Michael - The Great Album Debate

[Kapital77]

so is it some sort of conspiracy or does he know something that we don't?

There is conspiracy because WE know, Cascios know, The Jackson family knows, 3t knows, McClain knows, Rodney Jerkins knows, Roger knows and everybody knows that it´s not Michael in those tracks.

It´s Jason Malachi in those tracks written by James Porte & the Cascios.

 

[Jesta]

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

Uh... I think it's Michael. So do many other fans. So this situation is not so clear cut as expected.

 

[kopwatcher]

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

did you read what I have posted before?

Do you consider that he might know something more than we know and that's why he could be so adamant.

See he was the first to mention the presence of Cascio songs, he even gave the names before it was reported, he was first about the "work tapes" - so I guess we can all agree that he has some sort of inside info probably coming from the Cascio side.

He was the person that reported MJ was in NJ in 2007. He also claims that he heard those songs pre-Michael in 2006.

so - just a scenario - did you even consider that he perhaps knew / heard that Michael recorded those songs before Michael's death, before any concern was raised and that's why he's so certain?

so is it some sort of conspiracy or does he know something that we don't?

My train of thought goes something like this:

• Given that Friedman has publically dogged MJ for most of his later career, why would he be given inside access? It doesn't make sense to me.
• Furthermore, why is he afforded this knowledge/peace of mind, but the fans, whom it is claimed the album is for, have not had that privilege to this day?
• Lastly - of course he's not going to bite the hand that feeds him. It's not logical. He's not going to accept inside access on the greatest entertainer on Earth, and then say the songs are fake, it's destructive for the relationship. It would be mutually beneficial to work together.

That's why I'm suspicious. You can't prove it either way, but my reasoning tells me something is up.

 

[ivy]

There is conspiracy because WE know, Cascios know, The Jackson family knows, 3t knows, McClain knows, Rodney Jerkins knows, Roger knows and everybody knows that it´s not Michael in those tracks.

It´s Jason Malachi in those tracks written by James Porte & the Cascios.

and when should I expect to see the fraud lawsuit then?

don't kid yourself, it's just personal opinion that even hasn't been taken to court to argue (forget proof, it's not even legally claimed). It's just twitter and message board rants. don't make it sound like it's factual, undebatable truth. It's not.

 

[Kapital77]

don't kid yourself, it's just personal opinion that even hasn't been taken to court to argue (forget proof, it's not even legally claimed). It's just twitter and message board rants. don't make it sound like it's factual, undebatable truth. It's not.

i don´t kid myself.

The only truth it´s this one:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=C7QINXGE

The words are words, the truth is when you heard Jason Malachi in those songs, when you heard his snorts in the Cascio´s songs, when you heard his voice in those songs.

There is no more debate.

The rare thing it´s that you did not recognize that it´s Jason Malachi in those tracks with the great amount of comparison and proof that we had give you.

 

[love is magical]

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

My train of thought goes something like this:

• Given that Friedman has publically dogged MJ for most of his later career, why would he be given inside access? It doesn't make sense to me.
• Furthermore, why is he afforded this knowledge/peace of mind, but the fans, whom it is claimed the album is for, have not had that privilege to this day?
• Lastly - of course he's not going to bite the hand that feeds him. It's not logical. He's not going to accept inside access on the greatest entertainer on Earth, and then say the songs are fake, it's destructive for the relationship. It would be mutually beneficial to work together.

That's why I'm suspicious. You can't prove it either way, but my reasoning tells me something is up.

Good points. Why RF was given such exclusive insider info?

Reading RF's article now, I can't help but wonder whether Sony is really this out-of-touch. It seems Sony is really keen on the Cascio tracks. They belive the songs are strong with "perfect" vocals. Sony decided to include these questionable tracks and exclude the songs with truly amazing vocals such as BG, DYKWYCA and STTR. Do they know Michael's music at all?

 

[ivy]

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

Kapital

you are entitled to your opinion - if you don't think it's Michael fine. But refrain from pushing your opinion as the ultimate truth on to other people.

 

[Kapital77]

Don´t you think that there are many many strange things with those songs?.

How could be possible that tons of fans, the Jackson Family, producers and others tells it´s not Michael..... and i have to stay in calm with this situation when the comparisons shows it´s not Michael and it´s Jason?:

http://rapidshare.com/files/455006416/JASON_MALACHI_FAKENEWS.rar

!!!! It´s the MJ MUSIC LEGACY !!!!.

 

[Jesta]

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

I can think of a reason why they're so keen to use the Cascio tracks: they're merely vocals. They can alter the songs to fit whatever rhythm they want, and they can do it without "tampering" with the original vision of the song.

Also remember, the Estate are the ones who choose which songs go on an album.

 

[ivy]

How could be possible that tons of fans, the Jackson Family, producers and others tells it´s not Michael.....

well don't forget tons of other fans and other producers and others also tell it's Michael.

in short it's a debate of differentiated opinions

 

[Kapital77]

And you don´t believe in the Jackson Family?, in 3T?, in Jackie?, in Katherine?, in Jermaine?, in Randy?, Rodney Jerkins?, Karen Faye?.

Do you prefer to believe in the Cascio´s family and Teddy Riley when you know that there is no proof that Michael sung on that songs?.

What will you said when the kids will be older and said that it was not his father in those tracks?.

 

[Jesta]

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

Strange, could've sworn there was a work tape...

 

[Minimj]

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

That is the problem.. this whole case, none of it is truth except speculation. That's it nothing more.

I know one thing, I don't make people believe what I think, it is time wasting. People will see sense in there own time. They make mistakes and learn, it's life.

 

[mickeyJ]

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

well don't forget tons of other fans and other producers and others also tell it's Michael.

in short it's a debate of differentiated opinions

what's your view on the 'yelps' comparison that pentum produced?

 

[Minimj]

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

Strange, could've sworn there was a work tape...

There was.. well Korgnex posted it, and I seem to have lost it. They were meant to release it.. but nothing.

Unless they are keeping it until a court case does come up, who knows, all words.

(Ooops.. should have put this in my last post, sorry!)

 

[Jesta]

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

Wait, do you mean that Korgnex actually has/had a copy of the work tape!?

Either way, why should they in all honesty? If anything, a work tape is something that an artist would not release. There are people here who accuse the Cascios of selling out MJ and his privacy, but surely a tape with what could be an intimate conversation would only invade his privacy more.

 

[Minimj]

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

Wait, do you mean that Korgnex actually has/had a copy of the work tape!?

O noooooooooooo, (not to my knowledge) he just posted the article about the tape being released.

 

[love is magical]

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

I can think of a reason why they're so keen to use the Cascio tracks: they're merely vocals. They can alter the songs to fit whatever rhythm they want, and they can do it without "tampering" with the original vision of the song.

Also remember, the Estate are the ones who choose which songs go on an album.

Everything is so out of Michael's character. Why would he recorded not one, not two, not three, but 12 demos with mere vocals? Laying down vocals was what Michael tended to do after he got all the music in place. Okay, so all of these are just "guide vocals" recorded for the musicians and are supposed to be replaced later. Then, how could all these guide vocals be so "perfect" as insisted by Roger Friedman.

Do you see how Roger Fridemand trash John McClain? How he said the Cascio tracks sound great and strong?

Have it come across to you that the reason the Estate disinclinated to show any evidence to fans is that the evidence is going to show how bad and filmsy those demos really are and that the demos should have never been sold and used.

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

i don´t kid myself.

The only truth it´s this one:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=C7QINXGE

The words are words, the truth is when you heard Jason Malachi in those songs, when you heard his snorts in the Cascio´s songs, when you heard his voice in those songs.

There is no more debate.

The rare thing it´s that you did not recognize that it´s Jason Malachi in those tracks with the great amount of comparison and proof that we had give you.

I'm sorry but I just had to point this out, Youtube comparisons of the same one-liners over and over again, is FAR from proof.

And you don´t believe in the Jackson Family?, in 3T?, in Jackie?, in Katherine?, in Jermaine?, in Randy?, Rodney Jerkins?, Karen Faye?.

Uhm, no. And your facts aren't even accurate, Jackie Jackson said nothing about the album regarding the vocals, in fact the only thing that he factually said about the album was that it was incredible, and that he loves it, his words not mine. Why should anyone believe Randy? What makes him more credible than Teddy Riley or The Cascio's? Nothing, at least Teddy Riley and The Cascio's never scammed money from Michael's own fans, right under his nose. We should believe the same Randy Jackson, that is believed by many to be the cause of Michael's rumored financial troubles? Sorry, but no. And since when, has Jermaine Jackson EVER been a reliable source when it comes to Michael Jackson? The same Jermaine Jackson who completely dis-acknowledged his owns brothers skin condition, for the sake of slandering him in a record so fans could "see his side of the story"? Again, he holds 0% of credibility when it comes to Michael Jackson. Oh, wait, there's Karen Faye, we should totally believe her, the same woman who said Michael was enjoying himself, and was looking great and was so ready to go on tour, until he passed that is. Then she changed her story and began to support the TINI campaign and claims Michael was worked to death, completely dis-acknowledging her own previous statements before June 25th. The same woman who holds sole responsibility of pictures of Michael's resting place being leaked all over the internet, then raged against fans for simply sharing a picture that she alone, posted on the internet.

Michael said it best, "My hairstylist is going on TV doing interviews, and she doesn't know the slightest thing about me."

And why has my request of video of Katherine Jackson and the kids claiming that the voice isn't Michael's, gone ignored for at least 10 pages? Maybe it's because such video doesn't exist and your best source is a tabloid article?

 

[Jesta]

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

In all fairness, the raw vocals could be a lot better. We've just got a heavily-processed/manipulated version of those vocals. Yes, I agree that a work tape of sorts will show that these songs were a poor choice for the album, but such is life. They probably saw the potential that they had to create something completely original using the vocals.

 

[ivy]

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

[*]Given that Friedman has publically dogged MJ for most of his later career, why would he be given inside access? It doesn't make sense to me.

I don't think he was given inside access per se for example Harvey Levin from TMZ mentioned attending to a special listen, Roger didn't. However it is apparent that he always had connection with people close to Michael as he always reported changes in Michael's business first with detail. He simply has his sources which include Jacksons as well.

[*]Furthermore, why is he afforded this knowledge/peace of mind, but the fans, whom it is claimed the album is for, have not had that privilege to this day?

I think it's mostly due to the reaction , open mindsets. For example we discussed this before for a second assume what Teddy Riley told us was the truth and there's notes that showing that Michael wrote / changed the lyrics. Would it make a difference? Assume that Roger was telling the truth and there's a work tape I don't know in which Michael is recorded saying "Eddie this part needs more bass" etc. Would you convince you or would you say "well it shows Michael knew this songs but he didn't record them it's still Jason".

Look to last few pages 2 people openly said nothing will change their minds. If this is the case then why even try, it's a futile attempt. why start the fire again?

They can simply call reporters , media channels and say "look we know Jacksons claim this and that but we have this supporting proof" to make it a non-story.

[*]Lastly - of course he's not going to bite the hand that feeds him. It's not logical. He's not going to accept inside access on the greatest entertainer on Earth, and then say the songs are fake, it's destructive for the relationship. It would be mutually beneficial to work together.

well he blasted Joe and the other Jacksons, didn't he? How's that working together?

 

[Minimj]

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

Everything is so out of Michael's character. Why would he recorded not one, not two, not three, but 12 demos with mere vocals? Laying down vocals was what Michael tended to do after he got all the music in place. Okay, so all of these are just "guide vocals" recorded for the musicians and are supposed to be replaced later. Then, how could all these guide vocals be so "perfect" as insisted by Roger Friedman.

Do you see how Roger Fridemand trash John McClain? How he said the Cascio tracks sound great and strong?

Have it come across to you that the reason the Estate disinclinated to show any evidence to fans is that the evidence is going to show how bad and filmsy those demos really are and that the demos should have never been sold and used.

That is the bit where I was like.. Wow that must be a record for Michael to do that within a few months. But then I was like, the lyrics were already written, and most likely the instrumental, so it was merely just laying down vocals if he did any.

Hence why when Teddy said he received no Instrumental.. I thought errrr, something isn't up, the rest all have instrumentals, except Breaking News/Monster.. which I thought would have been completed totally as it would be something close to Michael's heart.. tearing down the tabloids. But who knows?

 

[ivy]

And you don´t believe in the Jackson Family?, in 3T?, in Jackie?, in Katherine?, in Jermaine?, in Randy?, Rodney Jerkins?, Karen Faye?.

Do you prefer to believe in the Cascio´s family and Teddy Riley when you know that there is no proof that Michael sung on that songs?.

What will you said when the kids will be older and said that it was not his father in those tracks?.

I wrote this before. I'll believe Jacksons when they take an action.

Joe claimed Michael's will to be fake - yet he didn't make the claim in court when he objected to the executors.
Joe claimed TII had body doubles - we all know how that turned out.
Taj went to court to object TII and memorabilia tour - yet he didn't go to court about the album.
Katherine claims she's not getting enough money- yet she doesn't go the court to make any requests.
Many Jackson's cry murder, conspiracy - yet they don't go to authorities and say that you can read "the truth" in their books.
3T sent 10 or so tweets for a few days about the album , promising to protect their uncle's legacy but then it was over. They moved on.

so no, It's hard to take it seriously. The day they take action and put their money where their mouth is I will say "they might have a legit claim here".

ps: there's no rule that says I have to blindly accept what they say because their surname happens to be Jackson.

and I don't "prefer" to believe in anyone. I hear Michael with supporting vocals of James Porte.

 

[kopwatcher]

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

I don't think he was given inside access per se for example Harvey Levin from TMZ mentioned attending to a special listen, Roger didn't. However it is apparent that he always had connection with people close to Michael as he always reported changes in Michael's business first with detail. He simply has his sources which include Jacksons as well.

You said yourself that we can all agree that his source is likely to be from The Cascio side. Unusual that they would choose him, don'tchathink?

well he blasted Joe and the other Jacksons, didn't he? How's that working together?

I thought the Jacksons were opposed to the Cascio songs.

 

[love is magical]

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

In all fairness, the raw vocals could be a lot better. We've just got a heavily-processed/manipulated version of those vocals. Yes, I agree that a work tape of sorts will show that these songs were a poor choice for the album, but such is life. They probably saw the potential that they had to create something completely original using the vocals.

If the raw vocals are better, then why over-processed them to make them worse?

What potential that they saw that I failed to see? Do they really think Monster is a better song than STTR? STTR is as marketable as Monster.

The fact that they took the liberty to create something out of nothing is very bothering. So, why are these songs called Michael Jackson songs? The music is not Michael's. The vocals are not 100% Michaels. They are not approved by Michael. For Best of Joy, at least we know it's Michael's voice. For Hollywood Tonight, at least we know Michael had been working on the song since the late 90's. For Much Too Soon, at least we knew Michael recorded it during the HIStory session and Bruce Swedien worked on one of the mixes. For Behind the Mask, at least we knew Michael recorded it in the 80's.

I understnad the nature of posthumous release. So, no need to explain to me that now that Michael is gone, it's better to have something than nothing and songs are not going to live up to his standard. For me, Best of Joy lives up to the standard. Behind the Mask lives up to the standard. Much Too Soon, Blue Gangster, DYKWYCA, STTR all live up to the standard. These are the songs that should be released with the name Michael Jackson.

I just don't think it's appropriate to release tracks with minimal to no imputs from Michael.

 

[Kapital77]

I wrote this before. I'll believe Jacksons when they take an action.

You don´t need that they will go to court to believe or not believe in them.

Michael never go to court to defend himself agains Chandler and we believed in MJ.

They, McClain and other knows more than us about this matter and it´s sure that they will claim whenever they want.

The main thing it´s to see that in those comparisons it´s clear that it´s the voice of Malachi, because it´s his tone, his snorts, his faults, his vibratto, and there are no proof Michael sung on that songs.

Tons of fans musn´t be wrong.

 

[Arklove]

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

If the raw vocals are better, then why over-processed them to make them worse?

What potential that they saw that I failed to see? Do they really think Monster is a better song than STTR? STTR is as marketable as Monster.

The fact that they took the liberty to create something out of nothing is very bothering. So, why are these songs called Michael Jackson songs? The music is not Michael's. The vocals are not 100% Michaels. They are not approved by Michael. For Best of Joy, at least we know it's Michael's voice. For Hollywood Tonight, at least we know Michael had been working on the song since the late 90's. For Much Too Soon, at least we knew Michael recorded it during the HIStory session and Bruce Swedien worked on one of the mixes. For Behind the Mask, at least we knew Michael recorded it in the 80's.

I understnad the nature of posthumous release. So, no need to explain to me that now that Michael is gone, it's better to have something than nothing and songs are not going to live up to his standard. For me, Best of Joy lives up to the standard. Behind the Mask lives up to the standard. Much Too Soon, Blue Gangster, DYKWYCA, STTR all live up to the standard. These are the songs that should be released with the name Michael Jackson.

I just don't think it's appropriate to release tracks with minimal to no imputs from Michael.

Well said...Exactly...To me, the finishing touches on BTM, BOJ, MTS are a dignified, respectful way to present these songs as posthumous Michael Jackson releases...You can't say the same with the Cascio songs....Not with the way they've handled them...

 

[Kapital77]

Uhm, no. And your facts aren't even accurate, Jackie Jackson said nothing about the album regarding the vocals, in fact the only thing that he factually said about the album was that it was incredible, and that he loves it, his words not mine.

The truth will be know, sooner or later, and i you will be very sorry to say those things against the Jackson Family.

And also don´t forget what Rodney Jerkins said, Batten, the written from "Of the record", the doubts from Quincy Jones, Will i am, producers, musicians, etc.. .

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

The truth will be know, sooner or later, and i you will be very sorry to say those things against the Jackson Family.

And also don´t forget what Rodney Jerkins said, Batten, the written from "Of the record", the doubts from Quincy Jones, Will i am, producers, musicians, etc.. .

You have no clue what tracks he was referring to. Why after the album released he sticks to his claim that the album is incredible, and he loves it, despite the songs still being on there? Does he have some sort of version that no one else does?

You don´t need that they will go to court to believe or not believe in them.

Michael never go to court to defend himself agains Chandler and we believed in MJ.

They, McClain and other knows more than us about this matter and it´s sure that they will claim whenever they want.

The main thing it´s to see that in those comparisons it´s clear that it´s the voice of Malachi, because it´s his tone, his snorts, his faults, his vibratto, and there are no proof Michael sung on that songs.

Tons of fans musn´t be wrong.

Again, your "fact's" are inaccurate. Michael wanted to fight that in court, he was advised by his legal staff not to.

 

[ivy]

You said yourself that we can all agree that his source is likely to be from The Cascio side. Unusual that they would choose him, don'tchathink?

I think it was a preexisting relationship. 2006 listen , 2007 reporting of MJ's NJ stay.

I thought the Jacksons were opposed to the Cascio songs.

before that. When Joe and Leonard Rowe called him to give him inside scoop of how they were managing Michael, he blasted them. even though Randy was his inside source , he blamed him for Michael's troubles. To me it doesn't seem like he goes along with everything he's told just to stay friendly with the sources.

how about point 2.

Michael never go to court to defend himself agains Chandler and we believed in MJ.

he hired lawyers and came to a settlement. Arbitration, negotiation, settlement etc they are all a kind of legal action / outcome.

Tons of fans musn´t be wrong.

how about the tons of fans who believe it's Michael? so they are wrong but you can't be wrong? Isn't that a claim of superiority ?