Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)
Look, from my PoV, the whole Cascio debate is quite silly, on one side we have people who say it's fake because their ears tell them so and because some (not all EG JANET) say they are, and on the other side we have those who say its real because they aren't so critical of people with a good track record, and they can hear Michael (well i can anyway).
Personally i think those producers who worked with Michael (including Travis Payne) have a better track record than Mrs Jackson and Mr Jackson who covered up Joe's abuse for years, and only admitting it in November last year...
Could you quote Janet's exact words where and when she said that those vocals on the Cascio tracks are real?
If you can't quote Janet, could you at least point out how exactly Janet showed her support to those Cascio tracks?
Thanks
I just don't understand why yet. If I could really understand a motive, or if it made sense whatsoever, like Michael being murdered, I'd understand. This debate makes little sense to me because
a) I hear Michael and
You must be among the 10% of people who believed that BN was a MJ track when it was streamed for the first time, so indeed this debate is pointless for you.
b) There's not reason.
There's no reason to fake these tracks. They do nothing to tarnish his legacy. There is nothing malicious about them, nothing slandering. It's all for love(or L.O.V.E.) anyway, obviously, where is the harm?
The seller does not care about someone's legacy, the seller sells and wants to sell more in order to become more powerful. If those tracks are fake, more fake can be sold in the future. If the fans don't react to what seems to be fake, then they can milk us as they wish. Now I hope that they'll be more careful when selecting the tracks for an album and they'd better hire specialists who know MJ's voice rather than hiring musicologists to prove it is Michael. They also better have some trace and proof it is MJ on the songs they sell, otherwise they might put it on the B side which they should have done with those Cascio tracks.Where is harm? For them surely nowhere, they got covered by the musicologists and keep on selling questionable tracks despite the controversy.
If these tracks were truly bad and also mentioned where he loves little boys bottoms, It'd make more sense to me.
Nobody debated how good/bad the tracks are even if some people said their opinion on that. The debate is about the authenticity. So revisit your process of making sense.
But the scenario that doubters come up with seems more laughable, to me, than the shower explanation.
Well, what exactly is more laughable? All the question is do you believe in the official version or in the non-official version of the facts.
-The official version says "it is Michael" (no matter the reasons)
-The non-official version says "it is not Michael" (no matter the reason)
You picked the first because your ears already hear what the official version says. You did not pick the first version because the official said it I hope.
Well, you see with the non-official version it is the same thing. We picked it because our ears don't hear MJ on those tracks.
Now, the official version so far has had quite questionable explanations when it comes to justifying why MJ sounds so different (except to your ears).
The non-official version don't have another explanation so far than presuming that it is an impostor.
In a nutshell, official version and non-official version agree that the voice is different (except to your ears), yet the official version still hasn't published the musicologists' results saying why they believe it is MJ and what makes them believe so beyond the doubt. However, the musicologists, to my sense should have examined the vocals of some impostors, such as Jason Malachi and expplain to us why they do not believe it is him. But, so far we have nothing. Nada. Zip.
As far as you are concerned, continue laughing.
And when I look at Eddie, I don't really see a liar. When I see Michael and him hanging out together, enjoying their time, I don't see a liar.
Who's a liar? Were you there before the trial and did you see the interview?
Plus, he's a little different than Gavin or Jordan, he's not a child being influenced by his parents. Those children were not liars, to me, but heavily influenced by their parents greed for money. This is a different case... Eddie Cascio spent his childhood and upbringing in a normal relationship with Michael. This was not some ill kid with greedy parents who exploited the situation, you understand my point? Eddie learned Michael Jackson songs on piano at a young age. He was 'in love' with Michael Jackson his entire life. I have a hard time believing he'd just betray Michael within a year of his passing.
What actually do you know what a person thinks? What actually do you know about relationship between Eddie and Michael.
So if you are analizing Eddie's relationship with Michael, why don't you do the same with Taryll for example? Didn't he have an excellent relationship with his uncle? Didn't they record two songs together? Now how many songs did Eddie work with Michael on an official album while MJ was alive?
And Teddy. I don't know Teddy at all, I hadn't seen any of him before this thing started and I still haven't watched his interviews he gave immediately after Michael's passing. I just hear he was very upset, grieving like everyone else... I think he's genuine. I don't see him easily betraying Michael's legacy.
Do you believe Teddy, the good friend of Michael's, the one who knows Michael extremely well, when he says MJ is alive?
I don't believe Joe. He seems almost crazy to me? He said that one child is Michael's child, but it totally isn't. I mean, they look a lot alike, but am I supposed to believe that other kid is Michael's 'secret child'? Come on.
Come on? Is that what you can say? And why not? Is it important? If Michael did have a "hidden" child, so what? Didn't he hide Prince's, Paris's and Blanket's faces with masks in public? Ask yourself hidden from whom before judging what has been said by people who actually knew Michael.
I look up to and admire Janet, and she hasn't said anything about the tracks being fake, so I'm also putting faith in her on this one.
She didn't say anything about the tracks being real. Do you still have faith when seen from that angle?
