Michael - The Great Album Debate

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

A basic amateur-made comparison would suffice for our ears just the way it was done on the site I provided above. Why no one makes such a comparison with any of Michael's songs and says "listen, here you can clearly hear that Michael's voice and the voice on the Cascio are exactly the same"?

you didn't understand what I meant.

Cascio songs are guide/demo vocals with low quality and heavily processed as said by sony /estate /riley.

For a relative comparison we need non-Cascio songs that are guide vocals, low in quality and heavily processed.

and we don't have any other Michael songs that fits this. therefore no one can present you the comparison you want. (it's not an issue of ability to make a video).

They bought it in good faith and they sell it in good faith. What about some ethics here? Only because you bought it in good faith and afterwards you realize the product might be fake, does this give you the right to sell the product in good faith anyway under the pretext that they are legally covered?

It fits to ethics as they investigated the claims and didn't ignore them. by your logic you say that every claim has to be treated as correct regardless of the results of investigation.

by looking to the statement we can see that "might be fake" is introduced, it's checked and everything done pointed out to be "is real". so why wouldn't they release it?

think about this let's assume that police suspect someone "might be suspect" because of a witness statement yet in their investigation everything they find points to the opposite. so are they to arrest him just because he might be guilty?
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

you didn't understand what I meant.

Cascio songs are guide/demo vocals with low quality and heavily processed as said by sony /estate /riley.

For a relative comparison we need non-Cascio songs that are guide vocals, low in quality and heavily processed.

and we don't have any other Michael songs that fits this. therefore no one can present you the comparison you want. (it's not an issue of ability to make a video).

How on Earth is possible that they sound strikingly closer to someone else's vocals way more than to his own vocals, and not only on one track, but on all tracks!?

Are you saying that be it slower or faster tracks they are all heavily processed even if they actually don't sound that processed?

The "processed" story sounds more like an excuse than a reality. The reality being that the vocals are similar to Jason's more than to Michael's.

In other words, Jason could have sung those tracks, no one would have noticed the difference, since, reportedly, the vocals have been heavily processed to the extentthat we don't recognie Michael any more.

Further on, I wonder what kind of bunch of random poor and questionable vocals have the Cascios sold to necessitate such heavy processes? They undeniably did it for their own profit. What can we expect next? Vocals that sound like Lady Gaga after being heavily processed? Michael without Michael's real voice is simply not Michael, it is either a robot or Jason. What a "wonderful" tribute to the King of Pop after years of perfectionism he demonstrated.



It fits to ethics as they investigated the claims and didn't ignore them. by your logic you say that every claim has to be treated as correct regardless of the results of investigation.

No it does not. Go to www.michaeljackson.com and read the comments made by the fans. SONY are aware of the issue and completely ignore what the fans think of the Cascio tracks. It is unethical to sell something that has been questioned since the streaming of BN.

When I read your story, you explained very well how companies are interested in financial gain and don't give a damn about the fans, which is quite unethical. Now in your post above you actually defend the idea that it is ethical?

I just hope the truth really comes up and slaps either doubters or non doubters in the face.

by looking to the statement we can see that "might be fake" is introduced, it's checked and everything done pointed out to be "is real". so why wouldn't they release it?

I am sorry, but again, it is as real as the vocals on some of Jason's songs. I used "might" in the sentence only for the sake of pushing the argument to the extreme, not because I was doubting. If I had used my opinion in that argument, I wouldn't have used "might" but "is fake".

think about this let's assume that police suspect someone "might be suspect" because of a witness statement yet in their investigation everything they find points to the opposite. so are they to arrest him just because he might be guilty?

As I said, I used argumentative "might", not my opinion.

Now, even so, some "might-be-guilty" people happen to actually be guilty, but cannot be arrested only because of objective lack of proofs. This only indicates how the judicial system is imperfect.

I hear Jason, I prove it by putting the Cascio track next to Jason's track, yet it is not considered as a proof. On top of that not a single audiologist did pronounce themselves on that matter.

So, I am encouraging everyone here in this forum to make listen the comparisons bewteen the vocals on http://fakemichael.com/ to a maximum of people and ask them their opinion.

If SONY or Estate cared about the fans as they claimed, they'd ask the audiologist themselves to do it. But I see nothing coming.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

@Bumper

you are really mixing up your emotions and own opinions with what they are required to do. For example you argue that as the fans questioned the vocals it's imperative that they publish the details of their tests, however the simple reality is that they don't have to.

The good news is everyone has a choice. As they didn't put a gun to your head, you are free to not to buy the album, not to listen to it, dislike the parties involved in this product. Similarly if you believe that there has been a substantial wrong done here, you have the option to take it court and ask people to be kept responsible for their actions.

I can almost to a certainty assure you that you wouldn't be able to get any answers that would satisfy you in this thread.

ps: business ethics acknowledge that companies are profit oriented and ethics towards customers is mainly based on "cause no harm /disclose risks", "be fair", "respect human rights", "be open, truthful" and "respect their freedom of choice". Business ethics doesn't have the condition of "make everyone of your customers happy". They did "openly" told you that their product was "questioned" and what they did to address this, the rest was your choice.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

@Bumper

you are really mixing up your emotions and own opinions with what they are required to do. For example you argue that as the fans questioned the vocals it's imperative that they publish the details of their tests, however the simple reality is that they don't have to.

The good news is everyone has a choice. As they didn't put a gun to your head, you are free to not to buy the album, not to listen to it, dislike the parties involved in this product. Similarly if you believe that there has been a substantial wrong done here, you have the option to take it court and ask people to be kept responsible for their actions.

I can almost to a certainty assure you that you wouldn't be able to get any answers that would satisfy you in this thread.

ps: business ethics acknowledge that companies are profit oriented and ethics towards customers is mainly based on "cause no harm /disclose risks", "be fair", "respect human rights", "be open, truthful" and "respect their freedom of choice". Business ethics doesn't have the condition of "make everyone of your customers happy". They did "openly" told you that their product was "questioned" and what they did to address this, the rest was your choice.

Actually I am sticking to what they said -- that they take us, fans, seriously. If they don't take us seriously, then it means they simply lied that they take us seriously, which would mean that if they lied once, they could lie twice, thrice, etc.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Bumper it's like banging your head against a brick wall. I really would like to come into this thread just for support and to share my thoughts with like minded people. I am sick and tired of arguing with the same people who seem to have made it their mission to come into this thread to defend the cascio tracks. Is that too much to ask? To have one miserable thread on the whole forum where we can share our distress over these hideous tracks in peace? There is only one thread where we are allowed to say we think cascio tracks are fake right? Ivy i'm curious as to why you clearly feel so strongly about defending the cascio tracks? No disrespect but i have started to skip your posts. I just can't take it anymore... All this legal mumbo jumbo. At the end of the day the vocals are not michael's. I also think it's really unfair to tell us to sue sony as if we have the power to do so. I can't wait for the day when the truth comes out. A lot of people will have egg on their faces.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

^ Agreed. I don't read the long posts. The fact is that not one of the 'believers' can find ONE Michael Jackson song on which he sings anything like 'he' does on Monster. Why is that? From 3.50 onwards... when has Michael Jackson ever sounded ANYTHING like that?

It's just a desperate attempt to fudge the issue by expounding the legal ramifications of Sony's actions. Does it sound like Michael Jackson? No. Simple.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Thank god i'm not the only one that feels that way sam. Sometimes i feel like the people defending the tracks have an agenda that is beyond their own personal belief and that they know something we don't and believe it's best to just let this go for reasons we are not aware of. Just a hunch. The way some people made such sudden and radical turnarounds on their views just doesn't make sense to me.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Thank god i'm not the only one that feels that way sam. Sometimes i feel like the people defending the tracks have an agenda that is beyond their own personal belief and that they know something we don't and believe it's best to just let this go for reasons we are not aware of. Just a hunch. The way some people made such sudden and radical turnarounds on their views just doesn't make sense to me.

My issue is this;

How can you believe you're listening to Michael Jackson on the basis of the sellers claims? Did it sound like Michael Jackson to you, before the claims? And does it suddenly sound MORE like Michael Jackson since the claims?

If you didn't hear Michael Jackson on those tracks, no one's claims should be able to tell you otherwise.

You're effectively being shown a picture of Madonna and being told it's Michael Jackson. "Well... it doesn't look like Michael... but if you tell me it is... I'll pay you for the privilege and will stick it up on my wall next to the picture from the Thriller album cover... although it looks NOTHING like Michael Jackson. But if you tell me... then I guess that's good enough for me... oh yeah... now I see the similarities... they're wearing the same eyeliner..."
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Exactly. I have never been one to blindly accept without question what people in authority or in power say just because of their position. I always question, do my own research and most important of all i trust my own instincts. I'm not easily swayed. I find it difficult to understand how others have accepted the 'company line' so easily regardless of how they initially felt when hearing the tracks.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I find it difficult to understand how others have accepted the 'company line' so easily regardless of how they initially felt when hearing the tracks.

Especially when you bear in mind what Michael Jackson, himself, said about that company. And especially when you bear in mind that Michael Jackson, himself, sacked half of the 'Estate' that is currently running his legacy into the ground, before having his finances investigated.

But, hey, let's pretend that none of that matters.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Sam & MJJesamor,

This whole thing makes me think of people who don't believe that dinosaurs existed; You put side by side Jason's and Michael's vocals and you tell them: "listen, it's the same voice" and they say: "no, no, it is not, there is no proof for that".

You show them the bones of dinosaurs, and they say: "no, no, they are not bones, there is no proof that they ever had been alive."

Furhtermore, if the most imminent audiologists got duped, they will never ever admit it as it would tarnish their reputation and question their authority on any other potential future test. I also can hardly imagine that they would dare to contradict each other and create unnecessary conflict among themselves over some guy's tracks. The fact that SONY hired the second best audiologist does not prove anything, he is certainly not going dare to contradict the first best audiologist.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Sam & MJJesamor,

This whole thing makes me think of people who don't believe that dinosaurs existed; You put side by side Jason's and Michael's vocals and you tell them: "listen, it's the same voice" and they say: "no, no, it is not, there is no proof for that".

You show them the bones of dinosaurs, and they say: "no, no, they are not bones, there is no proof that they ever had been alive."

Furhtermore, if the most imminent audiologists got duped, they will never ever admit it as it would tarnish their reputation and question their authority on any other potential future test. I also can hardly imagine that they would dare to contradict each other and create unnecessary conflict among themselves over some guy's tracks. The fact that SONY hired the second best audiologist does not prove anything, he is certainly not going dare to contradict the first best audiologist.

I don't believe they hired anyone. Why would Sony hire someone and not show the results in their favour, if they did, indeed, hire them? Or if the results were, as Sony claim, Michael Jackson? "Here's our results!" they would say. But they haven't.

It's all bullshit. Like I posted earlier... I ask the believers to FIND ME JUST ONE MICHAEL JACKSON SONG where he sounds ANYTHING like this joke on these bullshit tracks. JUST ONE. Until then, don't waste your time flapping about the legal ramifications of Sony's lies. Just post one song. That's all.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Ivy i'm curious as to why you clearly feel so strongly about defending the cascio tracks? No disrespect but i have started to skip your posts. I just can't take it anymore... All this legal mumbo jumbo. At the end of the day the vocals are not michael's. I also think it's really unfair to tell us to sue sony as if we have the power to do so. I can't wait for the day when the truth comes out. A lot of people will have egg on their faces.

100% with you. :clapping:
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

The Cascio tracks are not Michael.

Quite frankly I don't care whether or not they are Jason Malachi, if Sony knew about this apparent fraud, or what role the estate plays in all of this.

Michael Jackson is not singing the tree songs in question.

It's as simple as that.


EDIT: Make that five. I forgot the horrible Carry On / All I Need. Dreadful.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

New video, but I kind of copied Morphios so thank you for the idea! I changed the tempo on Let Me Go to match Monster and used better quality:


[youtube]fymR9DMdtqE[/youtube]
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

That's good to know kapital. Ivy i really don't mean to be disrespectful i am just sincerely frustrated by your posts. You obviously put an awful lot of time into them and i feel that the aim whether intentional or not is to dishearten and to show that it's a futile struggle... Not because we are wrong but because we have no chance of getting anywhere as the powers that be have ass covered themselves so well. I am not saying that this is your deliberate intention just expressing the the way the posts come across to me and the feelings that they provoke in me.
It's just wrong. MJ deserves respect and including these tracks on the album show a total lack of respect to MJ and the many fans, family and friends that do not support these tracks.
Pentum, good work. Undeniably the same voice on both tracks.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

It's just wrong. MJ deserves respect and including these tracks show a total lack of respect to MJ and the many fans, family and friends that do not support these tracks.

Agree with every word.

A man whose output throughout his life was pure, unadulterated class. To now have his work abused in this manner... 'they eat your soul like a vegetable'? It's completely sickening. And I hope all of those involved get what's coming to them. Completely disgusting.

The signs were all there when they released the botched Visions box set. Michael's 'vision'? I don't think so.
 
Pentum;3224223 said:
New video, but I kind of copied Morphios so thank you for the idea! I changed the tempo on Let Me Go to match Monster and used better quality:


[youtube]fymR9DMdtqE[/youtube]

Thanks for your efforts Pentum.

This is clearly what I was referring to in my long posts. Not a single Michael's song put parallelly to Monster matches the vocals. Yet they match Jason's vocals on "Let me let go"!

And, even if believers still believe it is Michael on those tracks, I don't understand how doesn't it bother them to have "Michael's" vocals that actually sound closer to Jason's vocals than Michael's.

On top of that, I stated earlier, as Jason's vocals and Cascio vocals are so close, it means that Jason could have sung those songs and nobody would even noticed it, since the vocals are exactly the same between Monster and Let me let go. How is it possible not to be bothered by that fact notwithstanding what audiologists, Teddy or anyone has to say? Doesn't it hurt the ears?




p.s. By the way, I might be wrong here, but I don't remember when Michael ever insulted anyone in his songs. Michael did criticize papparazis, but I don't remember that he ever insulted them as in the song "Monster":

"Monster, he's a monster, he's an animal!" Those are straightforward insults that I don't recollect Michael ever did in his songs. In order to make it more believable, there are some cliché sentences in those lyrics:

[You can look at them coming out the walls
You can look at them climbing out the bushes ] = Threatened, Thriller

[He be waiting with his camera on focus ] = Privacy

[Too bad] = 2Bad

[Oh-oh Hollywood, it's got you jumping like you should] = Hollywood Tonight, Elisabeth I love you, (Jumpo for joy?)

[It's got you bouncing off the walls] = Off the wall

[(Oh oh) Hollywood just look in the mirror ] = Hollywood tonight, Elisabeth I love you, Man in the mirror

[Mama say, mama got you in a zig zag] = Wanna be startin' somethin'

[And you're running
And you're running just to escape it ] = Xscape

[But they're gunning for the money so they fake it] = Money


[(why you stalking me) ] = Privacy, Xscape

50 Cents's[I can feel it in the air, ] = Phil Collins's I can feel it coming in the air tonight (ooops!)

[everybody wanna be a star] = Elisabeth I love you

As a conclusion, yes, indeed, it sounds like Michael (but it is not).
 
Last edited:
Reviewing the Statement from the Estate, there are many interesting things that we must to recheck:

First:

Statement:

it was decided to bring Teddy Riley on board to work on several songs, including “Breaking News”

Ok, Estate/Sony called Teddy and other producers (Stewart, Bacharach) to fix or work with the Cascio´s tracks.


Statement:

Riley produced and submitted “Breaking News” to Sony for inclusion on the album.

Ok, Riley and other producers gave back the final production to Sony, (Including adlibs from older songs)<_<.


Statement:


After the tracks were submitted to Sony, three of these Cascio songs were selected to be on the album, and “Breaking News” was one of the three. The day after the submission and selection of the album tracks, for the very first time, the authenticity of Michael’s vocals on the Cascio tracks was questioned.

:bugeyed

Why was questioned after the tracks were submited? why not when the tracks were submited by Cascio´s?

--------------------------------------------

Continue...


Friedman: 10/19/2010:
Michael Jackson Album of New Songs In Limbo
Why in limbo? no forensic analysis till that day?: (10/19/2010? <_<

-----------------------------------------------------

Continue...


When did they selected the songs?:


Friedman: 10/19/2010:

Teddy Riley and a couple of other producers have worked to fix up the Cascio tracks for release.
In that moment the song selection was not made but producers sent their work to Sony: (Burn2nite, Water, All i need, Stay...Breaking news, Keep your head up, Monster...), as said Friedman:

Friedman: 11/04/2010:

Michael Jackson: Deal For New Album Cut Late Last Night

MORE: The album will include at least four or five of the “Cascio” tracks, produced mostly by Teddy Riley, including the single.

The decision was made by all parties finally at 11pm last night.

Final decision?, final tracklist? Not, only decided that Cascio´s traks will make the cut, but they did not selected the songs... maybe 4 or 5.

As Friedman said.... the day after:

Friedman: 11/05/2010:

Here are the likely titles of the Cascio songs for the album called “Michael,” which will be released on December 14th: “Breaking News,” “Monster,” “Water,” “Keep Your Head Up,” and “All I Need.” There were 10 original Cascio songs Michael sang on. The finished ones chosen, aside from “Breaking News,” are still pending.

Ok, songs not Selected on day 11/05/2010.

Now, we have to recheck this:

Statement from Estate/Sony:

After the tracks were submitted to Sony, three of these Cascio songs were selected to be on the album, and “Breaking News” was one of the three. The day after the submission and selection of the album tracks, for the very first time, the authenticity of Michael’s vocals on the Cascio tracks was questioned.

How they began the forensyc analysis on day 11/04/2010 or 11/07,8,9/2010?.

A few days before stream Breaking news?.


---------------------------------

Continue:


Friedman: All i need:11/09/10

Michael Jackson Producers Rejected Burt Bacharach Arrangement for New Song

Producers of the album–including co-executor John McClain–sent Burt Bacharach a song Michael recorded with Eddie Cascio called “All I Need.”

The legendary writer-producer went into the studio and added strings, etc. to the track. But it didn’t sound right, sources tell me, and was ultimately rejected. “All I Need,” in some form, may wind up on another album of unreleased Jackson songs. But it won’t be on “Michael.”

You can read that a lot of Cascio´s tracks were submitted to producers and late they sent their fixed tracks to Sony for the final selection. All i need was not selected.

On day or on days before (7,8,9,10 of november) Sony/Estate rejected All i need but they choosed Breaking news, Keep your head up, Monster:

This is what Friedman said in day 11/09/10:

The “Michael” album is not quite finalized, I’m told, but will have to be by Friday. Right now there are three “Cascio” tracks including “Breaking News.”

Recheck the Statement from Estate/Sony:

After the tracks were submitted to Sony, three of these Cascio songs were selected to be on the album, and “Breaking News” was one of the three. The day after the submission and selection of the album tracks, for the very first time, the authenticity of Michael’s vocals on the Cascio tracks was questioned.

When was the first time the tracks were questioned?

The day after selection of the album tracks?

7,8 or 9 of november?

When did they streamed BN?: 11/08/10.

Finally, you can see that there is something wrong with all of this.

The Statement said that the debate began when they selected the songs, but they selected the songs on the week of 8,9 of november. They selected the song listening to the final production of Teddy Riley and other producers. Not listening the original raw vocals from Cascio´s. It was very late for them to take out the Cascio´s tracks because they needed to make the cds and sell to the general public. It was too late for them after hear the bad reaction of the fans after hear the streaming of Breaking news.

I thinks that they called the other producers after the streaming of Breaking news and with the hurry, they finally made the forensic analysis on those days.

Right now we must talk about, what the producers and engineers heard in that session with Sony/Estate:

Statement:

Because of these questions, I was immediately asked by co-Executors John Branca and John McClain to conduct an investigation regarding the authenticity of the lead vocals on the Cascio tracks.

Six of Michael’s former producers and engineers who had worked with Michael over the past 30 years - Bruce Swedien, Matt Forger, Stewart Brawley, Michael Prince, Dr. Freeze and Teddy Riley - were all invited to a listening session to hear the raw vocals of the Cascio tracks in question. All of these persons listened to the a cappella versions of the vocals on the Cascio tracks being considered for inclusion on the album, so they could give an opinion as to whether or not the lead vocals were sung by Michael. They all confirmed that the vocal was definitely Michael.

What did they listen?.

Corey Rooney said this:
Renny Ortiz but anything of this song is michael? anything?


Cory Rooney A few samples from older songs, if you listen you can figure out which songs they come from.

Cory Rooney I sat in a session where we solo'd the vocals and it was just someone set up to sound like him and the only parts that really sounded like him were samples from older records of his. There was nothing that was consistent with any of his previous recordings as far as vocal control or just plain habits. Last but not least when we asked if there were any out takes or alternate tracks they said that they were erased

What did they heard? Raw vocals? or the Teddy Riley final prodution without music (but including adlibs from other songs)?.

is not rare?.

Estate said this:

Six of Michael’s former producers and engineers who had worked with Michael over the past 30 years - Bruce Swedien, Matt Forger, Stewart Brawley, Michael Prince, Dr. Freeze and Teddy Riley - were all invited to a listening session to hear the raw vocals of the Cascio tracks in question. All of these persons listened to the a cappella versions of the vocals on the Cascio tracks being considered for inclusion on the album,

What did they heard? original raw vocals.... or a capella version like the "Breaking news" a capella version that we heard on You Tube that includes adlibs from older songs?.

They hear this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWBNH5-HY-Q

If they heard that version, it´s sure they find MJ, because Teddy Riley included adlibs from older songs. Like Corey Rooney said:

Cory Rooney I sat in a session where we solo'd the vocals and it was just someone set up to sound like him and the only parts that really sounded like him were samples from older records of his.

Is´t not rare?
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Yeah kapital, very interesting. I smell a rat or two for sure.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

^^

Great post Kapital

The very fact that they actually questioned the tracks smells. If they questioned them it means that they did not exclude a possibility of fraud. But, I think it was too late to go backwards with the project, hence they chose to stream a Cascio song just to see general public's reaction. I honestly believe that the buyers couldn't tell the difference between Malachi and Michael, and that they probably even didn't know the existence of Malachi. They learned it afterwards when it was way too late.
 
The very important thing is that producers etc... (including Corey Rooney) heard not raw versions, they heard the final song production(including adlibs) without music.... the final Teddy Riley production.

The "a capella" version from the Teddy´s fixed work.

This:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWBNH5-HY-Q

That´s why they heard MJ, they heard adlibs from older songs.

It was too late for Sony.

And we were their experiment proyect with the streaming of Breaking news on day 8.

After heard our mixed reaction, it´s sure that they did not know what to do.... but it was too late to take out more songs. They only taked out the worst songs... All i need & Stay. The fakest songs.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Personally I think the whole thing is hogwash and that they deliberately released bogus material.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

And Sony knows that as a big company they can probably get away with it. That's what bugs me the most about this whole thing - that there's probably nothing we can do about this.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Personally I think the whole thing is hogwash and that they deliberately released bogus material.

Too risky. I don't think they all were aware.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

The biggest mystery to me is how the people who were putting this album together insisted on the cascio tracks so much. The moment there was talk about them possibly being fakes then they should have been removed. If that ment that the album would have been delayed for a few more months then so be it.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

The biggest mystery to me is how the people who were putting this album together insisted on the cascio tracks so much. The moment there was talk about them possibly being fakes then they should have been removed. If that ment that the album would have been delayed for a few more months then so be it.

I think that it was too late as they had probably made copies ready to ship.
 
Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Too risky. I don't think they all were aware.

Neither do I. Unfortunately their trust was in the wrong people and more importantly the project on Sony's side wasn't handled by true fans, or not even people who knew Michael Jackson or his music that well.

Sony have no motive that I can see to release second rate material, they're a business first & foremost and want the album to sell as well as possible.

We need our best man on the case.

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

I am sick and tired of arguing with the same people who seem to have made it their mission to come into this thread to defend the cascio tracks. Is that too much to ask? To have one miserable thread on the whole forum where we can share our distress over these hideous tracks in peace? There is only one thread where we are allowed to say we think cascio tracks are fake right? Ivy i'm curious as to why you clearly feel so strongly about defending the cascio tracks? No disrespect but i have started to skip your posts. I just can't take it anymore... All this legal mumbo jumbo. At the end of the day the vocals are not michael's. I also think it's really unfair to tell us to sue sony as if we have the power to do so.

^ Agreed. I don't read the long posts. It's just a desperate attempt to fudge the issue by expounding the legal ramifications of Sony's actions. Does it sound like Michael Jackson? No. Simple.

Sometimes i feel like the people defending the tracks have an agenda that is beyond their own personal belief and that they know something we don't and believe it's best to just let this go for reasons we are not aware of. Just a hunch. The way some people made such sudden and radical turnarounds on their views just doesn't make sense to me.

100% with you. :clapping:

That's good to know kapital. Ivy i really don't mean to be disrespectful i am just sincerely frustrated by your posts. You obviously put an awful lot of time into them and i feel that the aim whether intentional or not is to dishearten and to show that it's a futile struggle... I am not saying that this is your deliberate intention just expressing the the way the posts come across to me and the feelings that they provoke in me.
It's just wrong.

Disclaimer : I'm not writing this as a moderator.

Okay I'll be brutally honest - The above just shows how some "doubters" can be disrespectful of other people's opinions.

First of all as I did mention over and over again - I honestly and truly hear Michael on those songs, that has been my opinion since the first streaming of Breaking News and it has got nothing to do with legal perspectives, logic, statements etc.

Additionally if you read my posts despite my "belief" and "legal mumbo jumbo", you'll see me agree with people in regards to possibility of some events such as fooling the scientific tests and even saying that "I might be wrong". That's me acknowledging the possibilities even though I might not be agreeing with them. That's me being honest and realistic and not pushing my own opinions on people.

However as the above posts shows it seems that it's not even possible to get basic respect from some of the people with differentiating opinion because as you write it - I must have "inferior hearing, an ulterior motive, must be delusional, must be blindly accepting, lying to myself" and that's "it's absolutely not Michael" and "you are absolutely right and everyone is absolutely wrong". And personally I have a problem with this.

Honestly regardless of how strong and confident in your opinion you might be, you must be able to act respectfully to other people that doesn't share your opinions. You can easily think and act "I don't agree with anything you say but I'll respect it regardless".

Some of you ask why I wrote long posts well it's because I took other peoples's (long and detailed) posts seriously and believed that they deserved an equally thoughtful response. I did contact several active posers in this thread privately and I told them how I respect their discussions and their style in expressing their opinions. This hasn't changed for me.

And another brutally honest point - when I write something (anything about any subject) and the response I get is personal I really cannot take it seriously. Because if I write something and I'm wrong, people can easily demonstrate me that how I might be wrong (example : my discussions with Bumper and love is magical and Arklove and L.T.D. etc -sorry if I forgot to mention you here). However if I write something and all I get is personal insults and accusations , then I feel the people on the opposite side has nothing they can say about what I wrote and hence needed to resort to "below the belt" attacks.

I spent time on this thread because I believed there were people who had raised interesting points and had the knowledge and ability to respectfully continue the discussion and I though that this was a "debate" thread. If that's not the case please tell me so and I can happily stay out while you write the same thing (it's Jason) over and over for the 14,865th time or better yet discuss SpongeBob.

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

Neither do I. Unfortunately their trust was in the wrong people and more importantly the project on Sony's side wasn't handled by true fans, or not even people who knew Michael Jackson or his music that well.

Sony have no motive that I can see to release second rate material, they're a business first & foremost and want the album to sell as well as possible.

We need our best man on the case.

wiggum.gif


Exactly, their products are good quality.

As far as our best man on the case is concerned, do you remember?:

[youtube]tBAbz6isTsI[/youtube]

and a case solved by our best man:

[youtube]XGoU7urNTbI[/youtube]
 
Back
Top