Michael - The Great Album Debate

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

To those that believe it's Michael on the Cascio songs, I will BACK DOWN if you can give me ONE GOOD REASON why Jason's tone and vibrato is IDENTICAL to the tone and vibrato on the Cascio songs. Just one reason.

But before you start hitting that keyboard in response, know this.... I am a professional artist and producer with a great deal of experience in mixing and vocal production. I come from a family of professional musicians and producers and have been in studios observing everything since I was literally 3 years old. My earliest memories are of being inside recording studios. I fully understand and have used, in depth, damn near every single vocal processing plugin that exists. I would put money on the fact that I could NAME the plugins used on these vocals.

So Teddy can try and bullshit some of you who don't know about this stuff and you don't have the knowledge to say he's lying. Teddy can claim that it doesn't sound like Michael because it's so processed as much as he wants, because he KNOWS that 99% of people reading don't have the knowledge or experience to call him out on the matter. But he can't bullshit me. Ironically enough, Teddy was one of the people I grew up idolizing as a producer. So many of his songs are among my favorites. And while I'll always love his work with Guy, Blackstreet, and the stuff he did with Michael in the 90's, I find it absolutely despicable that he would lie to people like this.

Taryll states that Teddy KNOWS it's not Michael on the Cascio songs. He said he did it for the work and the hopes of working on future projects. He said that he was happy as hell when he got the chance to work on what he knew was a REAL song (Hollywood Tonight).

Furthermore, Taryll posted DIRECT quotes of what Teddy is supposed to have said, AND the location where it happened. We KNOW that Taryll was there while the album was being put together because he's on one of the songs. If you don't believe this happened, you are calling Taryll a liar.

And yes - you can counter that by saying I'm calling Teddy a liar. Which I am. But there's two very important differences which I will outline below:

1. Teddy has a motive for lying. Taryll doesn't.

2. Teddy is 100% DEFINITELY lying regarding the processing. That vibrato on the songs doesn't sound like that because of Melodyne, or any other vocal plugin. This is a fact. If you know how to use Melodyne, then you also know this to be a fact. Ask ANYONE that knows how to use it to it's full capabilities. Ergo, Teddy lied.

If some of you guys want to believe that there's some mysterious magical hidden setting on Melodyne that only Teddy Riley knows about, that makes Michael Jackson (the most identifiable voice of all time) 's vibrato sound IDENTICAL to Jason Malachi's NATURAL one, go ahead and believe that, but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

Great post! That's why, I said it earlier, I am willing to believe Teddy if and only if he himself or anyone on this planet takes any Michael's existing demo such as Billie Jean, Starlight, In the Back, and processes the voice so to obtain the same results as on the Cascio tracks. I wonder how would it be possible without hiring another singer to cover the songs in order to obtain the same results. Not surprisingly Malachi seems the perfect candidate to do so.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

This is exactly what Bumper suggested a while ago. Take one of Michael's demos, melodyne it, tweet it, pitch it, over-process it, you name it and see if it turns out sounding like the Cascio tracks.

No one has taken the challege!

Hello :better:

 

[Arklove]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Another great post Casey!

 

[Jesta]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

I just downloaded "Virtual DJ" and am tinkering around with "Monster". It's pretty interesting...

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Another great post Casey!

Hi Arklove

 

[Arklove]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

I just downloaded "Virtual DJ" and am tinkering around with "Monster". It's pretty interesting...

.....and?

EDIT: Hi Bumper!

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Hello :better:

hello friend. :better:

 

[Jesta]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Well, if you slow it down and adjust the pitch, it does make it a bit more believable that MJ is singing. It's all a matter of finding the right pitch. All of this discussion has prompted me to tinker with the songs.

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Well, if you slow it down and adjust the pitch, it does make it a bit more believable that MJ is singing. It's all a matter of finding the right pitch. All of this discussion has prompted me to tinker with the songs.

mind posting your result here? your work may help us ease some of our doubts.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Well, if you slow it down and adjust the pitch, it does make it a bit more believable that MJ is singing. It's all a matter of finding the right pitch. All of this discussion has prompted me to tinker with the songs.

Interesting...Keep working on it and maybe show us when it's more than just a BIT more believable? Someone else has previously done the same thing, (using Monster) adjusting the pitch and what not, and it made no shred of difference to me.

Just like using any of Mike's demo's and adjusting pitch, slowing it down and what not...I can guarantee it won't make a difference in changing the fact that it IS Michael Jackson singing, even if the pitch is slowed down, and turned upside down.

 

[Jesta]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

I'm mostly trying to figure the thing out, but I will post something eventually, plus I'll post a similar thing to compare to "Hollywood Tonight" when I've properly tinkered with it just because I've heard that that song has also had a bit of tuning as well.

 

[ivy]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

1. Teddy has a motive for lying. Taryll doesn't.

How can you be so sure about such thing?

Do we know what might have happened between Taryll and Cascio's first of all?

Furthermore by Corey Rooney's own facebook post he and Taryll had a song that didn't make the cut. Who's to say that Taryll wouldn't benefit from starting a campaign against Cascio songs so that they wouldn't be included in the future albums due to the controversy and his song would have a higher chance to be included in the future releases? Or couldn't it be anger because his song didn't make the cut but Cascio's 3 songs did?

Plus it's no secret that Jackson's and the estate executors don't get along - even Randy said so on his twitter. Different Jacksons has been against different projects, Joe even has a bid to remove the executors claiming several things including fraud. So couldn't it be an action that continues in the previous line of actions/statements of "these executors of the estate are bad, they make questionable decisions, remove them and give the control to family for the protection of MJ's legacy"?

In short how can you, better yet how can we all be so sure of anyone's motives?

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Great post! That's why, I said it earlier, I am willing to believe Teddy if and only if he himself or anyone on this planet takes any Michael's existing demo such as Billie Jean, Starlight, In the Back, and processes the voice so to obtain the same results as on the Cascio tracks. I wonder how would it be possible without hiring another singer to cover the songs in order to obtain the same results. Not surprisingly Malachi seems the perfect candidate to do so.

Like I've said several times on another board, the problem with the hoax theory is that not a lot of thought is given to what WOULD BE NEEDED in order for the hoax to be pulled off.

In order for such a hoax to be possible, a LOT of people would now have to hold their tongues :

The complete Cascio family, including the parents, and the brothers' girlfriends/wives if any.
James Porte, and HIS significant other/relatives.
Jason Malachi, and HIS significant other/relatives.

All of those people would have to have agreed to face the legal/financial repercussions that would surely happen if ANY ONE of them spilled the beans.

All of those people would have to trust one another, despite the fact that they would obviously know each other to be frauds and dishonest liars.

And all of those people -- especially the Cascios -- would have had to think that this was the easiest way to make a lot of money, when their connection to MJ could have been turned into lucrative deals in many much easier, much less risky ways : book deals, TV appearances, tabloid tell-all articles, sale of MJ memorabilia on Ebay, etc.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

How can you be so sure about such thing?

Do we know what might have happened between Taryll and Cascio's first of all?

Furthermore by Corey Rooney's own facebook post he and Taryll had a song that didn't make the cut. Who's to say that Taryll wouldn't benefit from starting a campaign against Cascio songs so that they wouldn't be included in the future albums due to the controversy and his song would have a higher chance to be included in the future releases? Or couldn't it be anger because his song didn't make the cut but Cascio's 3 songs did?

Plus it's no secret that Jackson's and the estate executors don't get along - even Randy said so on his twitter. Different Jacksons has been against different projects, Joe even has a bid to remove the executors claiming several things including fraud. So couldn't it be an action that continues in the previous line of actions/statements of "these executors of the estate are bad, they make questionable decisions, remove them and give the control to family for the protection of MJ's legacy"?

In short how can you, better yet how can we all be so sure of anyone's motives?

Because many of us hear the same as Taryll and the Jacksons without having a slightest motive. Our ears simply don't hear Michael.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Like I've said several times on another board, the problem with the hoax theory is that not a lot of thought is given to what WOULD BE NEEDED in order for the hoax to be pulled off.

In order for such a hoax to be possible, a LOT of people would now have to hold their tongues :

The complete Cascio family, including the parents, and the brothers' girlfriends/wives if any.
James Porte, and HIS significant other/relatives.
Jason Malachi, and HIS significant other/relatives.

All of those people would have to have agreed to face the legal/financial repercussions that would surely happen if ANY ONE of them spilled the beans.

All of those people would have to trust one another, despite the fact that they would obviously know each other to be frauds and dishonest liars.

And all of those people -- especially the Cascios -- would have had to think that this was the easiest way to make a lot of money, when their connection to MJ could have been turned into lucrative deals in many much easier, much less risky ways : book deals, TV appearances, tabloid tell-all articles, sale of MJ memorabilia on Ebay, etc.

It still doesn't answer our question how come we don't hear Michael?

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

How can you be so sure about such thing?

Do we know what might have happened between Taryll and Cascio's first of all?

Roger Friedman has provided a plausible explanation for Taryll's anger towards the Cascios : he's jealous of them because he wanted MJ to record with 3T, but MJ wouldn't, and spent more time with the Cascios than with his own family.

Another big question remains : if the songs are fake, why would the Jacksons or even just Taryll not sue Sony/the Estate? They've sued for less before.

 

[ivy]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Like I've said several times on another board, the problem with the hoax theory is that not a lot of thought is given to what WOULD BE NEEDED in order for the hoax to be pulled off.

In order for such a hoax to be possible, a LOT of people would now have to hold their tongues :

The complete Cascio family, including the parents, and the brothers' girlfriends/wives if any.
James Porte, and HIS significant other/relatives.
Jason Malachi, and HIS significant other/relatives.

All of those people would have to have agreed to face the legal/financial repercussions that would surely happen if ANY ONE of them spilled the beans.

All of those people would have to trust one another, despite the fact that they would obviously know each other to be frauds and dishonest liars.

And all of those people -- especially the Cascios -- would have had to think that this was the easiest way to make a lot of money, when their connection to MJ could have been turned into lucrative deals in many much easier, much less risky ways : book deals, TV appearances, tabloid tell-all articles, sale of MJ memorabilia on Ebay, etc.

In addition people do not consider consequences as well. for example due to the recent events people have been waiting for a confession from Jason Malachi - however fail to realize how unlikely it is because of

such confession for Jason
- will be admitting to fraud and open the door to lawsuits, financial consequences
- as a deputy sheriff loss of his job / pension and never be able to employed by any law agency
- probably never able to get a job in the music industry as he will forever be labelled as "MJ faker"

Because many of us hear the same as Taryll and the Jacksons without having a slightest motive. Our ears simply don't hear Michael.

for the fans in other words us:

Motive - no of course not. but how about bias? everyone of us is biased one way or another.

Plus do not forget that there's a group of people who hear Michael - so again it's not an undisputed "for sure" fact.

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

I don't know the Jacksons. I don't know the Cascios. I don't know Teddy Riley. To me, they are people related to Michael in his life. I don't like them. I don't dislike them. In short, I'm indifferent. What the Jacksons said does not carry more weight; or vice versa.

I don't even want to examine their motives. I don't even want to decipher their cryptic tweets.

Focus on the songs and the sound, could someone explain why the vocals sound so strange ONLY on the Cascio tracks? Could someone give me one valid explanation? Not excuse, but explanation. Could someone explain to me why the singing skills Michael's born with are totally absent from the Cascio tracks (the vibrato on I Want You Back sounds better than the one on KYHU)? Could someone explain to me why there is no single trace of Michael's creative inputs in the Cascio tracks?

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Roger Friedman has provided a plausible explanation for Taryll's anger towards the Cascios : he's jealous of them because he wanted MJ to record with 3T, but MJ wouldn't, and spent more time with the Cascios than with his own family.

Another big question remains : if the songs are fake, why would the Jacksons or even just Taryll not sue Sony/the Estate? They've sued for less before.

Roger Friedman is full of bull shit! He already proved that in the past. If I admit what RF says, then I would have to admit that I myself am jaelous that Michael spent more time with the Cascios than with me only because I claim the same as Taryll.

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

It still doesn't answer our question how come we don't hear Michael?

A lot of people DO hear MJ -- from other fans, to music reviewers, to Greg Phillinganes and all of the others who apparently vouch for the songs' authenticity.

But to answer your question, maybe you don't hear Michael :

1- Before the first impression created by "Breaking News", with its overly processed vocals, and its surprising third-person lyrics, influenced your subsequent impression of all of the other Cascio tracks. Ask yourself : if the first song streamed had been "KYHU", which certainly sounds "more" like the usual MJ, would the whole debate have even taken place?

2- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the greatest vocalist of his generation, had deteriorated to the point where he sounded like what he sounds like on the Cascio tracks.

3- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the darling of all of the greatest producers in the world, had seen his fortunes decline to the point where he even considered recording half-baked R&B tunes with semi-amateur nobodies like the Cascios.

By the way, I for one haven't made up my mind regarding the Cascio tracks : I don't know if they're fake or not.

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

^Ivy, first, I'm not trying to put you on a spotlight. I'm just curious.

Aside from your consideration of legal and financial consequences Sony, the Estate and the Cascio would face, aside from your logical thinking, aside from what the Estate has formally communicated to the fans, what do you really think of Breaking News, Monster, KYHU, All I Need and Stay?

What your instinct tells you? Do you hear Michael? Do you hear the voice that you love passionately? Do you feel the stark difference when Best of Joy starts to play after Monster?

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Focus on the songs and the sound, could someone explain why the vocals sound so strange ONLY on the Cascio tracks? Could someone give me one valid explanation? Not excuse, but explanation. Could someone explain to me why the singing skills Michael's born with are totally absent from the Cascio tracks (the vibrato on I Want You Back sounds better than the one on KYHU)? Could someone explain to me why there is no single trace of Michael's creative inputs in the Cascio tracks?

The vocals ALSO sound strange on Hollywood Tonight, and I'm 100 % convinced that if THAT song had been leaked to us in advance as a Cascio track, everybody would have called it obviously fake.

As for MJ's singing skills on the Cascio tracks, is KYHU such an awful vocal performance? If the exact same song had been released on Invincible, would you all be calling it an obvious step down from earlier songs?

And as for MJ's creative inputs in the Cascio tracks, some could argue that they're all over them, since all three Cascio tracks on the album are very similar in themes with classic MJ cuts from the past. And if you think there is no MJ input in those songs, maybe it's simply because he didn't write them. Anyway, it's not as if MJ's classic touch is all over songs like "Heaven Can Wait", "Break of Dawn" or "2000 Watts" on the Invincible album.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

A lot of people DO hear MJ -- from other fans, to music reviewers, to Greg Phillinganes and all of the others who apparently vouch for the songs' authenticity.

But to answer your question, maybe you don't hear Michael :

1- Before the first impression created by "Breaking News", with its overly processed vocals, and its surprising third-person lyrics, influenced your subsequent impression of all of the other Cascio tracks. Ask yourself : if the first song streamed had been "KYHU", which certainly sounds "more" like the usual MJ, would the whole debate have even taken place?

2- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the greatest vocalist of his generation, had deteriorated to the point where he sounded like what he sounds like on the Cascio tracks.

3- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the darling of all of the greatest producers in the world, had seen his fortunes decline to the point where he even considered recording half-baked R&B tunes with semi-amateur nobodies like the Cascios.

By the way, I for one haven't made up my mind regarding the Cascio tracks : I don't know if they're fake or not.

Your explanations are not sufficient.

First, the first time I heard BN, I was happy to finally hear the new song and even didn't bother who was it recorded with or where. I simply couldn't recognize Michael's voice. I had a happy face with an attempted smile when I was listening to it. I failed to smile because something in the timbre and the accent disturbed me. It was unpleasantly unusual.

Second, I honestly was open to the idea that it was Michael. I accepted the story of melodyne thing and all the heavy processing to it. But when I heard Monster, I found it even more less believable to be Michael. especially the way some words were pronounced. I am even not talking about the melody, but simply the voice timbre, lack of power, lack of husk, strange accent and intonation. For the first time in my life I preferred the other singer on the duet, in this case 50 cent. He actually saved the song.

Third, I didn't care if it were Cascios or 3T, or whoever, I just wanted to hear Michael's voice. Even if it was in the subway. But it is not.

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Your explanations are not sufficient.

First, the first time I heard BN, I was happy to finally hear the new song and even didn't bother who was it recorded with or where. I simply couldn't recognize Michael's voice. I had a happy face with an attempted smile when I was listening to it. I failed to smile because something in the timbre and the accent disturbed me. It was unpleasantly unusual.

Second, I honestly was open to the idea that it was Michael. I accepted the story of melodyne thing and all the heavy processing to it. But when I heard Monster, I found it even more less believable to be Michael. especially the way some words were pronounced. I am even not talking about the melody, but simply the voice timbre, lack of power, lack of husk, strange accent and intonation. For the first time in my life I preferred the other singer on the duet, in this case 50 cent. He actually saved the song.

Third, I didn't care if it were Cascios or 3T, or whoever, I just wanted to hear Michael's voice. Even if it was in the subway. But it is not.

Fair enough, but let me ask you this : what about KYHU? Do you think the voice on that song is very different from MJ's? If that song had been the first one streamed on the official Web site, would your smile had been merely attempted, or would you have happily thought this was simply the latest anthem-like song from good ol' MJ?

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

The vocals ALSO sound strange on Hollywood Tonight, and I'm 100 % convinced that if THAT song had been leaked to us in advance as a Cascio track, everybody would have called it obviously fake.

As for MJ's singing skills on the Cascio tracks, is KYHU such an awful vocal performance? If the exact same song had been released on Invincible, would you all be calling it an obvious step down from earlier songs?

And as for MJ's creative inputs in the Cascio tracks, some could argue that they're all over them, since all three Cascio tracks on the album are very similar in themes with classic MJ cuts from the past. And if you think there is no MJ input in those songs, maybe it's simply because he didn't write them. Anyway, it's not as if MJ's classic touch is all over songs like "Heaven Can Wait", "Break of Dawn" or "2000 Watts" on the Invincible album.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

Hollywood Tonight doesn't sound strange at all. It is exactly Michaels tone, tune, husk, accent, everything is right where it should be. It spouses MJ's fans ears to such an extent that there is no discussion about it being fake or not. Beyond any doubt it is Michael.

Only people who don't know Michael's voice would claim Hollywood tonight as fake.

You are implicitly trying to say that we were brainwashed by the Jacksons claiming that the Cascio songs are fake. This is not the case. I am repeating many of us heard the leaked songs before even reading what the Jackson had said. And we were not aware that the Jacksons too tought that they were fakes.

 

[Jesta]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Can someone tell me how to post MP3s on here? I think I may have something to show.

 

[Aniram]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

Didn't several people close to Michael around the time of his death say that he was very upset and disappointed with how his vocals had been deteriorating over the years?

If his voice was in perfect shape, why would he have to use backing tracks on This Is It(and why only one verse on Thriller 2008)? Of course, he sang a couple songs, but that's not very hard. What if, during the Cascio sessions, he was weaker, and he did several vocal takes to the point where he was losing his voice or had to use more force?

In This Is It, he sang moderately. Who knows how much or how hard he sang in the studio at the Cascios.

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

A lot of people DO hear MJ -- from other fans, to music reviewers, to Greg Phillinganes and all of the others who apparently vouch for the songs' authenticity.

But to answer your question, maybe you don't hear Michael :

1- Before the first impression created by "Breaking News", with its overly processed vocals, and its surprising third-person lyrics, influenced your subsequent impression of all of the other Cascio tracks. Ask yourself : if the first song streamed had been "KYHU", which certainly sounds "more" like the usual MJ, would the whole debate have even taken place?

2- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the greatest vocalist of his generation, had deteriorated to the point where he sounded like what he sounds like on the Cascio tracks.

3- Because you don't like the idea that MJ, once the darling of all of the greatest producers in the world, had seen his fortunes decline to the point where he even considered recording half-baked R&B tunes with semi-amateur nobodies like the Cascios.

By the way, I for one haven't made up my mind regarding the Cascio tracks : I don't know if they're fake or not.

1. Yes, it would. Because the vocals on Breaking News, Monster and Stay do sound strange. If I'm brainwashed, I should have hated All I Need. But, I like All I Need and hear Michael in the song.

2. Michael, the greatest vocalist of the 20th century, never deteriorated. Your point may be valid if we never hear how he sounded during the TII rehearsal. Michael never lost his ability to sing or convey emotion through his music. He sounded GREAT on WBSS 2008, HMH and Best of Joy. One of the reasons why this debate is still carrying on is because we all know Michael's vocals did not deteriorate. It puzzled us why he sounded so bad on the Cascio tracks.

3. Michael, the producer of his producers, could still commend the best of the best. He's not forced to record in a basement studio with unknown producer. In 2006, one year after the trial, he worked with will.i.am, one of the most popular music producers nowadays. The fact that he could still worked with the best of the best and in the most state-of-art studios add to the puzzle. Why would Michael Jackson, the perfectionist who always demanded the best of the best, recorded in a home studio with amateur producers?

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

You are implicitly trying to say that we were brainwashed by the Jacksons claiming that the Cascio songs are fake.

Not at all, but I'm saying (and I'm including myself in this) that Breaking News was such a shock, because of its overprocessed sound and its strange lyrics, that we had sort of a "rejection" reaction, and that we then naturally thought about what the Jacksons had said. And then, everytime a Cascio track came out -- since we knew in advance they were from the Cascios -- they automatically became suspicious.

I don't know if the Cascio tracks are fake or not, but I know -- in my case at least -- that if the first song on the web site had been KYHU, I would have never had such a negative and disbelieving reaction to it.

 

[smooth_criminal05]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Cascio Controversy Thread)

I often thought of this:

If the three Cascio tracks aren't Michael Jackson then Sony has successfully tricked every music critic in the world. Because not one critic from over 300 reviews thought the vocals weren't Michael. In fact most said they WERE Michael Jackson without a doubt. Just something to think about.