Michael - The Great Album Debate

[Billyjeanplxiv]

This is rediculous. Why do we sit around babbling the same stuff back and forth when we all should be trying to grt awnsers

 

[Arklove]

This is rediculous. Why do we sit around babbling the same stuff back and forth when we all should be trying to grt awnsers

Joe Vogel couldn't even get answers for his book from Eddie Cascio regarding these tracks, so.....

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Joseph Bird shouldn't even (or odd?) get up before the night is over or answer for his folder from Teddie Rilascio. Best regards. I am in total denial about these tracks, and I like to moo it, moo it! so.....

For further info about my mental condition please see my first video hereunder

[youtube]QDw8HFuJRtg[/youtube]


Thanks for your performance Arklove

 

[Chamife]

singing voice or any voice with any alteration ( they asked people to whisper, put a pencil in their mouth and speak - in our case it would be any processing/ effects and so on) is actually a lot harder to identify than speaking voice.

Doesn't this article claim the opposite? (I found it hard to understand, but couldn't find anything in Dutch, so I can be wrong)

If it doesn't, well...then it still looks like an interesting piece (thesis) for all who read and understand the English language better than me.

2.2 Speech vs. Singing
Historically, speech and singing research have been closely linked, but there are important differences between the two methods of vocal production. The vast majority of
sounds generated during singing are voiced (approximately 90 percent) whereas speech
contains a much larger percentage of unvoiced sounds (about 60% voiced and 40% unvoiced for English) [15]. In the most common classical singing technique, known as bel
canto, singers are taught to sustain vowels as long as possible between other phonemes
because they are the most efficient and audible sounds. As a result, singers also learn to
develop a high degree of consistency in their pronunciation of vowels, which can make
it easier to automatically determine the vowel from analysis of the signal. Classical
singers usually employ a technique in which they lower the larynx, creating an additional high-frequency resonance (around 4-5 kHz) not present in other types of vocal
production. This resonance, known as the singer’s formant is especially important for
being heard in the presence of other instruments, for example allowing an opera singer
to be heard over an entire orchestra [86].
Because of their periodic nature, voiced sounds are often easier to analyze and generate using linear signal processing theory. Even when limiting consideration to voiced
sounds, there are important differences between speech and singing. In Western music, the range of fundamental frequencies used in singing is far greater than in speech.
Likewise, the singing voice tends to have a much wider dynamic range in terms of amplitude than the speaking voice. Another distinction is that singing in the Western
classical tradition is most often an interpretation of a predefined musical score whereas
speech is most often spontaneous. The analysis/synthesis framework presented in this
dissertation is specific to the classically-trained singing voice and takes advantage of
these features that discriminate classical singing from speaking.
One type of speech that has more in common with classical singing is acting. Just as
singing is usually performed from a pre-defined score, actor voices are generally the
result of a performance from a pre-defined script. Stage actors are trained to project
their voices to be heard throughout large auditoriums in a manner similar to opera
singers by altering resonance in certain frequency ranges. And like singing, the goal of
the voice in acting is often more than just the communication of words, but also the
communication of emotion and intent requiring a similar standard of sound quality.
Because of these similarities, some of the research presented in this dissertation may
also be applicable to actors voices.

http://web.media.mit.edu/~moo/thesis/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the end all of this doesn't really matter, because no technique can be (not yet) used as proof. That's why the statement from The Estate makes no sense at all, because the fans wanted proof and they must have known their analysis from experts was no proof at all (just like the fans discovered after they studied the forensic possibilities). It was just to keep the fans quiet.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Doesn't this article claim the opposite? (I found it hard to understand, but couldn't find anything in Dutch, so I can be wrong)

If it doesn't, well...then it still looks like an interesting piece (thesis) for all who read and understand the English language better than me.

2.2 Speech vs. Singing
Historically, speech and singing research have been closely linked, but there are important differences between the two methods of vocal production. The vast majority of
sounds generated during singing are voiced (approximately 90 percent) whereas speech
contains a much larger percentage of unvoiced sounds (about 60% voiced and 40% unvoiced for English) [15]. In the most common classical singing technique, known as bel
canto, singers are taught to sustain vowels as long as possible between other phonemes
because they are the most efficient and audible sounds. As a result, singers also learn to
develop a high degree of consistency in their pronunciation of vowels, which can make
it easier to automatically determine the vowel from analysis of the signal. Classical
singers usually employ a technique in which they lower the larynx, creating an additional high-frequency resonance (around 4-5 kHz) not present in other types of vocal
production. This resonance, known as the singer’s formant is especially important for
being heard in the presence of other instruments, for example allowing an opera singer
to be heard over an entire orchestra [86].
Because of their periodic nature, voiced sounds are often easier to analyze and generate using linear signal processing theory. Even when limiting consideration to voiced
sounds, there are important differences between speech and singing. In Western music, the range of fundamental frequencies used in singing is far greater than in speech.
Likewise, the singing voice tends to have a much wider dynamic range in terms of amplitude than the speaking voice. Another distinction is that singing in the Western
classical tradition is most often an interpretation of a predefined musical score whereas
speech is most often spontaneous. The analysis/synthesis framework presented in this
dissertation is specific to the classically-trained singing voice and takes advantage of
these features that discriminate classical singing from speaking.
One type of speech that has more in common with classical singing is acting. Just as
singing is usually performed from a pre-defined score, actor voices are generally the
result of a performance from a pre-defined script. Stage actors are trained to project
their voices to be heard throughout large auditoriums in a manner similar to opera
singers by altering resonance in certain frequency ranges. And like singing, the goal of
the voice in acting is often more than just the communication of words, but also the
communication of emotion and intent requiring a similar standard of sound quality.
Because of these similarities, some of the research presented in this dissertation may
also be applicable to actors voices.

http://web.media.mit.edu/~moo/thesis/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the end all of this doesn't really matter, because no technique can be (not yet) used as proof. That's why the statement from The Estate makes no sense at all, because the fans wanted proof and they must have known their analysis from experts was no proof at all (just like the fans discovered after they studied the forensic possibilities). It was just to keep the fans quiet.

The unvoiced (or voiceless) sounds are the ones I mentioned in my post earlier [p], [t], , [f], [k], [ch], [sh], [th] and very often [h].

It is clear that voiceless (unvoiced) sounds cannot be analysed as accurately as the voiced ones, because of the absence of voice. Therefore, of course that voiced sounds are easier to analyse. Vowels are always voiced (unless you whisper), that's also why it is easier to analyse them.

But without analysing the voice, we still have our ears which are telling us that something is wrong, or unusual. That alone should have been enough not to include those tracks on a MJ's album without firm proof and tracable support that it was indeed MJ who sang them.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Here are all the separate sounds in English:

Short vowels


as in respectively: fish, bull, up, clock, American, bed, cat

Long vowels

as in respectively: tree, boot, arm, horse, bird

Diphthongs (double vowel sounds)

as in respectively: ear, tourist, bike, boy, know, where, owl, train

Voiceless consonants


as in respectively: place, take, chocolate, key, father, think, sister, shop

Voiced consonants


as in respectively: bar, do, job, great, van, mother, zeal, pleasure

Other consonants


as in respectively: milk, name, king, hill, love, rabbit, wagon, yacht



Now when you hear Michael pronouncing some of those sounds and when you hear the singer in the Cascio tracks pronounce the same sounds, they don't pronounce it the same way. That's not subjective as far as I am concerned.

 

[ivy]

I made a simple comparison and suddenly in comes Malachi and court. Those two had nothing to do with my comparison.



It's so exhausting talking to you, because you always drift off.
I said, there is a difference, because we can analyse 2 audio files whereas the lady would have to take at least one virtual audio file from her faulty memory. Nothing more, nothing else. Please stop exploiting simple posts every time.

very simply I asked what kind of analysis you did. listening to audios and making determination with ears or something more like waveform comparisons. believe me it's not that hard of a question to answer.

 

[Grent]

very simply I asked what kind of analysis you did. listening to audios and making determination with ears or something more like waveform comparisons. believe me it's not that hard of a question to answer.

None. Again, I said we have 2 audio files to analyze. Instead of one or none in the case of the lady.
It is not about the actual analysis at all. Forget analyze. Let's just say: we have 2 audio files at hand.
Thats not that hard of a statement to understand. I now quit that nonsense.

 

[Chamife]

Here are all the separate sounds in English:

Short vowels


as in respectively: fish, bull, up, clock, American, bed, cat

Long vowels

as in respectively: tree, boot, arm, horse, bird

Diphthongs (double vowel sounds)

as in respectively: ear, tourist, bike, boy, know, where, owl, train

Voiceless consonants


as in respectively: place, take, chocolate, key, father, think, sister, shop

Voiced consonants


as in respectively: bar, do, job, great, van, mother, zeal, pleasure

Other consonants


as in respectively: milk, name, king, hill, love, rabbit, wagon, yacht



Now when you hear Michael pronouncing some of those sounds and when you hear the singer in the Cascio tracks pronounce the same sounds, they don't pronounce it the same way. That's not subjective as far as I am concerned.

Difference for an uneducated person is difficult between the voiced and unvoiced. They're all voiced to me, lol. I mean, I hear them all. And to me it sounds like the voiced ones are pronounced more softly, instead of the other way around......When you first posted this, I was like: ok, and now?... But it's clearer what the signs mean after your edit.

 

[StellaJackson]

Which song is "you keep" pasted from in Breaking News?

 

[Grent]

Which song is "you keep" pasted from in Breaking News?

I'm sure the you and the keep are from different songs.
I once listened to Keep the Faith, but couldn't find it.
Theoretically it could even be from a speech.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Difference for an uneducated person is difficult between the voiced and unvoiced. They're all voiced to me, lol. I mean, I hear them all. And to me it sounds like the voiced ones are pronounced more softly, instead of the other way around......When you first posted this, I was like: ok, and now?... But it's clearer what the signs mean after your edit.

That's because you are a Dutch speaker. Dutch speakers have tendency to pronounce some voiced sounds as voiceless without affecting the meaning of the word (example: "woord", the "d" will be pronounced as "t").

But in English, if you do that, you'd change the meaning, hence the importance of pronouncing correctly the sounds and clearly make a difference between "d" and "t". For example if a Dutch speaker reads the English word "BAD", there are many chances that the Dutch speaker will actually pronounce it "BAT".

Other common pronounciation mistakes Ducth speakers make: "bag" vs "back", "Jesus" vs "Cheesus", "sad" vs "sat", etc.

Now do a little test:

say vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv (voiced)

and now don't change your position of the mouth, just use the same position of your lips against the teeth, don't use the voice, just your breath, you'll obtain:

fffffffffffffffffffffff (voiceless)


those sounds are exactly the same (the position of the tongue, mouth, lips, teeth, etc), the only difference is voice on/off


Voiceless consonants

Voiced consonants

 

[StellaJackson]

I'm sure the you and the keep are from different songs.
I once listened to Keep the Faith, but couldn't find it.
Theoretically it could even be from a speech.

It's from 0:28/0:29 of Invincible I think with the "keep" and the "you" swapped around.

 

[Grent]

It's from 0:28/0:29 of Invincible I think with the "keep" and the "you" swapped around.

The 'you' is not from there - sounds too different. Actually, that's a great 'you' to sample - even from the album version, because it's pretty much silent during the very word.

The 'keep' sounds VERY MUCH like it's from there. The BN 'keep' sounds darker though, but this is something that could easily be done by processing D). The quality of the BN 'keep' is pretty low. I am not 100% sure, it's from Invincible 0:28, but this is really, really close. Probably too close to be a coincidence. Just one semitone and the length is pretty much the same. It also sounds the same (except for color and quality). Might be it.

Great find !

 

[Chamife]

Well, I passed the test Bumper! And I don't belong to that category of Dutchies that pronounce words like in your examples, lol. But I know a lot do. Still difficult material for me, but it's also late here. Will study it more tomorrow.

@ Grent, so the 'you' is not from there, according to you. What about Ghosts, "Tell me are YOU the Ghost of jealousy"? Could it be from there? Same grittyness and length?

 

[Pentum]

The "keep" is from Invincible. Found my mjmax a while back, I think I posted a comparison along with it. TPIMaster also did a spectogram check and it matched.

Not sure about the "you".

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Well, I passed the test Bumper! And I don't belong to that category of Dutchies that pronounce words like in your examples, lol. But I know a lot do. Still difficult material for me, but it's also late here. Will study it more tomorrow.

@ Grent, so the 'you' is not from there, according to you. What about Dangerous, "Tell me are YOU the Ghost of jealousy"? Could it be from there? Same grittyness and length?

No prob, I was not referring to all Dutchspeakers, but to the ones that would naturally try to pronounce English words without previously studying it. Many Dutch speakers have an excellent level of English, but the only mistakes that sometimes betray them are the ones that I mentioned

 

[Pentum]

BUMPER, what kind of mistakes do Norwegian people do?

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

BUMPER, what kind of mistakes do Norwegian people do?

Lol, I don't know because I don't speak Norwegian. But given the fact that it is also a Germanic language, Norwegians probably can have a very good level of English if they make some efforts.

I should first hear a Norwegian speak Norwegian, then I should listen to the same person speaking English, and then I could tell you what is the little thing that betrays a Norwegian.

p.s. I just listened to a piece of Marcus Joseph's She's out of my life

(Common?) mistakes he made:

Cuts like a knife , it sounded like "kets"

Possession = he pronounced instead of [z]

Hands = he pronounced instead of [z]

In other words, he pronounced a voiced consonants as if it was voiceless, just like Dutch speakers.

Apart that, his pronunciation is excellent when he sings, (I don't know how's his pronunciation when he talks).

 

[Pentum]

Lol, I don't know because I don't speak Norwegian. But given the fact that it is also a Germanic language, Norwegians probably can have a very good level of English if they make some efforts.

I should first hear a Norwegian speak Norwegian, then I should listen to the same person speaking English, and then I could tell you what is the little thing that betrays a Norwegian.

[youtube]JXqMBuT8It8[/youtube]

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

[youtube]JXqMBuT8It8[/youtube]

Lool, very nice video!

Ok, here are the sounds that I hear are different from English:

[j] (as in "julol") sounds very strong

[l] sounds almost like a mix between Russian and German

[o] in "hopp" sounds more British than American

[d] in "good" pronounced [t], almost as if he said "goot" (confirming what i said earlier with Joseph Marcus, voiced pronounced voiceless), even the word "dance" he pronounces "tance".

[r] sounds almost like Scottish, rolled

etc.

 

[Chamife]

Germans always betray themselves too when speaking English, lol. And I mean, always.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Germans always betray themselves too when speaking English, lol. And I mean, always.

What betrays German speakers is their intonation, not necessarily their pronunciation of sounds. However I've met some Germans who had excellent pronunciation and intonation.

Arnold Schwarzennegger is a perfect example of a German speaker both mispronouncing English sounds and having the wrong intonation. Nothing subjective here.

 

[Pentum]

Lool, very nice video!

Ok, here are the sounds that I hear are different from English:

[j] (as in "julol") sounds very strong

[l] sounds almost like a mix between Russian and German

[o] in "hopp" sounds more British than American

[d] in "good" pronounced [t], almost as if he said "goot" (confirming what i said earlier with Joseph Marcus, voiced pronounced voiceless), even the word "dance" he pronounces "tance".

[r] sounds almost like Scottish, rolled

etc.

These are a little extreme and overdo it because it's funny to listen to, pluss they mix in some Norwegian words. Consider the video as a parody of how Norwegian talk English

My cousin is from Germany, and his English can be good, but can sound way off sometimes, lol.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

These are a little extreme and overdo it because it's funny to listen to, pluss they mix in some Norwegian words. Consider the video as a parody of how Norwegian talk English

My cousin is from Germany, and his English can be good, but can sound way off sometimes, lol.

Of course, I realized it, especially when he used words such as "hear" = "hor" and "ear" = "or"

 

[Grent]

@ Grent, so the 'you' is not from there, according to you. What about Ghosts, "Tell me are YOU the Ghost of jealousy"? Could it be from there? Same grittyness and length?

Oh my good, I forgot how I love Ghosts. It's incredible. Hardly any other song gets me moving that much.
Oh Teddy. You sold your soul. I can't believe it. I used to adore you.

But no, it's not from Ghosts. These "you"s are far too strong. It's probably from the Invincible disc or even song (at another point), when so many samples seem to be from there.

 

[Pentum]

Of course, I realized it, especially when he used words such as "hear" = "hor" and "ear" = "or"

This is English with typical Norwegian accent, hilarious

[youtube]49CkgeQVh70[/youtube]

Petter Solberg is a legend!

 

[Chamife]

Oh my good, I forgot how I love Ghosts. It's incredible. Hardly any other song gets me moving that much.
Oh Teddy. You sold your soul. I can't believe it. I used to adore you.

But no, it's not from Ghosts. These "you"s are far too strong. It's probably from the Invincible disc or even song (at another point), when so many samples seem to be from there.

Okies, last try:

[youtube]SJA_jJ09NJw[/youtube]

0.57 or 1.56?????

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

This is English with typical Norwegian accent, hilarious

[youtube]49CkgeQVh70[/youtube]

Petter Solberg is a legend!

Ok, all the vowels are a mess lol and the same thing as with Dutch, the voiced become voiceless.

Now, that's nothing, Norwegian and English are European languages with common roots. Now imagine a Japanese who can't speak English, reading it :rofl:

[youtube]jAwwW_Pj6Mg&feature=related[/youtube]

 

[Pentum]

Ok, all the vowels are a mess lol and the same thing as with Dutch, the voiced become voiceless.

Now, that's nothing, Norwegian and English are European languages with common roots. Now imagine a Japanese who can't speak English, reading it :rofl:

[youtube]jAwwW_Pj6Mg&feature=related[/youtube]

Jahahaha! Love a good laugh before sleep!