Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

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

So there's also ZERO evidence that he knew anything about "Hollywood Tonight" then! That was registered after his death, it could very well be fake as well!
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

We have a demo snippet of HT in very bad quality leaked many years ago.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Do you happen to have a link to that snippet?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

the difference is that there are:
-handwritten lyrics for Hollywood Tonight
-a handwritten story that inspired the lyrics
-he originally worked on the song with a long time collaborator, Brad Buxer

and on top of that the vocals are obviously Michael Jackson. so how would he not know about the song. He wrote it!!!

The sad thing is, with the Cascio songs, there's none of that evidence... and the vocals sound unlike anything Michael Jackson ever recorded in his life.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Alec said:
the difference is that there are:
-handwritten lyrics for Hollywood Tonight
-a handwritten story that inspired the lyrics
-he originally worked on the song with a long time collaborator, Brad Buxer

and on top of that the vocals are obviously Michael Jackson. so how would he not know about the song. He wrote it!!!

The sad thing is, with the Cascio songs, there's none of that evidence... and the vocals sound unlike anything Michael Jackson ever recorded in his life.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

The evidence for Hollywood Tonight takes into account that it sounds exactly like Michael Jackson. Something that no one can say about the Cascio tracks.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

No, IT IS NOT.

And answer your PM, please!
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Lol, I am challenging you to sue anyone without the slightest evidence. You can always try. But if the jury has the slightest doubt because of lack of evidence, you spent your energy, time and money for nothing. Besides, the ruling does not mean that the truth prevailed. It simply means that "(lack of) evidence for what you sue" prevailed.

How about their "phony" practices? Did he feel there was injustice or not? Answer by yes or no?

If no, explain why did he try to get away from SONY?
If yes, explain why didn't he go to court but rather tried to make his own justice by calling SONY names and denouncing their practices publicly despite the fact that he was paid 1 billion dollars?
Click to expand...

you are mixing up the nature of the cases here

1. as I said you can sue without evidence see herpes case, see billie jean - nothing stops you from filing a lawsuit , it only determines whether your case will survive or not.

2. in this vocals debate I think that if the Jackson's went to court with their statements and professional musician support with some sort of comparison - that would be enough for a trial - in the end they might have lost but the trial would have happened

(look to Joe's case even he didn't have grounds to sue that hearings went on for months, Katherine's lawsuit partially made to the jury. Remember judges do not decide on who's right or wrong - they decide on whether it's something a jury should hear)

3. the nature of the vocals case is different as the outcome requires expert investigations, personal statements etc - so it's more like which side has the most and better evidence. It's an argumentative topic (see this thread)

Michael and Sony is different because their relationship is in the legal sense is defined by a "contract" which is a written document that has one interpretation and is binding.

For example if Michael - Sony contract said that Sony would spent $5M on promotion and if they did that satisfies the contract - end of story legally. Michael could have think $5M is not enough, they were doing that to hurt him etc but it wouldn't matter again legally. Like I said contract law is more straightforward then the vocals debate we have.

Plus it's wrong to say that Michael didn't do anything about his dislike of Sony legally - he got out of his contract, didn't he? He satisfied the conditions of his contract and left Sony, he legally (but out of court) finished his binding tie with them.

(and again what does "phony practices" equal to in legal terms?)

Edit : and let me remind you all that Taj went to probate court and talked against TII movie he said his perfectionist uncle wouldn't want a rehearsal footage to be released and trying to get the movie out in 3-4 months time could mean low quality work - no evidence no nothing - just his feeling , opinions about the topic. Judge didn't accept his position (or he lost) but yet he still voiced his concerns in a "court of law" setting. and now tell me why even that didn't happen in this instance? Explain to me how "forever fighting for our uncle's legacy" equals to a handful of tweets? and why you (people who are questioning these vocals) are satisfied with this?
 
Here i give you 11 minutes of LIES and AUDIO COMPARISONS that shows Jason Malachi sings on Breaking News, Monster, Keep your head up, Stay and All i need:

[youtube]6zJPDX2JxX8[/youtube]

That it´s the FINAL TRUTH.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=PDG9W7QM
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

ivy said:
you are mixing up the nature of the cases here
Click to expand...

You are actually mixing up the reality in court and the reality outside the court, in this case the vocals.

No matter what the court or the law says, the vocals are what we're dealing with. You have knowledge in law, but apparently you don't have a musical ear, so let's not debate whether it is legal to sell fake vocals or not, but let's debate what we hear. I think that we all agree doubters and non doubters that faking vocals is illegal, so why bother.

ivy said:
1. as I said you can sue without evidence see herpes case, see billie jean - nothing stops you from filing a lawsuit , it only determines whether your case will survive or not.
Click to expand...

No wonder, but nobody is fool to sue without evidence, except Sneddon.

ivy said:
2. in this vocals debate I think that if the Jackson's went to court with their statements and professional musician support with some sort of comparison - that would be enough for a trial - in the end they might have lost but the trial would have happened
Click to expand...

Again, Sneddon's method. You sue without evidence and no matter what, except that Sneddon was smarter, he used tax payers' money, not his own.

ivy said:
(look to Joe's case even he didn't have grounds to sue that hearings went on for months, Katherine's lawsuit partially made to the jury. Remember judges do not decide on who's right or wrong - they decide on whether it's something a jury should hear)
Click to expand...

Maybe this experience was enough to disusuade them for further suing. They're not that young any more either.

ivy said:
3. the nature of the vocals case is different as the outcome requires expert investigations, personal statements etc - so it's more like which side has the most and better evidence. It's an argumentative topic (see this thread)
Click to expand...

There is no other evidence whatsoever except the audio tracks that we all can hear. i'm still waiting for that truth to come out, but still nothing.

ivy said:
Michael and Sony is different because their relationship is in the legal sense is defined by a "contract" which is a written document that has one interpretation and is binding.

For example if Michael - Sony contract said that Sony would spent $5M on promotion and if they did that satisfies the contract - end of story legally. Michael could have think $5M is not enough, they were doing that to hurt him etc but it wouldn't matter again legally. Like I said contract law is more straightforward then the vocals debate we have.

Plus it's wrong to say that Michael didn't do anything about his dislike of Sony legally - he got out of his contract, didn't he? He satisfied the conditions of his contract and left Sony, he legally (but out of court) finished his binding tie with them.

(and again what does "phony practices" equal to in legal terms?)
Click to expand...

Yeah, surely he got out of the contract. He's dead (just as he had feared for years).
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
You have knowledge in law, but apparently you don't have a musical ear
Click to expand...

okay I'll bite. So does that mean Bruce Swedien, Matt Forger, Stewart Brawley, Michael Prince, Dr. Freeze, Dorian Holley and Greg Phillinganes doesn't have musical ears as well?

I can accept to be "flawed" but I'm not only one hearing Michael, right? so what's the "excuse" against those people?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

ivy said:
okay I'll bite. So does that mean Bruce Swedien, Matt Forger, Stewart Brawley, Michael Prince, Dr. Freeze, Dorian Holley and Greg Phillinganes doesn't have musical ears as well?

I can accept to be "flawed" but I'm not only one hearing Michael, right? so what's the "excuse" against those people?
Click to expand...

I was not biting you, I said "apparently", because you actually said so earlier.

Now, do you need a bunch of people telling you what to hear, knowing that there are as many -if not more- people close to Michael telling you the opposite?

In times of Hitler "specialists" claimed that Jesus was blond and that he had blue eyes. Do I have to accept that only because of their titles despite that the logic tells me that Jesus was a Semite, thus most probably with dark skin, hair and dark brown eyes?

neeley.jpg
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

You have heard every single Jason comparison there is, heard of the guy, heard a lot of his music, discussed it.

I don't think those guys you mentioned have done that. Give them the damning audio comparisons, let's see what they now think.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I told in this thread what I heard multiple times - before any estate statement - so you already know that nobody told me what to hear.

you are minimizing my opinion based on claiming me not having a musical ear.

I'm curious to learn about how other what other people said is debunked although they definitely have a musical ear.

Pentum said:
You have heard every single Jason comparison there is, heard of the guy, heard a lot of his music, discussed it.

I don't think those guys you mentioned have done that. Give them the damning audio comparisons, let's see what they now think.
Click to expand...

thank you

so you say :
they don't know Jason - fine
but can we all agree that they know Michael very well ?

if yes then the argument becomes Jason is good enough to fool people who know Michael very well.

and again we are left with the paradox of "perfect fake" to fool those experts such easily yet being such "imperfect fake" that's so obviously and easily be identified.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

ivy said:
I told in this thread what I heard multiple times - before any estate statement - so you already know that nobody told me what to hear.

you are minimizing my opinion based on claiming me not having a musical ear.

I'm curious to learn about how other what other people said is debunked although they definitely have a musical ear.
Click to expand...


I am NOT minimizing you! You yourself claimed earlier not to have a musical ear! I didn't make that up!
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
I am NOT minimizing you! You yourself claimed earlier not to have a musical ear! I didn't make that up!
Click to expand...

I honestly don't remember making any statements about my ears musicality :cheeky: I said I have limited/basic experience with music editing and know absolutely nothing about your expertise area and I do not know much about the musical terms and limited in regards to expressing what I hear in a technical fashion. I'm not claiming to have "supersonic" ears like some people but I'm not deaf either. and this post was fun :D
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Maybe I have supersonic ears? :ph34r:
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

ivy said:
I honestly don't remember making any statements about my ears musicality :cheeky: I said I have limited/basic experience with music editing and know absolutely nothing about your expertise area and I do not know much about the musical terms and limited in regards to expressing what I hear in a technical fashion. I'm not claiming to have "supersonic" ears like some people but I'm not deaf either. and this post was fun :D
Click to expand...


You said it in another thread when you heard BN for the first time:

Originally Posted by kasumehttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3058589#post3058589
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Well, I DO have supersonic ears, I don't know about the rest of you :ninja:
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Believers, try using this when listening to the cascio songs! :D
supersonic-ear.jpg
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

or these:

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

BUMPER SNIPPET said:
You clearly showed that you have been struggling between what your ears hear and what your sense of logic dictates to you. You opted for logic by minimizing yourself saying that you don't have a musical ear.
Click to expand...

Correction : it also shows that without adding logic to the mix (as I separated them) I said "Some parts sound like Michael some don't." so I heard Michael all along. and that has been my position since the beginning.

I mentioned on this thread that I was "torn" multiple times due to the "additional vocals" and didn't know what to make of them - legit or imposter- and that after information came out I concluded them to be legit.

My logic tell me it's unlikely that they'll risk so much with such a fraud, even without logic my ears heard Michael. (find my post that says when I listened to acapella it sounded more like Michael)

as far as my ears go as I said in my very last post I don't claim superiority and perfection (I never do in any subject) but I'm not deaf either.

and still put me aside, how about other people with established musical ears?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I don't know about any of you guys, but I'm friends with Dorian Holley on Facebook and I spoke to him about the authenticity, and he pretty much confirmed it was him, like he did in the statement. I know it's the real Dorian Holley because there are candid pictures updated of him every so often, mostly with pictures of his family and fans. Dorian has no financial benefit from lying as he has had no input in the album.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Anna said:
Really? Can I have the links?
Click to expand...
Here it is. Use good speakers or good headphones. Not your laptop speakers or your Koss Porta Pro headphones. Listen carefully:

http://soundcloud.com/pentum/jasons-delicious-snorts

I know it doesn't prove that much, but it proves that Jason in fact did the same thing in at least two of his songs. I've never heard Michael do anything like that and I've listened to all available a cappellas 1000 times. Coincidence that it happened in a questionable song where he sounds like Jason and at least 90% of the fans said was fake when it premiered? I think not.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Pentum said:
Here it is. Use good speakers or good headphones. Not your laptop speakers or your Koss Porta Pro headphones. Listen carefully:

http://soundcloud.com/pentum/jasons-delicious-snorts

I know it doesn't prove that much, but it proves that Jason in fact did the same thing in at least two of his songs. I've never heard Michael do anything like that and I've listened to all available a cappellas 1000 times. Coincidence that it happened in a questionable song where he sounds like Jason and at least 90% of the fans said was fake when it premiered? I think not.
Click to expand...
Hmm. That is interesting indeed.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Like love is magical mentioned a few days ago, it seems like that's how Jason's breathing pattern is. I have found a few more snorts, but they are so hard to hear, so they weren't worth including. But yes, it is very interesting.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Apart from the doubts with the vocals, the snort in BN did stick out to me, but I thought, "Well they're just demo vocals, unfinished. And maybe he had a cold or something."

I've gone back and forth so many times. At one point I actually got to a stage where I said to myself, "If it were really Michael there would be no doubts whatsoever. Because I can instantly recognise Michael's voice."
But then I convinced myself that it would be ridiculous to use JM tracks on an MJ album. For Sony to take such a risk. For The Estate to give the okay.

But we've heard MJ's voice do so many things over the years, but never not sounding like him. Until the Cascio tracks emerged.

Argh! I don't know what to think anymore.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Anna said:
Apart from the doubts with the vocals, the snort in BN did stick out to me, but I thought, "Well they're just demo vocals, unfinished. And maybe he had a cold or something."

I've gone back and forth so many times. At one point I actually got to a stage where I said to myself, "If it were really Michael there would be no doubts whatsoever. Because I can instantly recognise Michael's voice."
But then I convinced myself that it would be ridiculous to use JM tracks on an MJ album. For Sony to take such a risk. For The Estate to give the okay.

But we've heard MJ's voice do so many things over the years, but never not sounding like him. Until the Cascio tracks emerged.

Argh! I don't know what to think anymore.
Click to expand...

Don't let the doubters get to you, let them behave like children, pasting pictures trying to be funny lmao.

Keep your head up to the sky like me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top