Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

ivy said:
I'm sure many people have the intelligence to know the difference between a lead vocal and an ad-lib.



honestly I enjoy this oxymoron. the claim that they did such a crappy job when they were faking the songs but yet no one can prove it. a perfect crime achieved by an inferior act.



answer : the difference between guide vocals and a finished songs. didn't Michael always record the adlibs the last? so why do you expect him to record them when they were just starting to work on the songs?
Click to expand...
.

But it can be proven. Just listen to the latest leaks. Blantantly not Michael. He never sounded like that in guide vocals, demos or otherwise. And these clearly aren't guide vocals. He is singing full out.The fact that it hasn't been proven legally is a whole different matter. And lets turn it round. Why has no one proven they are Michael? There is not one piece of evidence that Mj recorded these songs. Show me one Michael Jackson guide vocal or demo where he sounds remotely like the Cascio vocalist.
 
If I were to fake MJ songs using and impersonator, I would still choose to use MJ adlibs to "Michael them up" like Stella said. Seems reasonable. Because everybody knows that a voice is not absolutely identical to another.
 
ivy said:
I'm sure many people have the intelligence to know the difference between a lead vocal and an ad-lib.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? There has been almost as much debate over ad-libs in this thread as the voices. A lot of them nobody even knows where they're from! They think it's unreleased songs. So that's just wrong. I'm sure people have listened through the Cascio songs and heard ad-libs and copy-and-pastes they thought were truly a part of the song, like in Monster for example where the sentences are made up of chopped Invincible vocals.
 
ivy said:
honestly I enjoy this oxymoron. the claim that they did such a crappy job when they were faking the songs but yet no one can prove it. a perfect crime achieved by an inferior act.
Click to expand...
How is this an oxymoron? It's not as if all sloppily committed crimes have led to rightful convictions.

answer : the difference between guide vocals and a finished songs. didn't Michael always record the adlibs the last? so why do you expect him to record them when they were just starting to work on the songs?
Click to expand...
People that worked with him have said that he recorded vocals in general last. So why would he record full vocals (verses and choruses all seem to be complete) for 12 songs if they only just started working on them, as you state?

When it comes to ad-libs: almost all the demos that I can think of now, from all kinds of different eras, contain several ad-libs - many times even more so than the final record, either because he seems to be just trying different things out, or because the lyrics were incomplete and he just comes up with something to fill the empty spots. Why would it be any different for these 12 songs?
 
Last edited:
Without even talking about ad-libs at all, I have a simple straightforward question:

If MJ sang those songs, why do we have copy-pasted words (from Invincible and History) in the middle of the sentences in every single Cascio track? Did MJ all of sudden forget to sing one word in the middle o the sentence in each Cascio song?
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Without even talking about ad-libs at all, I have a simple straightforward question:

If MJ sang those songs, why do we have copy-pasted words (from Invincible and History) in the middle of the sentences in every single Cascio track? Did MJ all of sudden forget to sing one word in the middle o the sentence in each Cascio song?
Click to expand...

Because they give it a "special touch".
 
I give you this


Now imagine Michael has died after recording this and you want to finish it as a full and complete song to release it at a posthumous album. How are you going to do it? Especially what are you going to do about the ramblings in the middle? How are you going to deal with the low volume vocals at the start? I personally love the nose sniffling noise at 1:32 :p


@pentum - why are you asking me about stolen and leaked material on a public platform? Haven't you learned anything?
 
Uuuh, Ivy, so what? Who hasn't listened to leaked MJ material? They have been available for streaming, youtube, etc.
 
ivy said:
I give you this


Now imagine Michael has died after recording this and you want to finish it as a full and complete song to release it at a posthumous album. How are you going to do it? Especially what are you going to do about the ramblings in the middle? How are you going to deal with the low volume vocals at the start? I personally love the nose sniffling noise at 1:32 :p


@pentum - why are you asking me about stolen and leaked material on a public platform? Haven't you learned anything?
Click to expand...

1) You hear MJ talking. Do you hear him on any Cascio so,ng talking?

2) Demo or not, this still sounds MJ's voice undoubtedly.

3) Did you buy this demo? Was it stolen? Has it leaked? How did it leak? So between this or the Cascio leaked tracks I don't see the difference.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
3) Did you buy this demo? Was it stolen? Has it leaked? How did it leak? So between this or the Cascio leaked tracks I don't see the difference.
Click to expand...

LOL

Thriller [Extra Tracks, Original Recording Remastered]
Released 2001
13. Billie Jean (Home Demo From 1981)

for the rest hola at me when you answer my questions, I'm done for the day
 
ivy said:
LOL

Thriller [Extra Tracks, Original Recording Remastered]
Released 2001
13. Billie Jean (Home Demo From 1981)

for the rest hola at me when you answer my questions, I'm done for the day
Click to expand...

So I guess you have the authorization to stream it or to publicly broadcast the supposedly bought material. LOL
 
bumper just don't. there's no comparison between a released material and a stolen material and you know it.

anyway I'm done as I said. This has turned into meaningless semantics with no real answers or discussion.

enjoy your night.
 
ivy said:
bumper just don't. there's no comparison between a released material and a stolen material and you know it.
Click to expand...

Does it say on your bought material that you have the clear authorization to stream or broadcast publicly the purchased songs or does it say that it is prohibited by the law. The question is very simple.
 
Bumper

A copyright infringement for a song in US courts have been determined to be maximum at $2,250 fee. RIAA has settled as low as $100 per song - for downloading songs without buying. For the case of uploading songs to youtube most of the time they simply do a DMCA request to take down songs with no punishment.

Stolen songs as we all know carry the risk of a prison sentence. Birchey was sentenced to 6 months in prison turned to probation for a year. Stolen materials also carry similar risks.

I know that you like to disagree with me just for the sake of it or just because you are in a kind of an auto pilot and you feel like you have to disagree with me in regards to anything I say. But please let's be rational and realize that a simple copyright infringement and a stolen materials aren't the same thing.

again this has turned to a meaningless semantics. you asked a question, I gave you an answer and you are focusing on trying to equal stolen and leaked songs to officially released songs on youtube rather than giving an opinion or answer to the main topic. such a waste of time.
 
Birchey was sentenced due to accessing the server and downliading material.

It's really different compared to have listened to already leaked material online, which by the way, millions of people do every day.
 
ivy said:
Bumper

A copyright infringement for a song in US courts have been determined to be maximum at $2,250 fee. RIAA has settled as low as $100 per song - for downloading songs without buying. For the case of uploading songs to youtube most of the time they simply do a DMCA request to take down songs with no punishment.

Stolen songs as we all know carry the risk of a prison sentence. Birchey was sentenced to 6 months in prison turned to probation for a year. Stolen materials also carry similar risks.

I know that you like to disagree with me just for the sake of it or just because you are in a kind of an auto pilot and you feel like you have to disagree with me in regards to anything I say. But please let's be rational and realize that a simple copyright infringement and a stolen materials aren't the same thing.

again this has turned to a meaningless semantics. you asked a question, I gave you an answer and you are focusing on trying to equal stolen and leaked songs to officially released songs on youtube rather than giving an opinion or answer to the main topic. such a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Will you excuse me for not having time to pay attention to your accusations. I simply try to follow your logic. You say you don't wanna listen to the leaked material, cuz it's unlawful. Fine. I didn't say anything against that.

Now at the same time you possess a CD or a file on which it is clearly stated that it cannot be publicly broadcast without legal authorization, yet you do it.

Sorry, but for me this is neither rational nor logical.

You know very well that when you upload or stream on youtube there are softwares that can download the youtube video and audio and therefore illegally copy the song, the song that you don't seem to bother to publicly post, yet lecturing people how it is illegal to listen to other streamed songs.

Stolen or not, that's not the point. The point is: it's illegal to stream them.
 
I have a few straightforward questions and statements to all the believers, if you care to answer.
They've all been asked many times before, but I'm just waiting to see the answers.

* Why do the Cascio tracks require sampled ad-libs when each song has more than enough ad-libs to be considered finished?
* Why did Michael suddenly abandon his usual vocal and studio tricks? (i.e., snapping his fingers, vocal gasps.) And the "guide vocal" answer doesn't work here. Listen to Beautiful Girl, In the Back, or any other song with guide vocals. It's all there.
* Why does each song reference/sound similar to/directly sample a song Michael's done in the past? (i.e., Black Widow and D.S./Morphine, Water and Heaven Can Wait, Keep Your Head Up and Keep the Faith, etc.) Michael's reused lyrics and ad-libs and things of the sorts, but never to this extent. And even if someone can explain this, why would he do it on these twelve songs and not on any others recorded around the time?
* Why is the vocal processing excuse still believed? None of the Cascio tracks have any vocal processing on them; Stay, All I Need and Fall in Love are two good examples of this. Any vocal processing would be much more noticeable.
* Why did Jason Malachi himself say, "I cannot confirm or deny anything at this time" when he was personally asked about the songs? The only reason he would be barred from speaking about the tracks is if he was involved in them in some way.
* Why has Eddie Cascio failed to provide any proof/evidence that these songs are in fact Michael Jackson?
 
oh okay there's a total lack of understanding here.

1. I did not talk or lecture about it's being illegal to listen to leaked songs. I don't care what other people do.

2. I said "why are you asking me about stolen and leaked material on a public platform? Haven't you learned anything?". If you didn't understand what I meant (which apparent that you didn't) let me spell it out in a simple way I will never mention to listening or having songs that are leaked and stolen on a public platform. If you ask me if I listened to any of the leaked songs my standard answer will be "no". capiche? Do I think it's stupid to admit to such things on a public platform that is most probably being read by the actual owners of the stolen songs? Yes. Especially knowing how Birchey initially got into trouble. I do have every reason to believe leaks and spreading links still carry legal dangers. But I did not lecture anyone about not listening or claiming it's illegal or wrong to do. Honestly I don't care if people listen to the songs or if they are stupid enough to admit that they have the songs on a public platform, it's not my problem. You just won't see me doing that.

3. I did not upload the Billie Jean demo. I share no risk as I did not violate the copyright and as I'm not spreading a stolen/leaked material.

4. Regardless, level of illegality is not comparable (as I mentioned before).

Are we done with this stupid exchange?
 
Ok Ivy, let me put it differently. Have you ever heard the song Escape?

My aim is not to attack you Ivy. I am simply wondering how can anyone give logical arguments in favor or against Cascio songs without having heard what we are talking about. Copy pastes blatantly prove to what extent those songs have been fabricated without any kind of originality.
 
Last edited:
Reading between the lines is not enough. Who heard what and how much is not known when reading between the lines.
 
ivy said:
I give you this


Now imagine Michael has died after recording this and you want to finish it as a full and complete song to release it at a posthumous album. How are you going to do it? Especially what are you going to do about the ramblings in the middle? How are you going to deal with the low volume vocals at the start? I personally love the nose sniffling noise at 1:32 :p
Click to expand...
But the Cascio songs are not comparable to this demo at all: they feature complete lyrics (and there are no repeated verses as in Hollywood Tonight, for instance). Also, even this very early demo is still full of ad-libs, so it contradicts your earlier argument that MJ would record those last and that that's why so many ad-libs in the Cascio tracks are copy/pasted from earlier tracks.
 
SoCav said:
Also, even this very early demo is still full of ad-libs, so it contradicts your earlier argument that MJ would record those last and that that's why so many ad-libs in the Cascio tracks are copy/pasted from earlier tracks.
Click to expand...
78248947_nodding_gif.gif
 
StellaJackson said:
But really, it doesn't matter anymore. I'm glad that Fall In Love, All Right etc have leaked because now people can hear it for themselves. There is simply no defence anymore. They sound so unlike him that it just becomes a joke to try and say they are Michael.
Click to expand...

Where did All Right leak?
 
We might be getting Dark Lady, H2O, Rock Tonight and Monster from MP and Brad soon... Will be a good way to clean the Cascio songs out seeing as they have similar titles.
 
Lol, this thread is like...I don't even know. There ARE some Jason ad-libs in these songs where he tries his Michael impersonation, then it's followed by more copy & paste. They definitely used the copy & paste method more than they did Jason himself on ad-libs, but I think it was because after hearing the few that do exist on each song, that's something he just couldn't duplicate.
 
there's a lot of things that people mistake for copy and pastes though... "Jason" just suddenly puts grit on a note but it's not copy and paste.

For example in Water:
"Feeling like your love is DAN-gerous"
"BABY it's you"
"Just HOLD me KISS me TOUCH me" sounds chopped up but although some ppl suspected the "HOLD" was from WYBT, it's not.
 
Pentum is right, the fact that almost no one care about these leaks gives you a hint about the number of believers and doubters :girl_whistle:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top