"Breaking News" All General Discussion Here [Merged]

What do You Think Now???

  • Now im Sure Its Michael!!!

    Votes: 89 21.4%
  • I Still Think its Not him!!!

    Votes: 223 53.7%
  • I now think that its Michael, but still have my doubts!!

    Votes: 24 5.8%
  • Im Confused!!!!

    Votes: 79 19.0%

  • Total voters
    415
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

If there is a announcement from the estate, do you guys reckon it will be New York time or LA time?
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Advanced voice and pitch correction software..for example Auto-Tune and Melodyne allows you to change the pitch, timing, phrasing (to a certain extent if you know what you are doing)...also you can cut up vocals to the finest degree and do all those neat little tricks that i just mentioned as if they were individual files.

The imposters vocal speed and velocity are also telling points. Michael can not only sing pitch perfect but can also pronounce and deliver with accuracy, speed and varying vocal volume to add emotion to words or even a syabble. With rough demos he likes to get the musical idea out clean and often mumbles or hums lyrics. If the full lyrics are down, Michael can nail the vocals with one take.

Proof of this is reports from Bill Bottrell stating that the take for 'Black Or White' was a one or two take job and most the hassle was with the instrumentation and overall production. 'Fall Again' demo was one take.
Childhood and Smile were recorded with live orchestration which is almost imposssible to do....you have to have the phrasing and timing so tight, most singers are hopeless without a drum or rhythm track behind them.


No one is better at the mic than mike.

May I add myself on this one.
I'm gonna make it very extensive and detailed so that you all can understand this perfectly:



Even though I haven't studied anywhere particularly, I think I can help here. I'm an artist myself (a musician), I don't do POP music like Michael did. I'm a Dancehall Reggae (with some RnB too) artist. I spend most of my time at recording studios, either recording my songs or mixing/mastering my tracks with producers and engineers.

I've read a lot of misleading information on the boards (not only here, actually I've been on a lot of MJ dedicated forums lately, but particularly on MJHideout). A lot of people seem to think Auto-Tune is a "person-exchanger" (does that even exist?) effect. There are two ways of using Auto-Tune, and neither can make you sound like a whole different person. The way you can use Auto-tune for (the plugin was actually concived to be use this way) is to correct vocals singing out of tune (hence, out-of-tune auto-tune), minor flaws and defects of vocal takes which would have been amazing otherwise (I mean, if there hadn't been any performance issues at the moment of recording). You may be wondering: How can a vocal recording be amazing if there are certain parts out of key? Well, the energy might be perfect, the dictation and pronnunciation might be spot on, even the intention the artist put when he/she sung it can be great. And sometimes you can't reproduce that SAME EXACT take twice, so there's nothing left to do but to use techonlogy to get it right, and honestly I don't think there's anything wrong with it. BELIEVE ME, most of your favourite artists (of ANY genre) and most of your favourite songs (of ANY genre) wouldnt exist if it wasnt for technology and auto-tune used the right way.

The other way of using Auto-Tune is actually... abusing of it. When you take the Plugin's setting to an extreme, giving a certain Scale, it'll robotize the sound, and make it all jumpy, like you can appreciate in most RnB/Hip-Hop songs lately. The so called T-Pain effect.

As "Daniel.San" said on his post, there's NO plugin, no editing possible, to change the Vocal Registry, and/or the Pronnunciation of a human being. You CAN make a voice sounds bassier, or alter the pitch to go higher or lower, you can do a lot of things, but what you can't do is make it sound like a different human being.
That's why certain impersonators (Youtube for Marcus Joseph) sing ALMOST, JUST LIKE, Michael Jackson when they perform one of Michael's songs, but they CAN NOT achieve the same amount of perfection and similarity when they have to sing something of their own production or from some other artist besides MJ.

Please, don't automatically assign any strange side effects to technology or to editing technics, or plugins. Up until now, there are still limits as to where a human being can go with technology, and what they can do with it. Up until now, we cannot sound exactly like somebody else. So, if you hear someone that 'sounds like.......' but you still hear differences, even if they're tini tiny differences, then TRUST your ears, they won't lie to you, but Sony will.


These are constructive comments folks. No bashing here, just pure debatable arguments based on experience! Thanks guys and I hope this whole thread turns into somethibg more like this than primitively jumping at each other's neck for no obvious reason.
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Ok, PLEASE PLEASE hear me out on this.....I've been tossing and turning and wondering what the hell has been going on...I just don't see why a record company would sabotage everything just to release a fake song(s)...I am hearing something different on the record now when I listen on mj.com....I mean, I just don't know what else to think...So please, spare me the negativity, and discuss constructively :angel:

This sorta just flowed out of me....

Ok, here is my theory....What I am hearing now on MJ.com is NOT what I heard the first time...I'm thinking Sony went in there and did one of two things: made the track clearer somehow so we can hear MJ's vocals more clearly (they did this because of the fans' uproar and complaints) OR...they actually put another version up..one that sounds more like him...LIke this was planned this way all along...'it's good publicity' is what they said (according to that article, so who knows how true it is) but it goes along with us thinking that they're sitting back, watching this unfold, and they're thinking this is great publicity...

with regards to Teddy Riley, maybe he IS telling the truth, but is not happy about it, remember he said, 'the truth will come out later in the week'...well, the TRUTH possibly is, this song uses Michael's vocals with obvious background vocals of someone else (we're not used to this, as MIchael pretty much did ALL of his own backing vocals on his songs)..so now Teddy is disappointed because of what Sony wanted to pull.....a publicity stunt, and he's disappointed that they decided to go that route....Because clearly, it could hurt sales, and Michael's legacy, possibly....

Again, I'm saying this because after listening to the song late last night again, I feel that I am physically hearing something more clearly now, or something different...This is all so confusing still...

in ssaying this, I still don't think they should use the Cascio tracks if they all have a result like this...Either way, even if people do believe it's some of Michael in there, the song is tarnished because of what it represents now...so it's better to not even use it (or other such tracks) on the album....
 
Re: The Estate NEEDS to see this: REAL evidence of the Cascio tracks being fake!!!

Listening to the acapella of Breaking News you can hear an INSANE amount of cut and pasting during the last section of the song. this really comes as no surprise.
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Ok, PLEASE PLEASE hear me out on this.....I've been tossing and turning and wondering what the hell has been going on...I just don't see why a record company would sabotage everything just to release a fake song(s)...I am hearing something different on the record now when I listen on mj.com....I mean, I just don't know what else to think...So please, spare me the negativity, and discuss constructively :angel:

This sorta just flowed out of me....

Ok, here is my theory....What I am hearing now on MJ.com is NOT what I heard the first time...I'm thinking Sony went in there and did one of two things: made the track clearer somehow so we can hear MJ's vocals more clearly (they did this because of the fans' uproar and complaints) OR...they actually put another version up..one that sounds more like him...LIke this was planned this way all along...'it's good publicity' is what they said (according to that article, so who knows how true it is) but it goes along with us thinking that they're sitting back, watching this unfold, and they're thinking this is great publicity...

with regards to Teddy Riley, maybe he IS telling the truth, but is not happy about it, remember he said, 'the truth will come out later in the week'...well, the TRUTH possibly is, this song uses Michael's vocals with obvious background vocals of someone else (we're not used to this, as MIchael pretty much did ALL of his own backing vocals on his songs)..so now Teddy is disappointed because of what Sony wanted to pull.....a publicity stunt, and he's disappointed that they decided to go that route....Because clearly, it could hurt sales, and Michael's legacy, possibly....

Again, I'm saying this because after listening to the song late last night again, I feel that I am physically hearing something more clearly now, or something different...This is all so confusing still...

in ssaying this, I still don't think they should use the Cascio tracks if they all have a result like this...Either way, even if people do believe it's some of Michael in there, the song is tarnished because of what it represents now...so it's better to not even use it (or other such tracks) on the album....

Yes..this seems like a plausible theory Arklove...I agree,I think, regardless if these are Michael's vocals or not, any Cascio tracks have got to be removed, these songs do have a tainted feel after everything that's happened..This can still work out..I just hope the correct and proper things are done and said to fix this whole issue..
 
Hi

l have just checked that the track it's not on the book ,for the record it's one of the book that l believe in.

l found only "Breaking free" :

Short poem written by Michael – included in his book of poems and
reflections, Dancing The Dream, published in 1992.


What do you think?
 
Re: long live fake jackson street.

m26uk
you're sorta spamming the forums with your threads as you post so many lol


I couldn't agree more..........

This could easily be posted on one of the other threads about Breaking News
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Ok, PLEASE PLEASE hear me out on this.....I've been tossing and turning and wondering what the hell has been going on...I just don't see why a record company would sabotage everything just to release a fake song(s)...I am hearing something different on the record now when I listen on mj.com....I mean, I just don't know what else to think...So please, spare me the negativity, and discuss constructively :angel:

This sorta just flowed out of me....

Ok, here is my theory....What I am hearing now on MJ.com is NOT what I heard the first time...I'm thinking Sony went in there and did one of two things: made the track clearer somehow so we can hear MJ's vocals more clearly (they did this because of the fans' uproar and complaints) OR...they actually put another version up..one that sounds more like him...LIke this was planned this way all along...'it's good publicity' is what they said (according to that article, so who knows how true it is) but it goes along with us thinking that they're sitting back, watching this unfold, and they're thinking this is great publicity...

with regards to Teddy Riley, maybe he IS telling the truth, but is not happy about it, remember he said, 'the truth will come out later in the week'...well, the TRUTH possibly is, this song uses Michael's vocals with obvious background vocals of someone else (we're not used to this, as MIchael pretty much did ALL of his own backing vocals on his songs)..so now Teddy is disappointed because of what Sony wanted to pull.....a publicity stunt, and he's disappointed that they decided to go that route....Because clearly, it could hurt sales, and Michael's legacy, possibly....

Again, I'm saying this because after listening to the song late last night again, I feel that I am physically hearing something more clearly now, or something different...This is all so confusing still...

in ssaying this, I still don't think they should use the Cascio tracks if they all have a result like this...Either way, even if people do believe it's some of Michael in there, the song is tarnished because of what it represents now...so it's better to not even use it (or other such tracks) on the album....
What article? :blink:
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

How is Cascio pronounced?
 
mehdiblanket;3064484 said:
Hi

l have just checked that the track it's not on the book ,for the record it's one of the book that l believe in.

l found only "Breaking free" :

Short poem written by Michael – included in his book of poems and
reflections, Dancing The Dream, published in 1992.


What do you think?

I think that "Breaking News" was written and recorded by Michael in 2007. When was your book published? :doh:
 
Re: For The Record there is no "Breaking news"

They released a 2nd edition after Michael's passing in 2009. I need to order it ASAP, it's still rather expensive though.

=[
 
Has Breaking News been registered in BMI?

Just a quick question, if somebody knows I would appreciate it. Thanks.
 
Re: For The Record there is no "Breaking news"

I've got the newest edition of the book..........and there is no mention Breaking News.......

And so far, I have not found anything to do with Cascios.........



But that really means nothing.....................

There could be about 50 unreleased songs that only a handful of people know about!!!!!!!
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Ok, here is my theory....What I am hearing now on MJ.com is NOT what I heard the first time...I'm thinking Sony went in there and did one of two things: made the track clearer somehow so we can hear MJ's vocals more clearly (they did this because of the fans' uproar and complaints) OR...they actually put another version up..one that sounds more like him...

I was beginning to think I was going crazy...

The version on the michaeljackson.com I'm sure is different...it just sounds...better... :S
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

I think Cascio should just stick to making watches and calculators :)
 
Re: The Estate NEEDS to see this: REAL evidence of the Cascio tracks being fake!!!

It's morally wrong.
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Random thought. If the streaming version of Breaking News is really the final version, why did they leave the snort in it?
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Random thought. If the streaming version of Breaking News is really the final version, why did they leave the snort in it?

Because Sony is nothing but a dumb.
 
Re: The Estate NEEDS to see this: REAL evidence of the Cascio tracks being fake!!!

and at the end of Speechless you hear the part at the end of You Are Not Alone... copy and pasted and pitch changed. lol
 
Re: The Estate NEEDS to see this: REAL evidence of the Cascio tracks being fake!!!

wrong on SO MANY LEVELS
 
Re: "Breaking News" All Discussion Here [Merged]

Random thought. If the streaming version of Breaking News is really the final version, why did they leave the snort in it?

There's a snort? LOL. I didn't hear it. I'm going to go listen to it again. In case I can't find it, do you know when it happens?
 
Re: The Estate NEEDS to see this: REAL evidence of the Cascio tracks being fake!!!

I can hear parts of "We are here t save the world" from Captain eo
 
The Dodgy Acapella

i listened to the acapella (the one with no music at all)
and the bit when he says ''you keep on breaking the news)
after the second chorus it sounds like they pieced it up & added the word KEPP from michaels real vocals possibly from HIStory when he sings ''keep moving no higher ground''
go have a listen see what ya think
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top