Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson feat. 50 cent - MONSTER - its the real deal says 50 -READ!

I'd just like to state that none of us are claiming to have any "concrete proof" of these tracks not being MJ.

But it doesn't really matter, some things can't be proved. I'm just going by what I'm hearing, and it's just not MJ, unfortunately.
 
mj_insane said:
no we wont keep our opinions to ourselves ! We have a right of freedom of speech , and we are defending MJs legacy !

its an absolute outrage , and NO , THIS IS NOT HIS PROJECT , its a money making scam . Michael would in NO WAY SUPPORT THIS , i bet he is turning in his grave .

myself , and millions of other fans , know MJ's voice , NO MATTER WHAT . Doesnt matter what effects they use , we know his voice when we hear it . Just listen to tracks such as childhood and compare that voice with Keep Your Head Up - they are TOTALLY DIFFERENT .

MY GOD , PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING .

"Just because you read it in a magazine , or see it on a tv screen dont make it factual"
Click to expand...

I have been a fan my hole life .. I know michaels voice... if u are not hearing it on for example keep yr head up or monster , seriouslty u cant be a fan of his ... u should know this is mjs voice.
 
Strange, I thought waveform analysis proved that it was him...
 
cgrimberg said:
I have been a fan my hole life .. I know michaels voice... if u are not hearing it on for example keep yr head up or monster , seriouslty u cant be a fan of his ... u should know this is mjs voice.
Click to expand...

I am seriously having to bite my tongue.
 
mj_insane said:
IF YOU READ MY POST A LITTLE MORE CARFULLY , I CLEALY STATED THAT NO MATTER WHAT EFFECT IS USED ON MJ'S VOICE , HARDCORE FANS KNOW HIS VOICE NO MATTER WHAT .

Funny , we not had to critisize another day , blue gangsta or DYKWYCA . Not one bit , because we know MJs voice .

Little odd , dont u think ???
Click to expand...

I think that this problem can be repeated on a lot of MJ tracks as soon as there are doubts...

for example : a lot of fans were complaining about MJ's voice who have changed on Invincible...

Imagine if he was dead in 2000 just before the release of Invincible ? What would fans have said ?
 
mj_insane said:
IF YOU READ MY POST A LITTLE MORE CARFULLY , I CLEALY STATED THAT NO MATTER WHAT EFFECT IS USED ON MJ'S VOICE , HARDCORE FANS KNOW HIS VOICE NO MATTER WHAT .

Funny , we not had to critisize another day , blue gangsta or DYKWYCA . Not one bit , because we know MJs voice .

Little odd , dont u think ???
Click to expand...
thats because nobody came out two days before those songs leaked and said "hey MJ fans, look out for a couple of songs titled Another day, Blue Gangster, and DYKWYCA because those three songs feature FAKE vocals" lol like really people...
 
Jesta said:
Strange, I thought waveform analysis proved that it was him...
Click to expand...

Proof is irrefutable. It's being refuted. Where's the analysis? Approach? Assumptions? Tools used? Has a baseline been established?
 
kopwatcher said:
Do mine, and thousands of other fans' ears count?
Click to expand...

No. Because
- fans are not experts
- it's just personal opinions
- fans are biased
- there are also fans with opposite opinions

kopwatcher said:
The fact that we are likely to be on the losing side has not escaped me. Especially after the testimony of other respected figures in the industry.
Click to expand...

I'll give you a strategy

-Sue them for consumer fraud with a good argument that the vocals are fake (meaning more proof than personal subjective statement of "I'm a MJ fan for 20-25 years and I know his voice", like some sort of comparative analysis).
-They will most probably produce the expert reports to get the case thrown out.
-Argue that Sony/estate has the opportunity, means and all to gain from falsifying the expert records and request the court to order an independent analysis of the vocals.
-If the court ordered analysis comes as "Not Michael" you win.
-If it turns out to be Michael, be prepared with Sony/Estate/Cascio's demand their lawyer costs from you.
 
kopwatcher said:
Unfortunately easier said than done!

Actually, out of interest, does anyone know if the "coalition" of fan clubs is intending to sue when it's released?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Any person who were to buy an album with "fake" tracks on it would have legal ground to sue.

Check out http://www.owlinvestigations.com/ -- they offer forensic voice analysis services. Just verified that a voicemail that was supposedly Britney Spears was altered.

Everyone goes on and on about how it's not Michael, yet won't step up and take any action. That, to me, proves even more than the songs are real and that a lot of people are stirring up drama for drama's sake.

Sad that Michael's album sales will suffer at the hand of some of his own fans.
 
babykinsilk05 said:
thats because nobody came out two days before those songs leaked and said "hey MJ fans, look out for a couple of songs titled Another day, Blue Gangster, and DYKWYCA because those three songs feature FAKE vocals" lol like really people...
Click to expand...

THANK YOU!!! That's what I've been trying to say. I think this is largely psychological in most people. They have no reason to doubt the other leaked songs, only the Cascio tracks because it was brought to their attention that it's considered fake by the Jackson brothers.
 
Jesta said:
THANK YOU!!! That's what I've been trying to say. I think this is largely psychological in most people. They have no reason to doubt the other leaked songs, only the Cascio tracks because it was brought to their attention that it's considered fake by the Jackson brothers.
Click to expand...

edited .
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
No. Because
- fans are not experts
- it's just personal opinions
- fans are biased
- there are also fans with opposite opinions

I'll give you a strategy

-Sue them for consumer fraud with a good argument that the vocals are fake (meaning more proof than personal subjective statement of "I'm a MJ fan for 20-25 years and I know his voice", like some sort of comparative analysis).
-They will most probably produce the expert reports to get the case thrown out.
-Argue that Sony/estate has the opportunity, means and all to gain from falsifying the expert records and request the court to order an independent analysis of the vocals.
-If the court ordered analysis comes as "Not Michael" you win.
-If it turns out to be Michael, be prepared with Sony/Estate/Cascio's demand their lawyer costs from you.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Now I need lots and lots of money; money that is not necessarily guaranteed to be paid back :)
 
Jesta said:
THANK YOU!!! That's what I've been trying to say. I think this is largely psychological in most people. They have no reason to doubt the other leaked songs, only the Cascio tracks because it was brought to their attention that it's considered fake by the Jackson brothers.
Click to expand...
OR...OR...OR...maybe, just MAYBE it's nothing to do what that, and more about how the Cascio songs in particular simply don't sound like MJ?

Sure, there might be some who are letting the "Cascio" label affect their judgement...but I'd say that's only about 2% of the doubters.
 
What I'm saying is from that moment on, we were introduced to the concept of a fake MJ song, so when we listened to "Breaking News", that stuck in our mind.

Fact is, unless there's serious evidence that it's not him, I'm siding with the Estate, because they've had tests done, and 6 well respected musical figures who actually WORKED with MJ and were in recording studios with him also say it's him.

EDIT: Maybe that's because.... IT'S A DEMO!!!!! We can't expect a perfect MJ voice anymore!!! He can't re-record vocals to finish a song, can he? They do the best with what they had. Are you saying that the Mayor in "Ghosts" sounds like classic MJ?
 
kopwatcher said:
Proof is irrefutable. It's being refuted. Where's the analysis? Approach? Assumptions? Tools used? Has a baseline been established?
Click to expand...

The only way people will get to see all those things is in front of a judge. "The public (opinion)" is not a courtroom. And people can (and probably have to) get their own audio experts as well. Sony and the estate don't owe anything to anyone and in my opinion won't just release this stuff to the public or anyone else without being forced to do so.
 
kopwatcher said:
Thank you. Now I need lots and lots of money; money that is not necessarily guaranteed to be paid back :)
Click to expand...

all you need is enough money to initially hire a lawyer if you are sure that you'll win. (the other side will be required to cover all the legal costs if you win).
 
Jesta said:
What I'm saying is from that moment on, we were introduced to the concept of a fake MJ song, so when we listened to "Breaking News", that stuck in our mind.

EDIT: Maybe that's because.... IT'S A DEMO!!!!! We can't expect a perfect MJ voice anymore!!!
Click to expand...
Seriously, no. You're looking way too far into it. There's no "psychological" crap influencing us. We're able to form our own opinions, yes, without this "psychological" doubt placed upon us with Breaking News. We've heard loads of demos already, and even MJ singing live literally days before he passed away, it's as raw as you can get really, and it doesn't sound like these "controversial" tracks at all.

Also, this "sue blah blah" to show that you're taking action is really quite sad. Nobody wants to pursue legal action and waste money on something like this. It's ridiculous that we're expected to do something so drastic to be taken seriously.
 
ivy said:
all you need is enough money to initially hire a lawyer if you are sure that you'll win. (the other side will be required to cover all the legal costs if you win).
Click to expand...

...and therein lies the rub. No one can be sure they'll win, especially against the likes of a multi-billion dollar corporation like Sony. Even MJ was told he wasn't sure to win in '93, despite the lack of evidence. I don't have that kind of disposable income. Does that mean I lose the privilege to express an opinion in a non-offensive way?
 
So you're saying that everyone that knew about the Jacksons' point of view didn't think about the song possibly being fake when first listening to "Breaking News"? I really doubt that.

EDIT: True, but in "This Is It" he sounds as same as I hear him in the Cascio songs. Well, in some songs at least.
 
Jesta said:
So you're saying that everyone that knew about the Jacksons' point of view didn't think about the song possibly being fake when first listening to "Breaking News"? I really doubt that.
Click to expand...

This has been discussed to death. If you think people were "brainwashed" or influenced by The Jacksons, then you are free to think that. I didn't let that factor into my opinion for the mere fact I didn't even know if the Jacksons had even said such a thing. It was typical tabloid stuff, the kind of story that could easily be made up. Hundreds of fans had the same immediate reaction to these songs, you can't tell me they were all influenced by some tabloid or gossip article.
 
Jesta said:
Are you saying that the Mayor in "Ghosts" sounds like classic MJ?
Click to expand...

No, but he was playing a character in Ghosts.

These are Michael Jackson songs, I can honestly see him trying to make himself sound so different. He might play round with his voice a bit like 2000 Watts, but I cant see him altering his voice to the point where so many of us doubt its actually him.

The demo theory has allways been a bit silly. We have heard demo's from him before. Fall Again for example. Did he sound different in Fall Again? No.
 
I'm not saying people were brainwashed, I'm saying that the thought of a fake MJ song was made available days before one of the tracks called into question was released. I think quite a few people at least thought "Isn't this a track someone said was fake?" or something along those lines.
 
kopwatcher said:
Does that mean I lose the privilege to express an opinion in a non-offensive way?
Click to expand...

who said you cannot express your opinions? I definitely didn't.

I wrote the legal info for the comment of "they are getting away with it" . If anyone feels like "they are getting away with anything", they can take legal action. My point is as simple as that.

Otherwise people should stick to writing their "opinions" and not make them sound like "factual".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top