seth Riggs? I personally do not think so.

If you read again that part of the post you will discover that what gives 3T credibility is not only their work with MJ, but also the fact that they know their uncle's voice be it inside or outside the studio. We cannot undermine that fact and pretend that other people who simply mixed Michael's vocals in the studio necessarily were more present in the studio with Michael himself. Likewise, it is not beczuse 3T recorded two songs with their uncle (and a video!) that they were never present in their uncle's studio.

On the other hand how many duets did Teddy Riley record with Michael? None! Does that mean that he was not in the studio with Michael? Being credited on a song doesn't mean that you are with the artist himself in the studio. Not being credited does not mean that you were not in the studio with the artist. So, it is a fact that we can give credit 3T for what they claim to be true as much as anyone else who knew and worked with Michael more than once or twice.

what makes you think Katherine even has any idea of what goes on in a studio?

Umm, maybe the fact that she's his mother! I hope no one ever tells you that someone else alien to the inner family knows better the voice of your children, brother or father than yourself.

Plus Katherine and the kids objections are just tabloid report of RF. Also Janet, Tito, Rebbie and Marlon made no comments. Jackie's only comment is that he asked some songs to be not included - he didn't give any reasons. Brian Oxman's comment for Joe is that Michael wouldn't want posthumous albums released as he was a perfectionist - again no comment about vocals. So let's not generalize it to "The Jackson family says".

The "some tracks" we are debating are Cascio tracks. By the way not single Jackson stood up to support neither Cascios claims nor Teddy Riley's. With the first posthumous album and such a controversy it's rather an indicator of their disagreement than agreement. Their silence isn't a good thing actually. And even if they spoke up and disagreed they would be again labeled as jaelous and greedy people. So why bother express their opinions when they are not trusted anyway?


based solely - could be true for some but again I wouldn't generalize it to all. Power of conditioning and subconscious mind are powerful things. At the least we were listening to see the vocals were Michael's or not. It's not some realization that we came on our own, it was previously introduced as an idea to our minds.

Power of conditioning goes both ways. And usually the mainstream way has more influence than alternative way. In this case SONY are the mainstream way, while the alternative way is labeled as speculation despite all the facts surrounding the whole controversy.



define employed. He actually has a long term work history with Interscope and works at his own production company QDT. By his account on the radio show he was called by the estate and not yet paid. So he would be hired/paid on a project basis and not necessarily be employed and on constant payroll.

I used the word employed in the sense of hired as a freelancer. I did not mean that Teddy works as an employee at SONY. In other terms short-term employed for the project.


sorry but how is this even remotely relevant? Michael decided to provide for his mother during his lifetime and left his everything to his children. This is a normal will- generally money goes to the next of kin which is in order husband/wife, kids, parents and then relatives. and it's not like he included tens of people and omitted Cascios - he only had his mother and his kids on there. So now everyone not mentioned in his will (meaning everyone expect his kids and mother) will be the evil? and you know what there are decent people in the world that do not care about money and can love a human being for who they are.Why do you automatically assume that every relation that Michael had has to be about greed and be fake. It's sad to see that we can't even give the people benefit of the doubt.

On the contrary, this is extremely relevant! It is pure logic behind my thinking. I am not seeking to accuse anyone, but if everyone accuses Michael's own blood for greed and financial gain, then I don't see why others wouldn't be keen to do the same? I am not accusing Cascios of anything, but, by the looks of it, when Michael was alive it was sufficient for them to hang around. Now that Michael has gone, apparently the secrecy isn't necessary anymore and all of sudden they have a dozen of tracks ready to be mixed and released (without demos though!!!). This has nothing to do with the family being evil, but they too are seeking to do business and eventually will get their paycheck. Now that Michael has gone they seem not to have impression that they are betraying him or the secrecy they had.

Furthermore, if Michael was such a friend with them I could speculate and say that if there is something that Michael could do for them is to agree to release those tracks and gain out of them.

Now, contrary to the speculation my logic tells me that while Michael was alive, so many years was he friend with the family and never did they release a single song in all those years. Now that Michael has gone, the songs popped up! And again, I am not saying that Cascios are not decent people. They surely are, but again, now that Michael is not here any more, things are not the same. And I just can't give people more benefit of doubt than to all those relatives who claim it is not Michael's voice! Let's not forget that the relatives were also there for Michael in bad times. We cannot eternally blame them for financial greed, it's too easy.
 
Last edited:

MJJuniorSinceMW

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Donations
$23.00
Messages
853
Points
63
^
It's just tiring...

So in my case: No comment, is still a comment!

*puts headphones on and listens to MICHAEL, to all ten tracks of course!*
 

samhabib

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,652
Points
0
There's absolutely nothing in the world that will make me believe Michael Jackson is the vocalist on those songs. Lyrics, handwritten notes, video, photos, etc. Absolutely nothing. I've never been more sure of anything in my life. The vocalist on those tracks sounds absolutely nothing like Michael Jackson to me. Absolutely nothing. You could play me a Barry White record and he'd sound more like Michael to me. That's how huge the discrepancy is.
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
I wonder, if some guys have such a huge everlasting hate for Sony, how can their "hearing" be objective?

Don't get me wrong, I 'm very aware of the Mottola/Sony thing in the PAST. And I am very aware it is NOW big business and nothing else. I don't want to be a defender of Sony...
But that kind of hate still now... OK, people have the right to express hate, it is an opinion and freedom of speach. But maybe it is beyond proportion, in my opinion.

Anyway, some posts are very "tactical" in their formulations and it bugs me. I can give an exemple :
fact 3 : SONY did not sue MJ,
fact 4 : MJ did not sue SONY
What happens here : making 2 facts out of negation "did not" makes it possible to blockletter Sony 2 times more!!
And these tricks are not the only ones.
It is opinion making like electoral campaigns. From the start actually.
I wonder what kind of satisfaction does this give to a person?
 

Kapital77

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
772
Points
18
I realize that many defend their right to opinion but neither side seem to care about each other's opinions. Consequently the debate that we are having seems to be a debate bewteen deaf people who won't accept anything else but their opinion or what they think is a fact.

Ok, I'll number some facts hereunder, but first we should bear in mind that without thinking and trusting our ears when it comes to those Cascio songs we are no better than brainless sheep following official statements.

Fact1: There is clearly a controversy over Cascio tracks, not only among fans but also among non fans and some memebers of family and Cascio themselves.

Fact2: Michael did work with SONY before and he DID have some issues regarding the promotion and his INVINCIBLE album. Michael did parade in London and spoke AGAINST Motolla and the group SONY.

Fact 3: SONY never sued Michael for the fact 2.

Fact 4: Michael never sued SONY for the fact 2.

Fact 5: Teddy Riley did work with Michael Jackson in the past and is undeniable that he knows how Michael works or sounds. He says it is Michael on the Cascio tracks.

Fact 6: 3T have worked with Michael and recorded one duet plus one song with Michael's backing vocals. In addition, they are his nephews and know how they uncle work or sound as much as Teddy Riley. They say it is not Michael on the Cascio tracks.

Fact 7: The Jacksons family, including his own mother, had worked and have known Michael all their life. They undoubtedly know how Michael works and definitely how Michael sounds. They say it is not Michael on those tracks.

Fact 8: Many MichaelJackson's fans bashed 3T before the release of Breaking News for stating that Cascio tracks are false even if those very fans hadn't heard the tracks yet. As soon as the very same fans heard the tracks they admitted for once that this time the Jackson family sounded more credible than the Cascios concerning those tracks.

Fact 9: Michael worked with his brothers. He split. Lots of jealousy and greed as well as many stories surrounding the Jacksons towards Michael were going on. Yet, they reunited at Madison Square Garden. And yes, the Jacksons were also united during Michael's bad moments and defended him.

Fact 10: The day after Michael's death, Joe Jackson coldbloodly took the opportunity to promote blu-ray technology while the whole world stood still because of his son's death. This gave the whole world an insight how Michael was treated and that greed was indeed around him.

Fact 11: Michael was according to the Cascios a part of their family for years, in good times as in bad times. As a matter of fact, michael apparenty did even not bother to warn the Cascios of his arrival and would show up in the middle of the night in front of their door.

Fact 12: The Cascios do have a studio in their basement.

Fact 13: Michael has lots of finished material in the vault.

Fact 14: Yet, SONY opts to invest in the Cascio tracks despite the controversy between the Jacksons opinion and Cascios' claims.

Fact 15: Fans have heard the tracks, and based solely on their ears, the fan community is divided on the question whether they hear Michael's leading vocals on the Cascio tracks or not.

So, I numbered I 15 important facts, among many other ones. These facts are enough to make a logical opinion without labeling it as a speculation.

Here is my logical pattern of thinking:

A) What does SONY want actually?
They invested money hoping to generate more money. So I think we can agree that SONY are purely business people.

B) What does the Jackson family want?
Knowing the greed expressed by Michael's father himself one or two days after his son's death, I would not be surprised that their interest is to take part in Michael's posthumous legacy. Because of their greed their credibility is questioned regarding their opinion on the authencity of Michael's vocals on the Cascio tracks. However, when we listen to the tracks, even if we do not support the Jacksons family or if we are not their fans, many among fans admitted that they share the Jacksons' opinion.

C) What does the Estate want?
Clearly their job is to protect Michael's legacy. In the same time they are seeking gains out of it. So, just like SONY, they are business people, but with the difference that they are supposed to care about Michael's legacy and avoid such a destructive controversy as we are experiencing it today. Regarding this posthumous album, the choices and the strategy were mediocre.

D) What does Teddy Riley want?
Employed by SONY, he wants to make it as perfect as possible in memory of his friend Michael Jackson, but at the end of the day he also wants his paycheck, despite the fact that he failed his mission, because as a matter of fact there is a big rift and controversy between fans due to Michael's unrecognizable vocals. He was even invited to explain himself with the Cascio family on Oprah show. This is not to be neglected.

E) What do the Cascios want?
As much as the Cascio were Michael's true friends. They stood for Michael in good and bad times. They were a family to him. They kept the secrecy. According to what they say they practically adopted Michael as a member of their own family... Now, the question is: WHAT DID MICHAEL DO FOR THEM IN EXCHANGE? ARE THEY ON HIS TESTAMENT?
Those two questions might sound rude or shocking, but think about it twice! If Michael's own blood, family, who grew up with and and who worked and spent time with him could seek financial interest in Michael out of greed (such as his own father advertizing blu-ray after his son's death), why wouldn't a foster Cascio family be able to do exactly the same thing knowing that Michael left them nothing at all after all what they had done for him? Just like Teddy Riley, at the end of the day they also get a paycheck.

After my A-B-C-D pattern opinion, here is the 16th fact:
The Cascios are unable to show a single proof that Michael recorded songs in their studio. No pictures, no videos, no handwritten notes,no rough or any other kind of demos, no actually nothing! However, the leading vocals DO sound differently from other vocals that Michael recorded in his entire life!

Great answer.

:clapping::punk:
 

MJJuniorSinceMW

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Donations
$23.00
Messages
853
Points
63
I wonder, if some guys have such a huge everlasting hate for Sony, how can their "hearing" be objective?

Don't get me wrong, I 'm very aware of the Mottola/Sony thing in the PAST. And I am very aware it is NOW big business and nothing else. I don't want to be a defender of Sony...
But that kind of hate still now... OK, people have the right to express hate, it is an opinion and freedom of speach. But maybe it is beyond proportion, in my opinion.

Anyway, some posts are very "tactical" in their formulations and it bugs me. I can give an exemple :
fact 3 : SONY did not sue MJ,
fact 4 : MJ did not sue SONY
What happens here : making 2 facts out of negation "did not" makes it possible to blockletter Sony 2 times more!!
And these tricks are not the only ones.
It is opinion making like electoral campaigns. From the start actually.
I wonder what kind of satisfaction does this give to a person?

This is great. And above all, it is so true!
 

Roosje

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
989
Points
0
Location
Netherlands
There's absolutely nothing in the world that will make me believe Michael Jackson is the vocalist on those songs. Lyrics, handwritten notes, video, photos, etc. Absolutely nothing. I've never been more sure of anything in my life. The vocalist on those tracks sounds absolutely nothing like Michael Jackson to me. Absolutely nothing. You could play me a Barry White record and he'd sound more like Michael to me. That's how huge the discrepancy is.

If you see Michael singing this in the Cascio studio you would still not believe it's him? Wow. That's stuborness to the highest degree. Suit yourself.
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
I'm sorry, I am going to give an honest opinion...
The first days after "Breaking News" many "it's fake" fans did not mention Sony, IMO just to mask their act or because they were already conditionned by opinion-makers.

From months before release I had noticed on several boards that there was a number of fans that hate Sony hugely and then already they stated not ever going to buy anything from Sony again and boycot their products. They organized in chatrooms.

What happened after BN? "Fake vocals", the twitter from Tarryl and the whole confusion gave a brilliant occasion to some angry fans for finaly pay Sony back for the Mottola thing. And yes, in my opinion they have organized themselves. Fans were oh so overactive in saying "it is not because of Sony that we do this", only "we don't hear MJ" and so on. Saying openly they were mad at Sony would have made them sound less objective.
(Now, at todays moment in the action, they can say it, opinions are made, missions are in far stadium of accomplishment.)
Another thing I noticed : many posts were more or less copies from each other... statements circulated the way pamphlets and petitions do.
Also there was/is a permanence of "watchers" in some "strategical" threads. And so on.
Of course this happened in my opinion only.

In my opinion this "fake vocals" campaign among fans is actually not about the vocals but about (hating) Sony. I understand the Sony past must have triggered feelings in fans that I can't imagine...
People can't set the clock on the hour NOW, their conclusions keep refering to the past too much.
Reality is past, present and future. Don't forget the present. Live what IS NOW.
And of course at some point we have to refer to the past... but how we do that is important. We are not all-knowing and certainly not when we project things from the past to the present, and we are not the ultimate judges. We could be mistaking...
 

mjcy

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
150
Points
0
Location
Cyprus
There's absolutely nothing in the world that will make me believe Michael Jackson is the vocalist on those songs. Lyrics, handwritten notes, video, photos, etc. Absolutely nothing. I've never been more sure of anything in my life. The vocalist on those tracks sounds absolutely nothing like Michael Jackson to me. Absolutely nothing. You could play me a Barry White record and he'd sound more like Michael to me. That's how huge the discrepancy is.

Couldn't agree more!
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
There's absolutely nothing in the world that will make me believe Michael Jackson is the vocalist on those songs. Lyrics, handwritten notes, video, photos, etc. Absolutely nothing. I've never been more sure of anything in my life. The vocalist on those tracks sounds absolutely nothing like Michael Jackson to me. Absolutely nothing. You could play me a Barry White record and he'd sound more like Michael to me. That's how huge the discrepancy is.

That's all right, that's your opinion and your choice, it's a part of your very personal freedom.
 

Parmenid

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
632
Points
0
Location
Croatia
some of you say you would be convinced that mj is the vocal on cascio tracks if you saw pictures and notes of mj workin with eddie cascio, .... now for me, thats just dumb

simple example, TII rehearsals, mj sang most songs - WE SAW IT, but on songs where vocals were incomplete, producers of the tii movie mixed in original-album-mj vocals (earth song, jam, tdcau...) to substitute lack of mj live vocals

so here, cascio (with or withouth sony knowing) COULD of done the same thing, after mj passed (even though mj worked with cascio and recorded demos with him) he saw the vocals were incoplete and called malachi or whoever to replace the lead vocal so he could give finished songs to sony to release and make bucks
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
some of you say you would be convinced that mj is the vocal on cascio tracks if you saw pictures and notes of mj workin with eddie cascio, .... now for me, thats just dumb

simple example, TII rehearsals, mj sang most songs - WE SAW IT, but on songs where vocals were incomplete, producers of the tii movie mixed in original-album-mj vocals (earth song, jam, tdcau...) to substitute lack of mj live vocals

so here, cascio (with or withouth sony knowing) COULD of done the same thing, after mj passed (even though mj worked with cascio and recorded demos with him) he saw the vocals were incoplete and called malachi or whoever to replace the lead vocal so he could give finished songs to sony to release and make bucks


Maybe, as you say, that COULD have been done. But was it really done? At this moment we don't know, in my opinion.
 

fzsky

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
104
Points
0
Something happened today made me change my mind a little bit concerning the annoying vibrato issue.

I was watching Michael's 30th Anniversary concert. As I came across YRMW, where the verses are lip-synced but the ad-libs are sung live, I suddenly realized that his vibrato was different from those in the CD. Though they do NOT sound like those in Casio tracks or those of Jason, but they were "vibrating faster (I couldn't find an appropriate expression)" than his usual vibratos.
This doesn't immediately lead to "all right then it's definitely Michael on Casio tracks", but it made me think: if, under certain circumstances, Michael's vibrato can be different and "faster" than his usual ones, then maybe it is possible that, after getting processed by melodyne etc, Michael's vocal turns into what we hear in those tracks.

Overall, I still have doubts in Casio tracks, but I'd rather be proven wrong. And I just think that I might've found something to start proving wrong.
Again, I'd like to stress that the vibratos in YRMW @ 30th Anniversary don't sound like the ones in Casio tracks, at least not to me. Please tell me your opinions.
 

januska

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
665
Points
0
Location
Marching with the elephants
I'm not really sure who I'd call the bad guy in this..but I wouldn't say this is all about being against Sony. They are a business, I get that even if I wouldn't approve of all their actions. They might do questionable things for questionable reasons, but are they worse than major corporations - I don't know. :unsure:

But to me it seems there's something wrong with the big picture, how things are handled and there's something wrong with the damn vocals. If I was the only person on the planet who tought they were fishy, I'd know I'm nuts, but since it's so many people it's something that cannot be ignored :mello:
 

barok232

Guest
I realize that many defend their right to opinion but neither side seem to care about each other's opinions. Consequently the debate that we are having seems to be a debate bewteen deaf people who won't accept anything else but their opinion or what they think is a fact.

Ok, I'll number some facts hereunder, but first we should bear in mind that without thinking and trusting our ears when it comes to those Cascio songs we are no better than brainless sheep following official statements.

Fact1: There is clearly a controversy over Cascio tracks, not only among fans but also among non fans and some memebers of family and Cascio themselves.

Fact2: Michael did work with SONY before and he DID have some issues regarding the promotion and his INVINCIBLE album. Michael did parade in London and spoke AGAINST Motolla and the group SONY.

Fact 3: SONY never sued Michael for the fact 2.

Fact 4: Michael never sued SONY for the fact 2.

Fact 5: Teddy Riley did work with Michael Jackson in the past and is undeniable that he knows how Michael works or sounds. He says it is Michael on the Cascio tracks.

Fact 6: 3T have worked with Michael and recorded one duet plus one song with Michael's backing vocals. In addition, they are his nephews and know how they uncle work or sound as much as Teddy Riley. They say it is not Michael on the Cascio tracks.

Fact 7: The Jacksons family, including his own mother, had worked and have known Michael all their life. They undoubtedly know how Michael works and definitely how Michael sounds. They say it is not Michael on those tracks.

Fact 8: Many MichaelJackson's fans bashed 3T before the release of Breaking News for stating that Cascio tracks are false even if those very fans hadn't heard the tracks yet. As soon as the very same fans heard the tracks they admitted for once that this time the Jackson family sounded more credible than the Cascios concerning those tracks.

Fact 9: Michael worked with his brothers. He split. Lots of jealousy and greed as well as many stories surrounding the Jacksons towards Michael were going on. Yet, they reunited at Madison Square Garden. And yes, the Jacksons were also united during Michael's bad moments and defended him.

Fact 10: The day after Michael's death, Joe Jackson coldbloodly took the opportunity to promote blu-ray technology while the whole world stood still because of his son's death. This gave the whole world an insight how Michael was treated and that greed was indeed around him.

Fact 11: Michael was according to the Cascios a part of their family for years, in good times as in bad times. As a matter of fact, michael apparenty did even not bother to warn the Cascios of his arrival and would show up in the middle of the night in front of their door.

Fact 12: The Cascios do have a studio in their basement.

Fact 13: Michael has lots of finished material in the vault.

Fact 14: Yet, SONY opts to invest in the Cascio tracks despite the controversy between the Jacksons opinion and Cascios' claims.

Fact 15: Fans have heard the tracks, and based solely on their ears, the fan community is divided on the question whether they hear Michael's leading vocals on the Cascio tracks or not.

So, I numbered I 15 important facts, among many other ones. These facts are enough to make a logical opinion without labeling it as a speculation.

Here is my logical pattern of thinking:

A) What does SONY want actually?
They invested money hoping to generate more money. So I think we can agree that SONY are purely business people.

B) What does the Jackson family want?
Knowing the greed expressed by Michael's father himself one or two days after his son's death, I would not be surprised that their interest is to take part in Michael's posthumous legacy. Because of their greed their credibility is questioned regarding their opinion on the authencity of Michael's vocals on the Cascio tracks. However, when we listen to the tracks, even if we do not support the Jacksons family or if we are not their fans, many among fans admitted that they share the Jacksons' opinion.

C) What does the Estate want?
Clearly their job is to protect Michael's legacy. In the same time they are seeking gains out of it. So, just like SONY, they are business people, but with the difference that they are supposed to care about Michael's legacy and avoid such a destructive controversy as we are experiencing it today. Regarding this posthumous album, the choices and the strategy were mediocre.

D) What does Teddy Riley want?
Employed by SONY, he wants to make it as perfect as possible in memory of his friend Michael Jackson, but at the end of the day he also wants his paycheck, despite the fact that he failed his mission, because as a matter of fact there is a big rift and controversy between fans due to Michael's unrecognizable vocals. He was even invited to explain himself with the Cascio family on Oprah show. This is not to be neglected.

E) What do the Cascios want?
As much as the Cascio were Michael's true friends. They stood for Michael in good and bad times. They were a family to him. They kept the secrecy. According to what they say they practically adopted Michael as a member of their own family... Now, the question is: WHAT DID MICHAEL DO FOR THEM IN EXCHANGE? ARE THEY ON HIS TESTAMENT?
Those two questions might sound rude or shocking, but think about it twice! If Michael's own blood, family, who grew up with and and who worked and spent time with him could seek financial interest in Michael out of greed (such as his own father advertizing blu-ray after his son's death), why wouldn't a foster Cascio family be able to do exactly the same thing knowing that Michael left them nothing at all after all what they had done for him? Just like Teddy Riley, at the end of the day they also get a paycheck.

After my A-B-C-D pattern opinion, here is the 16th fact:
The Cascios are unable to show a single proof that Michael recorded songs in their studio. No pictures, no videos, no handwritten notes,no rough or any other kind of demos, no actually nothing! However, the leading vocals DO sound differently from other vocals that Michael recorded in his entire life!

Well done! :clapping:

This is as logical as one can be. Without omitting facts that go against your personal opinion (quite neutral). Thank you for this post
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
Well done! :clapping:

This is as logical as one can be. Without omitting facts that go against your personal opinion (quite neutral). Thank you for this post

I don't think it is neutral, but that's nothing more than my opinion.
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
Something happened today made me change my mind a little bit concerning the annoying vibrato issue.

I was watching Michael's 30th Anniversary concert. As I came across YRMW, where the verses are lip-synced but the ad-libs are sung live, I suddenly realized that his vibrato was different from those in the CD. Though they do NOT sound like those in Casio tracks or those of Jason, but they were "vibrating faster (I couldn't find an appropriate expression)" than his usual vibratos.
This doesn't immediately lead to "all right then it's definitely Michael on Casio tracks", but it made me think: if, under certain circumstances, Michael's vibrato can be different and "faster" than his usual ones, then maybe it is possible that, after getting processed by melodyne etc, Michael's vocal turns into what we hear in those tracks.

Overall, I still have doubts in Casio tracks, but I'd rather be proven wrong. And I just think that I might've found something to start proving wrong.
Again, I'd like to stress that the vibratos in YRMW @ 30th Anniversary don't sound like the ones in Casio tracks, at least not to me. Please tell me your opinions.


That's an interesting observation.
 

Alec

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
920
Points
28
Stories of each song creation told by Cascio, photos, handwritten lyrics, video footage. A real reason why they don't sound like MJ.
It wouldn't mean Michael is the lead vocalist on the four songs (All I Need, KYHU, Breaking News and Monster), but hell - it would make it more believable.

I just don't get it. If he is telling the truth, why can't he provide any kind of evidence to support his claims? Explain the controversy, explain how you worked with MJ. Say that you don't have any outtakes/demos, but explain everything. Tell us how you composed each song, what MJ said when they recorded Breaking News.

HONESTY is the key.
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
I was talking about the 15 facts. The rest (A,B etc) is his opinion. He says so himself!

That I have read too, barok. I wonder if an opinion ever can be neutral... but that is "psychology" :).
The "facts", I think they must be read carefully, one by one. Some could be more "factual" than others. And I think also Ivy's comments are interesting. I think it is good to hear both sides.

My problem is that I think some people have pre-set agenda's... and is this on both sides, I don't know.
 

Garden

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
1,041
Points
38
Stories of each song creation told by Cascio, photos, handwritten lyrics, video footage. A real reason why they don't sound like MJ.
It wouldn't mean Michael is the lead vocalist on the four songs (All I Need, KYHU, Breaking News and Monster), but hell - it would make it more believable.

I just don't get it. If he is telling the truth, why can't he provide any kind of evidence to support his claims? Explain the controversy, explain how you worked with MJ. Say that you don't have any outtakes/demos, but explain everything. Tell us how you composed each song, what MJ said when they recorded Breaking News.

HONESTY is the key.

I agree, it would help IMO.

Honesty is the key!
 

love is magical

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
4,704
Points
0
Location
New Jersey, US
I'm sorry, I am going to give an honest opinion...
The first days after "Breaking News" many "it's fake" fans did not mention Sony, IMO just to mask their act or because they were already conditionned by opinion-makers.

From months before release I had noticed on several boards that there was a number of fans that hate Sony hugely and then already they stated not ever going to buy anything from Sony again and boycot their products. They organized in chatrooms.

What happened after BN? "Fake vocals", the twitter from Tarryl and the whole confusion gave a brilliant occasion to some angry fans for finaly pay Sony back for the Mottola thing. And yes, in my opinion they have organized themselves. Fans were oh so overactive in saying "it is not because of Sony that we do this", only "we don't hear MJ" and so on. Saying openly they were mad at Sony would have made them sound less objective.
(Now, at todays moment in the action, they can say it, opinions are made, missions are in far stadium of accomplishment.)
Another thing I noticed : many posts were more or less copies from each other... statements circulated the way pamphlets and petitions do.
Also there was/is a permanence of "watchers" in some "strategical" threads. And so on.
Of course this happened in my opinion only.

In my opinion this "fake vocals" campaign among fans is actually not about the vocals but about (hating) Sony. I understand the Sony past must have triggered feelings in fans that I can't imagine...
People can't set the clock on the hour NOW, their conclusions keep refering to the past too much.
Reality is past, present and future. Don't forget the present. Live what IS NOW.
And of course at some point we have to refer to the past... but how we do that is important. We are not all-knowing and certainly not when we project things from the past to the present, and we are not the ultimate judges. We could be mistaking...

I respectfully disagree with you. I'm aware of some fans who really dislike Sony and will boycott anything manufactured by Sony. Those fans remain the minority. There are many many fans who don't have a particular feeling about Sony who still have doubt.

I don't dislike Sony. To me, Sony is a record label that exists to do business. Nothing evil about it. To be honest, I don't like the way Michael showed his disagreement with Sony and Motolla so publicly back in 2002. His action didn't make me a Sony hater. I, for one, never ever mentioned the Invincible episode and Motolla in my discussion on the Cascio tracks. I'm fully aware of the fact that Sony Music is run by a different executive team now. I've never mentioned the past disagreement in my discussion not becasue I want to pretend to be objective, but because I know it has nothing to do with the Cascio tracks. I do have ability to reason.

I support This Is It completely. I saw the film more than 10 times in theatre, bought the album, the DVD and the Blu-ray. I appreciate the way the This Is It project is handled.

Back to this album, how many times we need to stress that our opinions are not influenced by the Jacksons? I don't have particular feeling about the Jacksons neither. If I'm so easily to be brainwashed, why am I not brainwashed by Sony, but the Jacksons? Why am I not brainwashed by Sony to believe that the lead vocals are 100% Michael? What's in it for me to have doubt?

Angry fan who wants to pay back Motolla? Sorry, please don't include me and many people here in that catogory. Motolla is not even with Sony anymore. Why the people who have doubts are always being labelled as Sony hater, irrational fans seeking revenge? Isn't it true that the vocals on the Cascio tracks sound different enough for people to have doubt? Isn't it true there is no adequate support provided by Eddie Cascio?

Finally, I find the following quote from you quite belittling.

Another thing I noticed : many posts were more or less copies from each other... statements circulated the way pamphlets and petitions do.

Many posts are similar to each other because many people share the same opinion and idea. We quoted each other and added our two cents. Isn't it what a public forum is for? For people who share the same point of views to discuss and for people who have different to debate.

I have absolutely no agenda. I won't be a happier person if Sony or the Cascios are proven some wrongdoings. All I want is an album that can live up to Michael Jackson's great name.

You know. I can say the same thing about the people who fully believe the vocals are 100% Michael too. I can say they are brainwashed by Sony, follow the mainstream opinion and easily swayed by others. But, I never went that far.
 
Last edited:

Arklove

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
18,071
Points
83
Location
Canada
I respectfully disagree with you. I'm aware of some fans who really dislike Sony and will boycott anything manufactured by Sony. Those fans remain the minority. There are many many fans who don't have a particular feeling about Sony who still have doubt.

I don't dislike Sony. To me, Sony is a record label that exists to do business. Nothing evil about it. To be honest, I don't like the way Michael showed his disagreement with Sony and Motolla so publicly back in 2002. His action didn't make me a Sony hater. I, for one, never ever mentioned the Invincible episode and Motolla in my discussion on the Cascio tracks. I'm fully aware of the fact that Sony Music is run by a different executive team now. I've never mentioned the past disagreement in my discussion not becasue I want to pretend to be objective, but because I know it has nothing to do with the Cascio tracks. I do have ability to reason.

I support This Is It completely. I saw the film more than 10 times in theatre, bought the album, the DVD and the Blu-ray. I appreciate the way the This Is It project is handled.

Back to this album, how many times we need to stress that our opinions are not influenced by the Jacksons? I don't have particular feeling about the Jacksons neither. If I'm so easily to be brainwashed, why am I not brainwashed by Sony, but the Jacksons? Why am I not brainwashed by Sony to believe that the lead vocals are 100% Michael? What's in it for me to have doubt?

Angry fan who wants to pay back Motolla? Sorry, please don't include me and many people here in that catogory. Motolla is not even with Sony anymore. Why the people who have doubts are always being labelled as Sony hater, irrational fans seeking revenge? Isn't it true that the vocals on the Cascio tracks sound different enough for people to have doubt? Isn't it true there is no adequate support provided by Eddie Cascio?

Finally, I find the following quote from you quite belittling.

Another thing I noticed : many posts were more or less copies from each other... statements circulated the way pamphlets and petitions do.

Many posts are similar to each other because many people share the same opinion and idea. We quoted each other and added our two cents. Isn't it what a public forum is for? For people who share the same point of views to discuss and for people who have different to debate.

You know. I can say the same thing about the people who fully believe the vocals are 100% Michael too. I can say they are brainwashed by Sony, follow the mainstream opinion and easily swayed by others. But, I never went that far.


I second this :agree:
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
I am sorry? Holding a panel F*CK SONY is an opinion? Saying in front of people that Motolla is a devil. Accusing Motolla of harming Mariah Carey's reputation and health is just an opinion, when Michael clearly stated that Mariah Carey told him so? Encouraging people to believe that SONY kills music is just an opinion? This goes beyond a simple opinion.

As far as the law goes it wasn't a personal opinion or something that I made up - it's the law.

In United States freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment and it's a basic right. If you don't like a person you are free to say so - unless you are seeking to hurt them, advocating violent acts. Don't believe me: go to google and search for " I hate sony" then explain to me why sony isn't suing those people. Then go to amazon and search for George Bush and Hate, you'll see several books written about the "president of the United states" and how much people hate him.

So in short you might not agree with it but in US under freedom of speech it's perfectly fine to hate someone and express it.

I see your statement here as a simple excuse. Although myself I am against going to court, it is undeniable that you can always go to court to settle your problems instead of shouting out how a company destroys artists taking advantage of them. When you blame, accuse and hold someone responsible for the destruction of music and/or artists, it is enough grounds to sue and seek the reparation of damage.

a lawsuit can only happen if you have grounds and if you have proof. Simple example Joe went to court to remove executors claiming fraud, the court said he has no grounds to sue. you don't determine the "grounds to sue" the law does. Again like I said even though Michael could have been unhappy with Sony as long as they satisfied their contract with Michael he wouldn't be able to sue.

On the other hand how many duets did Teddy Riley record with Michael?

You do know that recording duets doesn't mean that you'll be in the studio at the same time? For example in Michael and Janet's duet of Scream they recorded their parts at different times and different studios. so 3T recording a duet with Michael doesn't automatically equal that they were in the studio with him.

Umm, maybe the fact that she's his mother! I hope no one ever tells you that someone else alien to the inner family knows better the voice of your children, brother or father than yourself.

that's true but you wrote including Katherine worked with Michael and knows how Michael works. I asked you what makes you think that Katherine was ever in the studio with Michael.

Now that Michael has gone, apparently the secrecy isn't necessary anymore and all of sudden they have a dozen of tracks ready to be mixed and released (without demos though!!!).

these are the unfinished demos to start with. why would they even have demos of demos?

Furthermore, if Michael was such a friend with them I could speculate and say that if there is something that Michael could do for them is to agree to release those tracks and gain out of them.

Now, contrary to the speculation my logic tells me that while Michael was alive, so many years was he friend with the family and never did they release a single song in all those years. Now that Michael has gone, the songs popped up


Let's be realistic here. When Michael met Eddie Cascio he was 3 years old. Did you expect him release songs with him when he was 3? By all accounts Michael and Eddie didn't start working since late 2007 and Michael died mid 2009. and Michael didn't release any new album between this time period. How can you for sure know that if /when he released an album he wouldn't include those songs? We have Frank Dileo, Kenny Ortega, michael's handwritten note etc that tells that Michael was planning on releasing an album. So perhaps if he hadn't died he would have released the songs with Cascio's. It's something that we cannot know for sure.

And a little tidbit when Eddie Cascio started in music business he was writing songs for Sony/ATV publishing. I'll give you 3 guesses to determine the "family friend" that used his connections in the music business to get him that job. In other words Michael was already helping him in the music industry.

http://www.drewacorn.com/2.5519/eddie-cascio-producer-student-1.845294
 

fzsky

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
104
Points
0
That's an interesting observation.

Sometimes when I get an idea, I'd spit it out too fast that I eventually mess it up. What I've posted is just a brief thought.
The basic idea is, it looks unlikely to transform from A (what we usually hear in Michael's voice) into B (what we hear in Casio tracks), but it looks easier to transform from C (what I heard in YRMW), which is related to A and is a little bit closer to B, into B.
I hope I'm making myself clear.

But then, I'm merely focusing on the vibrato issue, so...
 

love is magical

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
4,704
Points
0
Location
New Jersey, US
Stories of each song creation told by Cascio, photos, handwritten lyrics, video footage. A real reason why they don't sound like MJ.
It wouldn't mean Michael is the lead vocalist on the four songs (All I Need, KYHU, Breaking News and Monster), but hell - it would make it more believable.

I just don't get it. If he is telling the truth, why can't he provide any kind of evidence to support his claims? Explain the controversy, explain how you worked with MJ. Say that you don't have any outtakes/demos, but explain everything. Tell us how you composed each song, what MJ said when they recorded Breaking News.

HONESTY is the key.


Exactly! Of course I know a handwritten note or video footage won't prove Michael is the lead vocalist. But still, something that documented Michael's creative process. I just found it very strange that there is no support on these tracks surfacing. Absolutely nothing! As mentioned in my previous post, there are some kind of evidence that can vouch Michael's involvement in every song except the Cascio tracks.

The mysterious orgin of the Cascio tracks is alarming. The way these songs are created is so different than what Michael had done in the past.

At this point, I welcome any tangible evidence from the Cascios.
 

love is magical

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
4,704
Points
0
Location
New Jersey, US
^ A genius. A certifiable genius.

It's that one word, and it's significance, that makes Black or White so political. It seems so innocuous when you hear it. But when you screw your head back on and think A. it's a song about racism and B. it's sung by an African American, suddenly that one word becomes a BIG deal.

"BOY is that girl with you?". 'Boy'. It's the word that racists have used for generations upon generations to describe blacks. 'Boy'.

Listen to the recent Stevie Wonder song, "What the fuss?", and hear him singing about the KKK. And look at the words he uses. "Should I be drivin thru a klantown, find a restaurant*to get me some food and someone says "hey BOY, we don't serve your kind..."

And then you go back to something as seemingly innocuous as Speed Demon. Where a white policeman says to a black motorist, "pull over BOY and get your ticket..."

And then you go back further still to something like Beat It. "Don't wanna be a BOY, you wanna be a man!" Who said that? Whose famous words are those? "I am not a boy! I am a man!". Which famous civil rights activist said that? Someone Michael studied and read about. And even sampled in his music. Ten points to the first correct answer :)*

I just realized I forgot to answer this question.

My first guess is Martin Luther King, Jr.
 

MJJuniorSinceMW

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Donations
$23.00
Messages
853
Points
63
Ivy & Garden, i admire you for your strength by putting up these posts again and again!

Garden is always well balanced and open minded.

And ivy speaks from my heart. I've a little knowledge in law too and you always put on the right words, which are going through my mind.
But I'm exhausted from the stubborn expressions made here.

Also Alec made a point above which could be base for reasonable discussion.
I agree, what you said, would help indeed. But maybe there will be something like that.

By the way:
It would be interesting to know if akon or lenny could provide some proof, that they were in studio, recording with Mike. If they were asked to come forward with something.
Just a thought...
 

samhabib

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,652
Points
0
If you see Michael singing this in the Cascio studio you would still not believe it's him? Wow. That's stuborness to the highest degree. Suit yourself.

Or 'conviction' to the highest degree. I know Michael Jackson's voice better than my own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top