Michael - The Great Album Debate

[Birchey]

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

who are you listening to in this case? Because we had conflicting information. Taryll said they had one take / one track. Teddy said they had a few vocal tracks and that some that he was given was already combined.

I am not listening to anyone, I am looking at the ProTools session from August 30th 2010 at 2:28pm

 

[Birchey]

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

What does "slightly clipped" mean?

means there were recorded too loud, or have then edited too loud, the spikes hit over 0db or summat and are clipped causing slight distortion.

 

[ivy]

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

I am not listening to anyone, I am looking at the ProTools session from August 30th 2010 at 2:28pm

I understand that but you said "we are told the vocals are one take". my question is who told us the vocals are one take?

 

[Birchey]

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

I understand that but you said "we are told the vocals are one take". my question is who told us the vocals are one take?

Aha, I was working from what the overall take people involved in this have said, one take, low quality etc...

regardless all the songs contain multiple takes, every song, so maybe Taryll only got to listen to what people wanted him to listen to, also the same with Riley.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

No wonder we never got any of the things I was expecting: a detailed report from the audiologists and the reason why they believe it is MJ on those tracks. We've never got the chance to see any of it. Just their "gospel" word.

 

[love is magical]

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

means there were recorded too loud, or have then edited too loud, the spikes hit over 0db or summat and are clipped causing slight distortion.

thanks again. what does it really tell us if some vocals were recorded too loud?

I'm no expert. The way I intrepret this information is that it's highly suspicious that a recording of Michael Jackson can consist of these kind of mistakes. Afterall, he's the master in studio. It doesn't make sense for him to tolerate such errors. Am I totally on the wrong track?

 

[Birchey]

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

I know this is a bit shocking, but you have to understand, I have a right to talk freely about what I have seen heard, but I have no intention of making the "evidence" public, I dont want that on my head, but I really feel like I have to mention this stuff.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

I know this is a bit shocking, but you have to understand, I have a right to talk freely about what I have seen heard, but I have no intention of making the "evidence" public, I dont want that on my head, but I really feel like I have to mention this stuff.

We're all ears

 

[ivy]

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

Aha, I was working from what the overall take people involved in this have said, one take, low quality etc...

regardless all the songs contain multiple takes, every song, so maybe Taryll only got to listen to what people wanted him to listen to, also the same with Riley.

got it.

Taryll is the one who claims one track. Teddy didn't. He said that he had separate tracks for Michael and James Porte, he said a few tracks, he acknowledged "processing to make them more presentable" and he also mentioned himself adding "oohs, vocal attacks, fxs are samples to finish the songs". So isn't this really in sync with Teddy Riley's explanation?

bingo!!! Also the Raw vocals from track to track are distinctly different volumes, some are even slightly clipped.

means there were recorded too loud, or have then edited too loud, the spikes hit over 0db or summat and are clipped causing slight distortion.

thanks again. what does it really tell us if some vocals were recorded too loud?

To me it doesn't sound like "proper recording". So now what is the theory? they hired an impersonator that's not good so they had to do multiple takes that hey couldn't maintain a certain volume level and/or had errors editing them even causing distortions.

So do we have a totally imperfect vocals / processing giving us such a perfect fake that it can't be proven by music experts?

 

[Deniro UK]

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

We're all ears

We sure are! Any information about anything on the tracks is priceless atm

 

[Birchey]

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

got it.

Taryll is the one who claims one track. Teddy didn't. He said that he had separate tracks for Michael and James Porte, he said a few tracks, he acknowledged "processing to make them more presentable" and he also mentioned himself adding "oohs, vocal attacks, fxs are samples to finish the songs". So isn't this really in sync with Teddy Riley's explanation?

Teddy said he has several tracks and some complete, these raw demos have so many vocal outtakes and overdubbed vocals on them you could consider them proper studio cuts. infact they are over the top studio cuts

To me it doesn't sound like "proper recording". So now what is the theory? they hired an impersonator that's not good so they had to do multiple takes that hey couldn't maintain a certain volume level and/or had errors editing them even causing distortions.

So do we have a totally imperfect vocals / processing giving us such a perfect fake that it can't be proven by music experts?

No, the thing is, the impersonator wasn't fool proof, thats why this thread is here and so heavily discussed, Michael did multiple takes, every artist does, its common practice in the studio, and thats the problem, its a classic studio scenario.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

Teddy said he has several tracks and some complete, these raw demos have so many vocal outtakes and overdubbed vocals on them you could consider them proper studio cuts. infact they are over the top studio cuts



No, the thing is, the impersonator wasn't fool proof, thats why this thread is here and so heavily discussed, Michael did multiple takes, every artist does, its common practice in the studio, and thats the problem, its a classic studio scenario.

Would Michael really order to erase all the trace behind him or are they hiding their way of fabricating those songs?

 

[love is magical]

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

So do we have a totally imperfect vocals / processing giving us such a perfect fake that it can't be proven by music experts?

First, are the songs really that perfect? If the songs are that perfect, we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

Second, do we know which takes was presented to the musicologists, Bruce Swedien, and others?

Third, do we know when the musicologists got involved? Did they get involved before the mixing and editing or after?

Forth, is the assurance from the music experts "absolute assurance" or "reasonable assurance"?

 

[StellaJackson]

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

I think if you have evidence you should show it. They are the ones in the wrong and none of this is fair on Michael's fans. This issue must be dealt with. What can you tell us about the song Water? I presume it's not what Michael sang a little bit of in This Is It?

 

[love is magical]

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

Teddy said he has several tracks and some complete, these raw demos have so many vocal outtakes and overdubbed vocals on them you could consider them proper studio cuts. infact they are over the top studio cuts



No, the thing is, the impersonator wasn't fool proof, thats why this thread is here and so heavily discussed, Michael did multiple takes, every artist does, its common practice in the studio, and thats the problem, its a classic studio scenario.

I think I get your point. If these vocals are just guide vocals or demos, it doesn't make sense for the raw vocals to be so processed already.

The situation is contradictory. The way the raw vocals were presented do not scream basement studio demos recorded when Michael was in a "I-don't-care-because-it's-demo" mode. Instead, they are more like outcome from several studio recording sessions.

 

[StellaJackson]

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

I think if you have evidence you should show it. They are the ones in the wrong and none of this is fair on Michael's fans. This issue must be dealt with. What can you tell us about the song Water? I presume it's not what Michael sang a little bit of in This Is It?

 

[Birchey]

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

I think if you have evidence you should show it. They are the ones in the wrong and none of this is fair on Michael's fans. This issue must be dealt with. What can you tell us about the song Water? I presume it's not what Michael sang a little bit of in This Is It?

I can't share anything its not my right, but I do have every right to talk about what i have seen and heard. The chorus in Water is similar to TII except MJ sings the word water three times on TII, its only sung twice on the Cascio demo, but its in the same sort of tone, expect it has tons of stcked backing vox singing it too.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

I however just wonder if they hired a soundalike, is it really the one that we doubters are hearing or are we deaf.

Actually Birchey, tell us simply this, are we deaf what we hear?

 

[mjjesamor]

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

So the perfect crime has been committed, cunning and calculated. Basically the tracks are as fake as fake can be but it is impossible to prove. Sickening. I hope the people responsible rot.

 

[StellaJackson]

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

Oh, and this cropped up today.

http://www.myspace.com/video/vid/107665112

 

[ivy]

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

First, are the songs really that perfect? If the songs are that perfect, we wouldn't be having this discussion now.

Second, do we know which takes was presented to the musicologists, Bruce Swedien, and others?

Third, do we know when the musicologists got involved? Did they get involved before the mixing and editing or after?

Forth, is the assurance from the music experts "absolute assurance" or "reasonable assurance"?

I'm using "perfect" as an oxymoron. can you explain to me if these songs are this much imperfect (meaning obvious takes, cuts and pastes, errors, additions etc) how can they fool people and better yet how can't it proven in a court of law?

I'm saying how could such an imperfect fake could result in a perfect fraud?

If these vocals are just guide vocals or demos, it doesn't make sense for the raw vocals to be so processed already.

If you listen to Teddy he says the vocals went through processing by Cascio's to make them presentable.

Think like this - you have Michael's vocals left on your phone machine. Do you take them to the record company as is , or do you try to make them better so that they could be more presentable.

 

[StellaJackson]

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

I can't share anything its not my right, but I do have every right to talk about what i have seen and heard. The chorus in Water is similar to TII except MJ sings the word water three times on TII, its only sung twice on the Cascio demo, but its in the same sort of tone, expect it has tons of stcked backing vox singing it too.

Ok fair enough. What can you tell us about the lyrical content of the other tracks?

 

[Jesta]

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

Is it just me, or was the last page mostly copies of the same post. Is it a forum glitch?

 

[Deniro UK]

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

Is it just me, or was the last page mostly copies of the same post. Is it a forum glitch?

Yep same here, was running slow too

 

[ivy]

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

Is it just me, or was the last page mostly copies of the same post. Is it a forum glitch?

seems like we suddenly had double - triple posts. I cleaned them. let me know if I wrongly deleted something.

 

[Deniro UK]

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

Wow so Water from TII really is the song too....interesting

 

[Jesta]

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

So if "Water" is very similar to "Water" from "This Is It", does that shed a light, even a tiny one, of credibility on these tracks?

 

[Birchey]

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

If you listen to Teddy he says the vocals went through processing by Cascio's to make them presentable.

Think like this - you have Michael's vocals left on your phone machine. Do you take them to the record company as is , or do you try to make them better so that they could be more presentable.

Those reasons alone flare up massive concern. Firstly Michael was there for over 2 Months, yet they say they only have telephone vocals, secondly, if they did make them more presentable to Sony and at the same time tell them they did, and that they are from a telephone, why didn't they hand over any of the raw vocals? Its not like they were a secret to Sony/Riley.

And this is the biggy, there are 2 vocals tracks at the end of "Water" named "MJTelephone" & "MJTelephonenopan" which are clearly 2 different takes of the same line, whilst the rest of the song is primarily made from the vocal "MJLd" meaning "Michael Jackson Lead Vocals" now if the whole thing was telephone vocals why differentiate between the 2?

one thing about both the "telephone" and "lead" vocal that works in favour of the Cascio tracks is that they are both heavily clipped, I belive this is the only track which they are clipped. Yet one track of backing vocals is also clipped, abnother is not, and another is a "ghost" which means someone else singing too.

 

[mjjesamor]

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

It's the perfect fraud because the vocals have been processed to oblivion with tons of stacking....many different voices including michael's meaning the 'forensic musicologists' cannot prove definitively whether it is or is not michael. It's a fraud. Simple as. So angry right now.

 

[Jesta]

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

Could the telephone vocals be ones that he just wanted to get down, like trying out different deliveries? I'd imagine it wouldn't be too far-fetched in order to get something down.