Michael - The Great Album Debate

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

How can anyone explain what has happened if it ISN'T an attempt to sabotage his legacy??? John Branca comes back into Michael Jackson's life. Days later Michael Jackson dies. John Branca takes the reins of Michael's Estate, years after Michael famously sacked him and asked him to NEVER represent him in any capacity ever again before having his activities investigated. Two days after Michael's death, songs are registered in his name that we now know sound nothing like ANY previous Michael Jackson songs that we've ever heard.

The VISIONS DVD set is released complete with square boxes around most of the videos - even though Michael hired, out of his own pocket, film directors to record the films on 35mm tape. With no Dolby sound options - even though Michael paid for that expense from his own pocket. I mean... why do the videos have black boxes on the iPhone?!?! Anyone want to test this? Log onto iTunes with your phone. Go to videos. Preview the Thriller video from the VISIONS collection... Why is there a black box all around the video?!?

You can't make a mistake like that. That HAS to be deliberate.

You then see what happened with the Breaking News leak - previewing the first few seconds without vocals. And then we hear the song and it sounds like no other Michael Jackson that we've ever heard.

Then Teddy Riley's public breakdown. The Cascio's no-show of evidence on Oprah. Friedman's desperation to prove the vocals are legit. Etc, etc.

Those ain't mistakes. That's a deliberate and willful act of sabotage. Major companies don't **** up to that degree unless they're doing it on purpose!

Good post..and your stating facts here...but I'm sure some people will attempt to rationalize everything you've stated.

Like "Maybe they put black boxes around them on purpose? They know what they are doing." :smilerolleyes:
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Record companies hardly do anything right unless it's handled by someone who really truly cares.

With Michael gone, the perfectionism lost for the most part, they're probably going to take a lot of shortcuts from now on.
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Rightttt, so Sony just dropped $250 mill for nothing, they want to throw away that money.

when there turnover runs into the billions evidently they did. They will make that back, even with mediocre sales. The estate supposedly chose these songs anyway, and they were not at all acting in Michael's interests, it's appauling, he'd be mortified if he had to see this. Unlike sony, they don't have other acts to consider, it's just attrocious.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Rightttt, so Sony just dropped $250 mill for nothing, they want to throw away that money.

Investing in Michael Jackson after 2009 is probably the safest investment a record label can ever make (I'm sorry to say it but it's true.)

Sony doesn't need to incur substantial marketing cost for this artist is already as well known as Coca Cola and McDonald's. Michael Jackson is one of the very few artists (probably the only one) who sells in major non-English speaking countries. Taylor Swift and Eminen are big in the States but they are nobody in Asia.

The demand for Michael Jackson's album is always there. Sony is taking advantage of Michael's hard work and reputation. Think about Vision, who else's music videos are marketable, not even the Beatles or Madonna. The treasure is there. Sony just need to grab them and pack them up and sell.

$250 million may sound huge initially. But, if I think about the value (high return and low risk) Sony gets from the investment, $250 million is not a gamble at all.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

It's like buying the Beatles back in the late 80's lol Worth so much more in the long-run than what was paid!
 
BUMPER SNIPPET;3249631 said:
I thought this might be interesting. I'm still wondering why MJ's fans have been ignored since 12th of November 2010.

Source: http://www.petitions24.com/michael

Michael Jackson

fans unite against some tracks from the new "Michael" album

A lot of Michael Jackson fan-clubs around the world have come together to ask the Estate of Michael Jackson and Sony Music to remove from the forthcoming "Michael" album the tracks produced with or by the Cascio brothers.

The international Michael Jackson fan community strongly feel that a new Michael Jackson album should not include songs that they feel are not Michael's.
The overwhelming response that we, fan-clubs, have received from our members expressing doubts over the Cascio tracks should not be ignored.

Michael Jackson fans around the world ask that the Estate of Michael Jackson and Sony Music respect our feelings and our expertise in this matter.
We are the future supporters of all the products that you will put out.
We ask that no doubt as to the origin of a song should ever surround the release of a Michael Jackson album.

The origin of the Cascio tracks is not clear enough for them to be included in this first new album since Michael Jackson's death.
Should you carry on with the release of the album as it stands, it would cast a shadow of doubt, discontent and frustration over any future release.

We know there are enough original unreleased songs to complete the album without the questionable ones.

Michael Jackson fans ask the estate of Michael Jackson and Sony Music to take our claim into consideration and respect our strong opposition to the release of "Michael" as it currently stands.

We will do what we deem necessary to honor the memory and legacy of Michael Jackson.

The United Michael Jackson fan-clubs of the world
MJFrance
jackson5abc.com
Jackson Source
mjackson.fr
MJJForum.it
mjjstreet.com
MJQUEBEC
Breaking News is not sung by Michael Jackson
Forum Forever MJ
MJ Backstage
Black & White magazine
mjjsh.com
MJJNation
MJLEGEND
MJ Collection
Jackson Street.nl
Michael Jackzone
Secret Of Moonwalk
The Michael Jackson Australian Fan Club
MJPortal
MJ's HideOut
Forum King Michael
MJCollectorland
Stéphane Boudsocq (journaliste RTL)
Les Minis Michael
El RincondePapaoso
Michael Jackson: Comenzó la Leyenda
HemerotecaMJ
Thrill Athens
The Michael Jackson Israeli Fan Club
MJJLatino.Net
The MICHAEL JACKSON Tunisian Fan Club
Michael Joseph Jackson International
Michael Jackson Fan-Club 3Generations
MJHQ
Official Michael Jackson Fan Club Chile: Dancing The Dream
Michael Jackson Database
Jackson Québec
Forum Michael Jackson01







p.s. I must conclude that Weitzman lied when he said in the report: "We take all fan comments very seriously,"


Checkmate!

ivy;3249894 said:
ah bumper bumper - you are better reader than that..

did I ever mention how many people signed the petition? No.

I said that we see website's names but that doesn't mean all their members agree with such stand - in other words for example MJFrance name is listed and I said most probably NOT ALL members agree on the subject.

I gave an example which I said is a "screenshot of voting from one the websites listed" - again not all of the website or everyone signed the petition- which based on 76 votes and was divided. It wasn't to show how many people signed the petition - it was to show how many people on the websites listed gave an opinion on the subject.

Then I gave the example of our own poll in MJJC with 200+ votes that's divided - we have 10,000 active users (68,000 members). So would it be fair for us to say "MJJC supports this" with only 200+ votes out of possible 10,000?

In short what I said was "such polls or such petitions is not representative of the whole member base".

Edit : this was what I was referring to. 76 votes out of 33,000 members and it's divided to 60-40%.


Ivy, Ivy, haven't you read what I posted. Here an isolated sentence from my post for you:

We ask that no doubt as to the origin of a song should ever surround the release of a Michael Jackson album.

Did you read that part?
Now here is what it means. It means that it is not important if it IS Michael or NOT. What is important is that there IS a serious DOUBT!

Is there a serious doubt? Yes there is. They hired, according to what they say, the audiologists to analyze the vocals. Why? Because they doubted the vocals.

Did their analysis change anything? No. The tracks sound still the same.

How relevant are polls or the petition I posted? Well, when you have thousands of people who signed the petition from around the world, there's something wrong. Let's not forget that not all doubters signed the petition and let's not forget thaty many doubters didn't even know about the petition.

Just a reminder: when Michael died, the whole planet was mourning him. Millions and millions if not thousands of millions of people showed up in the streets across the globe. How many among those millions and millions of people left a message on the official www.michaeljackson.com website to express condolences and their mourning? Hardly a million! Hardly. So, we can reasonably deduce that there is a huge number of doubters who never signed any petition or who even never expressed their doubt on any of the forums or MJ's fan websites.

In this case, if you neglect 7000 petitioners, it is clearly undermining the real and huge problem that we are having!

You, who claim that you make up no excuses but are looking for facts and are abiding by the rules of logic, tell me, how come that the title of this thread has been imposed to us as if we were the ones who are sabotaging Michael's legacy? 'Only go here if you want to continue controversy'.
Do we really want this? Did we choose this title? How other memebers label doubters in this forum because of this title? We are cornered in this thread as if we were a kind of conspiracy theorist groups seeing evil everywhere.

How about changing the title of the thread and have something like: 'Only go here if you want to know/find out the truth'?

When you make that change, only then you can talk about other fan clubs biased polls on internet who signed the petition.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

^^bumper, ivy is waiting for your llllllllllllllloooooooooooonnnnnnnnnggggggggg post... :D
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

How relevant are polls or the petition I posted? Well, when you have thousands of people who signed the petition from around the world, there's something wrong. Let's not forget that not all doubters signed the petition and let's not forget thaty many doubters didn't even know about the petition.

Just a reminder: when Michael died, the whole planet was mourning him. Millions and millions if not thousands of millions of people showed up in the streets across the globe. How many among those millions and millions of people left a message on the official www.michaeljackson.com website to express condolences and their mourning? Hardly a million! Hardly. So, we can reasonably deduce that there is a huge number of doubters who never signed any petition or who even never expressed their doubt on any of the forums or MJ's fan websites.

In this case, if you neglect 7000 petitioners, it is clearly undermining the real and huge problem that we are having!

This is so ture... :agree:
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

It is very true. Good post about the petition, BUMPER SNIPPET. I apologize for my sarcastic words towards you earlier. I should have thought more before I spoke. :) Bless the petition and I hope someone listens!!!
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

@Bumper

I didn't come up with the thread title. Contact Gaz if you have issues with the title.

However I know the logic behind it - it's not labeling you or aimed at the "doubters" , it's actually a warning for the believers. Because we got a lot of complaint about the "vocals debate derailing the discussion and bringing negativity" that's why we started these threads in the first place. so it's a warning to the believers that say "enter at your own risk and if you enter then do not complain about the content", it aims to give you "doubters" maximum freedom possible in regards to the content of your posts (as long as everyone avoid insults and can show respect)

see the updated desctiption at first post: Members coming into this thread you do so at you own responsibility, if you do not like the tone or what is being said here then you are duly asked to steer clear of this thread, as of now we will not accept any responsibility should members complain about what is written or if debates get out of hand. again it is your own responsibility as to whether you come in here and what your participation might be.

and isn't controversy a prolonged debate by definition- isn't this a debate we are continuing for 4 months now with no end and no common ground in sight?

I'll also say this - regardless of what the thread is titled you (or anyone) will not be able to find "the truth" here. I know that you are intelligent enough to realize that we have been discussing the same topic and going in circles. Every possible theory is written, every possible "proof" is posted. Everyone has formed their opinion. I don't expect anything to change - unless we get new information - which I find quite unlikely after 4 months. If the goal is to find the truth and/or fight for Michael's legacy the place should be a courtroom. Sorry but forum posts, twitter rants and online petitions aren't really that effective IMO.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

No, you said it was a bullshit song, and what song has he ever written like that 'bullshit song'.

Go and read my post again. I never mentioned ANYTHING about 'writing'.

Cheater and Dangerous barely compare vocally

I wouldn't expect you to notice the similarities.

I'm not going to give up. Why don't you give up? :D :p

Because I care about Michael Jackson's legacy. He didn't earn it with blood, sweat and tears to have some piss-poor imitator sing songs under his name. He didn't die in front of our eyes just so some fool could melodyne some prick's weak ass attempt at singing like Michael Jackson.

You believe that if you want. Where's the song??? I told you to go and find one song that sounds like All I Need. Where is it? Why can't you find one? Don't you care about Michael Jackson's legacy? If you do you'd shut me up by finding a similar song. Where is it?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

If the goal is to find the truth and/or fight for Michael's legacy the place should be a courtroom.

Speaking of courtroom, I'd love to see the Teddy on Judge Judy trying to defend the vocals:

Teddy: "This is Michael's voice--"

Judge Judy: "That's bologne, it doesn't make sense!"

Or even Sony who have said they tested Michael's vocals"

Sony: "We have done extensive rese--"

Judge Judy: "Well where is it?"

Sony: "Well, we didn't bring it today but--"

Judge Judy: "Well where did you think you coming to a tea party? Outrageus!"

OWNED!
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

@Bumper

I didn't come up with the thread title. Contact Gaz if you have issues with the title.

However I know the logic behind it - it's not labeling you or aimed at the "doubters" , it's actually a warning for the believers. Because we got a lot of complaint about the "vocals debate derailing the discussion and bringing negativity" that's why we started these threads in the first place. so it's a warning to the believers that say "enter at your own risk and if you enter then do not complain about the content", it aims to give you "doubters" maximum freedom possible in regards to the content of your posts (as long as everyone avoid insults and can show respect)

see the updated desctiption at first post: Members coming into this thread you do so at you own responsibility, if you do not like the tone or what is being said here then you are duly asked to steer clear of this thread, as of now we will not accept any responsibility should members complain about what is written or if debates get out of hand. again it is your own responsibility as to whether you come in here and what your participation might be.

and isn't controversy a prolonged debate by definition- isn't this a debate we are continuing for 4 months now with no end and no common ground in sight?

I'll also say this - regardless of what the thread is titled you will not be able to find "the truth" here. I know that you are intelligent enough to realize that we have been discussing the same topic and going in circles. Every possible theory is written, every possible "proof" is posted. Everyone has formed their opinion. I don't expect anything to change - unless we get new information - which I find quite unlikely after 4 months. If the goal is to find the truth and/or fight for Michael's legacy the place should be a courtroom. Sorry but forum posts, twitter rants and online petitions aren't really that effective IMO.


I am not blaming you for the choice of the title, but I am surprised to see how much you fight for not being biased when it comes to facts, but when one presents some facts, such as the link to the petition, you automatically undermined it by claiming that the number was quite low and that the petitioners are mainly web sites owners, hence biased. But at the same time, actually, there's nothing you find surprising on this such a biased forum as MJJ Community. That's what I meant, if you fight for unbiased facts, then let's put everyone on the same level, including the policy of MJJ Community forum which currently lead its members to believe that the cascio tracks are genuine as there is no single official protest whatsoever from the owner of this site.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I am not blaming you for the choice of the title, but I am surprised to see how much you fight for not being biased when it comes to facts, but when one presents some facts, such as the link to the petition, you automatically undermined it by claiming that the number was quite low and that the petitioners are mainly web sites owners, hence biased. But at the same time, actually, there's nothing you find surprising on this such a biased forum as MJJ Community. That's what I meant, if you fight for unbiased facts, then let's put everyone on the same level, including the policy of MJJ Community forum which currently lead its members to believe that the cascio tracks are genuine as there is no single official protest whatsoever from the owner of this site.

again I NEVER said anything about the number of the people signed the petition, I NEVER said it was quite low etc.

All I said was the website names listed doesn't mean all their members feel the same way and it's most probably only representative of what website owners think and I gave the example of 76 voting out of 33,000 and 200 voting out of 68,000 to make my point.

I know that Gaz communicated concerns of our members to the estate and estate responded with the statement to our concerns.

And sorry but I don't understand how do you justify an official protest. Aren't we torn in this debate? Aren't there people who believe the songs to be legit as well? so how can you justify to impose an official protest on them? Would you be happy if any MJ fan website that you are member of said "It's our official position that these songs are real"? We simply left it to everyone's own prerogative. For example you see Tom and I , two staff, in this thread and we are advocating for opposing ideas and it's completely fine because we have that freedom, we have our personal choice. It allows us to have two opposing perspectives together and isn't it what a unbiased position requires?
 
That discussion was helpful; I think I understand the believers’ position a little bit better. It seems to me that you’re listening to these Cascio tracks, and you feel that PARTS of it sound like Michael. The parts that don’t sound like Michael--like the vibrato--you’re explaining away with various excuses like melodyne, etc.

You can’t look at the songs in pieces. You have to look at them as a whole. If you hear a part where you say to yourself “that sounds like Michael, I can feel Michael in that line/verse” it’s not because it’s Michael Jackson. It’s not like Michael sings “you can look at them climbing out the bushes” and then an impostor is singing the line, “mama say mama got you in a zigzag” It’s just that the impostor (JM) can sound more like Michael on some lines than on others. I still don’t think there’s a single instant in Monster where he sounds identical to the real Michael, but sure, at some parts he sounds close. You can’t just pick out specific words, specific phrases, specific seconds, of the song and say those are Michael but the rest isn’t.

The song is a whole. It has to be taken as such. I mean, ANYONE could probably sound like Michael Jackson for a couple of words. But overall? It’s instantly obvious that it’s not him. Look at it this way, I’m sure you could isolate certain words or phrases from “Mamacita”, totally separate them from the song as a whole, and it would sound pretty similar to Michael Jackson.

Has anyone (Pentum?! :)) tried to do that? Take some lines from a song we know is JM, and try to pick out certain parts that sound like Michael Jackson? It shouldn’t be too hard, since that’s JM’s main objective when he sings. But when you step back and look at the whole thing, it’s CLEARLY not Michael. It’s a macro/micro problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1qyHVlK5PI
This is a good example. In the JM song “Let Me Let Go” I would say that the part from 1:35 to 1:40 where he says “moves on the single scene” he sounds pretty close to Michael Jackson. Not identical, but pretty damn close. Does that mean that Michael Jackson came in for 5 seconds, recorded those vocals, and the rest was filled in with JM? Of course not. It just means that at certain moments, with certain phrases and certain words JM can do a better imitation than in other parts. Even the title of this Youtube clip: “Jason Malchi feat. Michael Jackson.” Really? What if Sony had released this track, exactly as is, with that title, “Jason Malachi, Let Me Let Go, feat Michael Jackson”? Would we be having this discussion? Would we think certain words/lines/sentences were Michael? Probably. It’s ridiculous.

Step back and look at this. Be honest with yourself. If there were ONE Cascio track I might (MIGHT) be able to believe that it was an unfinished demo that Michael had recorded 1 or 2 words/lines of, and they brought an impostor in to finish it out. Which would still be incredibly dishonest, by the way, since they said it was 100% MJ lead vocals. But that’s not the case. There are 12 tracks. From what we’ve heard so far, they all sound exactly the same. It seems far more likely to me that they’re 100% sung by JM.

I’d just like to re-iterate that not one line of these songs sounds exactly like Michael Jackson to me. It was really hard for me to pick out even one sentence of Monster that a “believer” might argue is Michael. And as a whole, there’s no freakin way these songs are anyone but Jason Malachi. I don’t think MJ utters a single word.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Read the official thread Michael when all the fans eagerly awaited to hear BN. After the page 540, it was a complete flop! 9/10 fans were disgusted about how fake the track was!

1) Among those fans who already expressed their disappointment, not many take their time to come back and post here. Their opinion has been completely neglected.

-You defend the official statemnt.

2) Cascio and Teddy fail to provide any tangible proof on Oprah.

-You defend the official statement.

3) I provided a link where Roger Friedman claims there is proof on the worktapes.

-You acknowledged that there are no such tapes, yet you still defend the official statement.

4) The family says it is not Michael on the tracks. (curiously not a single MJ family member claimed they actually think it is Michael on those tracks)

-You defend the official statement.

5) I provide the link with petitions with not less than 7000 electronic signatures (which are not to be neglected) coming from many MJ fan websites from around the world.

-You defend the official statement.

6) There is a clear doubt about those tracks, and that's a fact, yet they are released! Now, the doubt is so strong that even the Estate and Sony music analyzed the tracks independently (according to them)

-You defend the official statement again and again.

Now tell me, if the Estate and SONY music were such specialists and really sure that those tracks are sung by Michael, why did they bother to analyse those tracks at all? To cover their ass? From what? From genuine Michael Jackson's vocals? I mean if you are sure 100% that it IS Michael, why do you analyse the tracks? What is the reason if you are so sure?
If you are not sure and you feel urge to cover your ass, why then do you bother releasing the tracks at all? knowing all this, why do you bother defending such practice and all their official gibberish statements and excuses?















again I NEVER said anything about the number of the people signed the petition, I NEVER said it was quite low etc.

All I said was the website names listed doesn't mean all their members feel the same way and it's most probably only representative of what website owners think and I gave the example of 76 voting out of 33,000 and 200 voting out of 68,000 to make my point.

I know that Gaz communicated concerns of our members to the estate and estate responded with the statement to our concerns.

And sorry but I don't understand how do you justify an official protest. Aren't we torn in this debate? Aren't there people who believe the songs to be legit as well? so how can you justify to impose an official protest on them? Would you be happy if any MJ fan website that you are member of said "It's our official position that these songs are real"? We simply left it to everyone's own prerogative. For example you see Tom and I , two staff, in this thread and we are advocating for opposing ideas and it's completely fine because we have that freedom, we have our personal choice. It allows us to have two opposing perspectives together and isn't it what a unbiased position requires?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I'll never forget reactions when BN first premiered. Not one fan said how good the song was. I'm not gonna quote reactions, but there was alot of "What the heck is this?" and "This doesn't sound like Michael" within the first few seconds after is first aired.

I'll never forget that and hopefully Estate/Sony won't either. I think they were hoping for positive reactions for the song and for 90% of us fans to turn that song down vocally should send off a bell in your head that somethin up.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I wonder if Janet will say anything at all about this on Piers Morgan tonight?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Exellent post azsummergirl! You hit the nail on the head there in the first paragraph. I always go back to the initial reaction to breaking news, it was almost universally questioned. People were in shock. I would say on this forum over 90% of people reacted negatively. What happened afterwards was that when the. 'official statement' came out some people took the estate's word for it simply because they were the estate. Some people just won't question perceived authority. I think people that have convinced themselves these tracks are legit based on that statement withno actual proof are just not being honest with themselves. I also think that there have been plenty of posts by people here with a very specific agenda acting on behalf of the powers that be to persuade people that the tracks are legit. It's very frustrating. I hate those damn diabolical songs.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Well I'm not working for the powers that be. :lol: I'm trying to find out the truth about this whole damn thing.

(runs back to Sony headquarters to report what has been said here lately :eek:)
 
mjjesamor;3250762 said:
Exellent post azsummergirl! You hit the nail on the head there in the first paragraph. I always go back to the initial reaction to breaking news, it was almost universally questioned. People were in shock. I would say on this forum over 90% of people reacted negatively. What happened afterwards was that when the. 'official statement' came out some people took the estate's word for it simply because they were the estate. Some people just won't question perceived authority. I think people that have convinced themselves these tracks are legit based on that statement withno actual proof are just not being honest with themselves. I also think that there have been plenty of posts by people here with a very specific agenda acting on behalf of the powers that be to persuade people that the tracks are legit. It's very frustrating. I hate those damn diabolical songs.

Thank you :)
I am really trying to understand where the arguments from the other side are coming from, because it's so hard for me to hear it.

I don’t just “want” new Michael Jackson releases. I yearn for them. I would listen to Michael recite the back of a cereal box, no joke. As Sam said earlier, I know his voice better than my own. It means everything to me. Not even .0001% of me wanted to believe that these tracks were going to be fake before I heard them. I desperately wanted these tracks to be real. The fact that I think they’re fake despite my strong desire to believe they’re him is a major red flag.

Honestly, I can make this determination without my emotions getting involved. It’s not even about how I feel or what I think before I hear it. The fact is, I’ve listened to so much Michael Jackson in my life that there’s no way I’m not going to be able to tell, from the first line of the song. And the difference is that “she dances in the sheets at night” registers instantly in the “Michael Jackson! Yay! :)” part of my brain whereas “everybody wan-in a piece of Michael Jackson” instantly registers in the “who the f*ck is this?” part of my brain. It’s that simple.

i hate these tracks too. every time i heard one of them it just reminds me of all of the people who have betrayed michael his entire life. it breaks my heart and it makes me sick.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I find it awfully bias how ALL of you fail to mention the initial stream of Breaking News was the wrong mix. Sony and The Estate admitted the mistake and said it would be fixed. Then we got the final album version, which sounds drastically different, in vocals, from the initial stream.
 
AnnieRUOkay89;3250770 said:
I find it awfully bias how ALL of you fail to mention the initial stream of Breaking News was the wrong mix. Sony and The Estate admitted the mistake and said it would be fixed. Then we got the final album version, which sounds drastically different, in vocals, from the initial stream.

After ten years of studio absence and after Michael died, a huge company such as SONY, made a mistake?

LOOOOOOOOOOOOL

That was the excuse n°1
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

^^ that's because the "mix" doesn't matter, it's not about the production, it's about who's singing. and the fact that the person singing isn't actually michael jackson.

and at any rate, both versions sounded exactly the same to me, they didn't change anything. in fact, someone on here actually did an analysis and they actually POSTED it on here (imagine that, unlike sony and the estate who won't show us their magical analyses.) Anyway the original mix matches up exactly to the so-called "new mix". they changed nothing between the 2.

people just felt like it sounded different because they had already heard it a few times and they were getting used to it. so it was easier to "hear michael" truth is, there was no change.

does anyone remember what thread that was in? i can't find it.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

The wrong mix!!! Just lol. You don't really believe that?
Azsummergirl i remember that post. I think it might have been pentum. The so called correct mix sounded exactly the same to me too.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

The mix sounded no different. I believe slight changes were made to the composition regarding the percussion sounds, much like it did in Monster too. But the vocals? No, not at all.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I find it awfully bias how ALL of you fail to mention the initial stream of Breaking News was the wrong mix. Sony and The Estate admitted the mistake and said it would be fixed. Then we got the final album version, which sounds drastically different, in vocals, from the initial stream.

Complete and utter bullshit. It was the exact same bullshit vocals that are on this bogus CD. They're the exact same vocals. 'The wrong mix'!!! Who do you think you're fooling? Multimillion dollar companies don't make mistake after mistake after mistake by accident. 'The wrong mix'! Pathetic!

'I find it awfully bias...'? Of course you do.

Now why does Monster sound 'off' to you?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I find it awfully bias how ALL of you fail to mention the initial stream of Breaking News was the wrong mix. Sony and The Estate admitted the mistake and said it would be fixed. Then we got the final album version, which sounds drastically different, in vocals, from the initial stream.

Drastic difference? Really? In all fairness, there is a difference between the initial streaming and the final album version, but the difference is not big enough to turn the amateurish vocals into one of the greatest voice the human kind has ever heard.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Wrong mix has nothing to do with the vocals.

Can't we just get a different mix of Michael's past albums and compare those?

Nuff said.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

see we are again going in circles

Now tell me, if the Estate and SONY music were such specialists and really sure that those tracks are sung by Michael, why did they bother to analyse those tracks at all? To cover their ass? From what? From genuine Michael Jackson's vocals? I mean if you are sure 100% that it IS Michael, why do you analyse the tracks? What is the reason if you are so sure?

see/remember : Due diligence

Due diligence concept says that you are REQUIRED to do EVERYTHING that is reasonable to do in such issues.

You cannot say " I'm absolutely sure I hear Micheal and I can bet my kids life on it" - beliefs, convictions, feelings aren't enough. A concern / a fraud possibility was raised by the Jacksons. And once the concerns were raised they were REQUIRED to investigate it - that's legit business practice.

Reading below

The term due diligence describes a general duty to exercise care in any transaction.

There are many reasons for conducting due diligence, including the following:

Confirmation that the business is what it appears to be;
Identify potential "deal killer" defects in the target and avoid a bad business transaction;
Gain information that will be useful for valuing assets, defining representations and warranties, and/or negotiating price concessions; and
Verification that the transaction complies with investment or acquisition criteria.

Who Conducts Due Diligence?

Lead and co-investors, corporate development staff, attorneys, accountants, investment bankers, loan officers and other professionals involved in a transaction may have a need or an obligation to conduct independent due diligence.

---

In short both Sony and Estate were required to carry out such investigation - regardless of their beliefs/ convictions - especially once a concern was raised.
 
Back
Top