Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

ADKIc3mAnX said:
On BMI there are 2 versions of Monster registered 1. Monster Rap Version (Released in 2010)2. Monster without rap/alternative version which is the same song just different beats and no rap that version did not make the album.
Click to expand...
The second version was leaked a long long time ago. Nothing new.
 
love is magical said:
The second version was leaked a long long time ago. Nothing new.
Click to expand...

Yeah I had it since before the album came out. It was the second Cascio track I heard after BN. I was gutted because I realised then that they were all going to be fake. And of course there is the original version at the original tempo, still with the familiar vibrato.
 
StellaJackson said:
Yeah I had it since before the album came out. It was the second Cascio track I heard after BN. I was gutted because I realised then that they were all going to be fake. And of course there is the original version at the original tempo, still with the familiar vibrato.
Click to expand...
Yup. I have the version with the original tempo. Monster was leaked before its official release. Back then, we were hoping the album version would sound more MJ
 
I have: Monster Album, Monster no rap, and
onster 1 min demo.

Same voice, barely any processing.
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
I know I had it since it leaked.
Click to expand...

But, you said the alternative version with no 50 cents rap is unreleased.

So, a few of us clarified it and told you the version with no rap and original release was leaked. Are you saying you want the so-called alternative version to be officially released?

Doesn't matter what your opinion is and how much you love the song. It won't happen. As a matter of fact, the plan to release Monster as a single was cancelled. Enough said.

It's simply not commercially viable to re-release an obscure song on from obscure album.
 
Ive heard rumours of a monster remix if it was used as a single. Ive heard the remix exist, unleaked though. Id like to hear it just for a listen.

The only Cascio Tracks i want to hear in full are
Black Widow.
Water (ive heard mention of a MJ telephone vocal maybe?)
And All Right.

Of course id rather them leak in good quality, becuase they shouldnt ever be on a MJ album ever
 
love is magical said:
But, you said the alternative version with no 50 cents rap is unreleased.

So, a few of us clarified it and told you the version with no rap and original release was leaked. Are you saying you want the so-called alternative version to be officially released?

Doesn't matter what your opinion is and how much you love the song. It won't happen. As a matter of fact, the plan to release Monster as a single was cancelled. Enough said.

It's simply not commercially viable to re-release an obscure song on from obscure album.
Click to expand...
Well you do not know that do you now maybe a 25th anniversary edition of "Michael" might have Monster Alternative Version without 50 Cent that's why it remains unreleased because they decided to use 50 Cent on the song like Michael intended.

Update: You sound like you know what the future will be "Doesn't matter what your opinion is and how much you love the song. It won't happen."
 
Billyjeanplxiv said:
Ive heard rumours of a monster remix if it was used as a single. Ive heard the remix exist, unleaked though. Id like to hear it just for a listen.

The only Cascio Tracks i want to hear in full are
Black Widow.
Water (ive heard mention of a MJ telephone vocal maybe?)
And All Right.

Of course id rather them leak in good quality, becuase they shouldnt ever be on a MJ album ever
Click to expand...

They aren't actually telephone vocals like the start of I Like The Way You Love Me. They are simply identified as "MJTelephone" and "MJTelephonenopan" in the protools file.
 
The alternative version of Monster was a DEMO, nothing else than what I can assume to be a pre-Teddy mix. It was a mix before 50 was called in and before the instrumentation was tightened. It was not a version in competition with 50's version for release. The reason it has a separate copyright is to most likely protect it from being stolen, in the same way that What About Us is copyrighted as well as Earth Song.


... Why do I bother...
 
Last edited:
ADKIc3mAnX said:
Well you do not know that do you now maybe a 25th anniversary edition of "Michael" might have Monster Alternative Version without 50 Cent that's why it remains unreleased because they decided to use 50 Cent on the song like Michael intended.

Update: You sound like you know what the future will be "Doesn't matter what your opinion is and how much you love the song. It won't happen."
Click to expand...

25th anniversary?

By then no Cascio track will ever be included on any MJ's album as they'll be proven to be fake.
 
Jesta said:
The alternative version of Monster was a DEMO, nothing else than what I can assume to be a pre-Teddy mix. It was a mix before 50 was called in and before the instrumentation was tightened. It was not a version in competition with 50's version for release. The reason it has a separate copyright is to most likely protect it from being stolen, in the same way that What About Us is copyrighted as well as Earth Song.


... Why do I bother...
Click to expand...
Okay but who knows if someday it might be released on a special edition of an album or like I said before maybe a 25th anniversary of "Michael" in the future.


The future
MICHAELaa.jpg
 
Last edited:
... I'm done. Again.

Ciao, my few friends. I fear that if I stay here, I may explode and get banned anyway. People know how to contact me via email. For those that don't have my Twitter account (i.e. Bumper, Billy, Aniram) it's "KaisaJesta". If I show my face here within a month, I want you guys to scold me and tell me to get off, for - if circumstances are the same - this will probably happen again.

As I've said countless times in the past, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a discussion with people when all they do is state that they like the songs and they believe it's him. That's not CONTRIBUTING to the discussion, that's just imposing your beliefs on everyone else. Debating with this current set-up is a lost cause because - when we do get somewhere - it's immediately sidelined by those aforementioned comments. Debating is about throwing in IDEAS and THEORIES to see if they hold water. Most believer THEORIES have not. Most doubter THEORIES have at least got credibility because of RESEARCH and EXPERIMENTS done to help prove their hypothesis. I have yet to see ANY believer do this, instead opting to say "I know it's Michael Jackson. I hear him everywhere in these tracks" and "I like these songs, so you can't change my opinion". That's just not what a debate is. While some doubters act similarly, they have proven themselves before with meticulous research and have gone to great lengths to reach the conclusions they have i.e. comparisons, proof of pasted vocals etc. I am SICK and TIRED of people trying to debate when others simply recite the old tired lines which contribute NOTHING to the debate except to confirm their belief in these tracks (AS IF WE ALREADY DIDN'T KNOW FROM THE FIRST BILLION TIMES YOU TOLD US!) and to divert from any actual questioning or analysis of these tracks. At least doubters spend time answering questions from believers to demonstrate their knowledge on the topic and WHY they believe what they believe.

This is how a debate goes:

"I believe it's not Michael because of the forced vibrato, the different timbre and the fact that - to me - the only parts that sound like Michael are those that have been pasted in. If you look at X:XX of "Cascio track", you will see example of XXXXXXX."

This is NOT how a debate goes:

"I believe it's Michael Jackson on all the tracks. I hear him throughout the songs. I like all of these, so you can't change my opinion. I hope they're all released because I love them so much."

And just to be objective, I know certain doubters also operate like that, however they have competently displayed their reasoning for these tracks in the past via the former template. It is dull and repetitive to say the same things over and over again. That's why it's easier to just say your opinion. However, it is NOT OK to use the latter template when you have displayed no reasoning for your belief and have therefore contributed NOTHING to the debate. Stating your opinion is fine when you have backed it up in the past and having that challenged again and again by people using the latter template. Using the latter template religiously while showing no intention of EXPLAINING your belief as the doubters have in the past is not contributing to the debate. As I said, the doubters are guilty of this too, but they HAVE explained their beliefs and the reasoning behind it in clear and concise detail in the past. That's why I'm harsher with certain believers. In fact, I admire Ivy so much because she rarely opts to use the latter template. She always does a lot of research with posts and shows evidence. That is the sign of a debater (even though she claims to not debate the songs anymore) and someone who contributes to the discussion.

You want to come on here and praise these as Michael's best work!? That is both irrelevant to the debate at hand and a complete waste of everyone's time when you've already said it SEVERAL times! And I know that quality is somehow subjective, but comparative quality is less subjective when analysis is thrown in. Compare Fall in Love to Speechless, Breaking News to Tabloid Junkie, Monster to Privacy, Ready 2 Win to On the Line. When compared - with in-depth analysis of vocals, lyrics and composition - they pale in comparison. To me and I'm sure a lot of people, it is an INSULT to Michael if you claim these to be among Michael's best work, especially considering they needed additional WORDS to Michael it up and make the ad-libs and verses stronger. I can understand the demand for demos and unreleased songs, but Michael himself released mumbling demos and the songs leaked are almost always a compliment to Michael's singing ability (i.e. Slave To the Rhythm) and if they are mumbling demos, it provides a fascinating insight into his work process. These songs are not in the same league as those categories as they do not compliment his singing ability and it does not provide an insight as to how he worked. I was discussing with someone as to how Michael would be ASHAMED to see these released if they were him, and yet people do want them released. Do you care about Michael so little as to have his weakest recorded moments released just so you can have 12 songs with vocals that have had the community in an uproar? If the answer is yes, then I have no further business with you.

Hence, I'm done. This is no longer a debate. This is people interrupting debate to say how they adore these tracks and how that's the foundation for their belief in them. This is a joke. I know I'm going to be banned or my access will be limited with this post, but this "debate" cannot continue the way it has been. I know people are infuriated by the way it's been going lately, and yet no-one's said anything. I might as well do before I leave.

- Jesta
 
http://www.atom.com/funny_videos/3EFBFFFF025638F00017017F54A8/

"Jason doesn't have the vocal capacities to sing 'you keep on breaking' that way..."(don't know who said that, sorry..:scratch:). Listen to 5.24-5.29.."Don't you" versus "breaking".

Listen to this video til the end. Who ever made it used the music from KYHU in 'Room2breath' to make it clearer to understand..:D. In the end you'll hear the same pronouncation of the word 'promise'.
 
Jesta said:
... I'm done. Again.

Ciao, my few friends. I fear that if I stay here, I may explode and get banned anyway. People know how to contact me via email. For those that don't have my Twitter account (i.e. Bumper, Billy, Aniram) it's "KaisaJesta". If I show my face here within a month, I want you guys to scold me and tell me to get off, for - if circumstances are the same - this will probably happen again.

As I've said countless times in the past, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a discussion with people when all they do is state that they like the songs and they believe it's him. That's not CONTRIBUTING to the discussion, that's just imposing your beliefs on everyone else. Debating with this current set-up is a lost cause because - when we do get somewhere - it's immediately sidelined by those aforementioned comments. Debating is about throwing in IDEAS and THEORIES to see if they hold water. Most believer THEORIES have not. Most doubter THEORIES have at least got credibility because of RESEARCH and EXPERIMENTS done to help prove their hypothesis. I have yet to see ANY believer do this, instead opting to say "I know it's Michael Jackson. I hear him everywhere in these tracks" and "I like these songs, so you can't change my opinion". That's just not what a debate is. While some doubters act similarly, they have proven themselves before with meticulous research and have gone to great lengths to reach the conclusions they have i.e. comparisons, proof of pasted vocals etc. I am SICK and TIRED of people trying to debate when others simply recite the old tired lines which contribute NOTHING to the debate except to confirm their belief in these tracks (AS IF WE ALREADY DIDN'T KNOW FROM THE FIRST BILLION TIMES YOU TOLD US!) and to divert from any actual questioning or analysis of these tracks. At least doubters spend time answering questions from believers to demonstrate their knowledge on the topic and WHY they believe what they believe.

This is how a debate goes:

"I believe it's not Michael because of the forced vibrato, the different timbre and the fact that - to me - the only parts that sound like Michael are those that have been pasted in. If you look at X:XX of "Cascio track", you will see example of XXXXXXX."

This is NOT how a debate goes:

"I believe it's Michael Jackson on all the tracks. I hear him throughout the songs. I like all of these, so you can't change my opinion. I hope they're all released because I love them so much."

And just to be objective, I know certain doubters also operate like that, however they have competently displayed their reasoning for these tracks in the past via the former template. It is dull and repetitive to say the same things over and over again. That's why it's easier to just say your opinion. However, it is NOT OK to use the latter template when you have displayed no reasoning for your belief and have therefore contributed NOTHING to the debate. Stating your opinion is fine when you have backed it up in the past and having that challenged again and again by people using ....
Click to expand...

I understand Jesta, its hard. :(
 
Jesta said:
... I'm done. Again.

Ciao, my few friends. I fear that if I stay here, I may explode and get banned anyway. People know how to contact me via email. For those that don't have my Twitter account (i.e. Bumper, Billy, Aniram) it's "KaisaJesta". If I show my face here within a month, I want you guys to scold me and tell me to get off, for - if circumstances are the same - this will probably happen again.

As I've said countless times in the past, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a discussion with people when all they do is state that they like the songs and they believe it's him. That's not CONTRIBUTING to the discussion, that's just imposing your beliefs on everyone else. Debating with this current set-up is a lost cause because - when we do get somewhere - it's immediately sidelined by those aforementioned comments. Debating is about throwing in IDEAS and THEORIES to see if they hold water. Most believer THEORIES have not. Most doubter THEORIES have at least got credibility because of RESEARCH and EXPERIMENTS done to help prove their hypothesis. I have yet to see ANY believer do this, instead opting to say "I know it's Michael Jackson. I hear him everywhere in these tracks" and "I like these songs, so you can't change my opinion". That's just not what a debate is. While some doubters act similarly, they have proven themselves before with meticulous research and have gone to great lengths to reach the conclusions they have i.e. comparisons, proof of pasted vocals etc. I am SICK and TIRED of people trying to debate when others simply recite the old tired lines which contribute NOTHING to the debate except to confirm their belief in these tracks (AS IF WE ALREADY DIDN'T KNOW FROM THE FIRST BILLION TIMES YOU TOLD US!) and to divert from any actual questioning or analysis of these tracks. At least doubters spend time answering questions from believers to demonstrate their knowledge on the topic and WHY they believe what they believe.

This is how a debate goes:

"I believe it's not Michael because of the forced vibrato, the different timbre and the fact that - to me - the only parts that sound like Michael are those that have been pasted in. If you look at X:XX of "Cascio track", you will see example of XXXXXXX."

This is NOT how a debate goes:

"I believe it's Michael Jackson on all the tracks. I hear him throughout the songs. I like all of these, so you can't change my opinion. I hope they're all released because I love them so much."

And just to be objective, I know certain doubters also operate like that, however they have competently displayed their reasoning for these tracks in the past via the former template. It is dull and repetitive to say the same things over and over again. That's why it's easier to just say your opinion. However, it is NOT OK to use the latter template when you have displayed no reasoning for your belief and have therefore contributed NOTHING to the debate. Stating your opinion is fine when you have backed it up in the past and having that challenged again and again by people using the latter template. Using the latter template religiously while showing no intention of EXPLAINING your belief as the doubters have in the past is not contributing to the debate. As I said, the doubters are guilty of this too, but they HAVE explained their beliefs and the reasoning behind it in clear and concise detail in the past. That's why I'm harsher with certain believers. In fact, I admire Ivy so much because she rarely opts to use the latter template. She always does a lot of research with posts and shows evidence. That is the sign of a debater (even though she claims to not debate the songs anymore) and someone who contributes to the discussion.

You want to come on here and praise these as Michael's best work!? That is both irrelevant to the debate at hand and a complete waste of everyone's time when you've already said it SEVERAL times! And I know that quality is somehow subjective, but comparative quality is less subjective when analysis is thrown in. Compare Fall in Love to Speechless, Breaking News to Tabloid Junkie, Monster to Privacy, Ready 2 Win to On the Line. When compared - with in-depth analysis of vocals, lyrics and composition - they pale in comparison. To me and I'm sure a lot of people, it is an INSULT to Michael if you claim these to be among Michael's best work, especially considering they needed additional WORDS to Michael it up and make the ad-libs and verses stronger. I can understand the demand for demos and unreleased songs, but Michael himself released mumbling demos and the songs leaked are almost always a compliment to Michael's singing ability (i.e. Slave To the Rhythm) and if they are mumbling demos, it provides a fascinating insight into his work process. These songs are not in the same league as those categories as they do not compliment his singing ability and it does not provide an insight as to how he worked. I was discussing with someone as to how Michael would be ASHAMED to see these released if they were him, and yet people do want them released. Do you care about Michael so little as to have his weakest recorded moments released just so you can have 12 songs with vocals that have had the community in an uproar? If the answer is yes, then I have no further business with you.

Hence, I'm done. This is no longer a debate. This is people interrupting debate to say how they adore these tracks and how that's the foundation for their belief in them. This is a joke. I know I'm going to be banned or my access will be limited with this post, but this "debate" cannot continue the way it has been. I know people are infuriated by the way it's been going lately, and yet no-one's said anything. I might as well do before I leave.

- Jesta
Click to expand...

Jesta, there is also another option: don't read the posts written by those repeating the same opinion and you'll feel better. Ultimately you can always ignore some members, but as far as I am concerned I don't see any reason to ignore anyone.

If anyway you see people repeating the same over and over again, crack a joke.

For example I don't know how many times people repeated that our mind was set on not to hear MJ on the Cascio tracks and I don't know how many times I had to justify myself and say that I hadn't known anything about the Cascios nor Roger Friedman prior to listening to those tracks, yet again lately IvoTD has told me that my mind was set on not to hear MJ, but Jason. In response after justifying myself again, I jokingly posted a song to him "I got my mind set on you" and he thanked me. So, that way the general tone becomes lighter and funnier, no need to explode or implode.

To ADKI when he said he was 20, I replied "in his opinion" because this thread apparently according to some is all about subjectivity and opinions as if there is no reality, just like the ALI G video shows NBA is an opinion and not a fact lol.

So Jesta, if you want to preserve your nerves focus on exteriorating your energy on positive things. The best way to do it is to crack a joke - laugh out loud. If people don't understand humor, then that's not your issue any morre.Those who will understand, at least you will make them smile, and smile is contagious, just like yawning. So if some don't understand your humor, you'll make them at least yawn. :D
 
@Jesta


“If a profound gulf separates my neighbor's belief from mine, there is always the golden bridge of tolerance”



:unsure::2cents:
 
Chamife;3574819 said:
@Jesta


“If a profound gulf separates my neighbor's belief from mine, there is always the golden bridge of tolerance”




:unsure::2cents:
Click to expand...


Beautifully said, and if I may, I'd use the word acceptance instead of tolerance. Accepting someone is giving and sharing love. Tolerating someone is more like testing your limits.
 
I think they should have named the album "Breaking News: Keep Your Head Up Monster (as a matter of fact)" :D
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Beautifully said, and if I may, I'd use the word acceptance instead of tolerance. Accepting someone is giving and sharing love. Tolerating someone is more like testing your limits.
Click to expand...
Of course you may.. I can accept that, although you're playing with my tolerancelevel..:D.

I understand what you are saying Bumper. Accepting/respecting the person for who he/she is and what he/she believes, without necessarily agreeing.
 
Chamife said:
Of course you may.. I can accept that, although you're playing with my tolerancelevel..:D.

I understand what you are saying Bumper. Accepting/respecting the person for who he/she is and what he/she believes, without necessarily agreeing.
Click to expand...

I can accept that tolerance of yours, or I can tolerate that acceptance of yours :D
 
Chamife said:
My tolerancy def ends with songs which aren't sung by Michael Jackson on a Michael Jackson album.

back on topic :D
Click to expand...

Mine too, and that's why Bumper has slyly persuaded me to return through his unseen wisdom... Now every time something happens that will annoy me, I will crack a joke :D

BTW, I don't have low tolerance for believers, me and KingMikeJ were friends long before he became a doubter and I never pressured him to switch sides. I have low tolerance for those that have no interest in contributing to the debate and instead boasting about how their love of these songs is the foundation for their belief without saying why they like the songs and where they hear Michael and how.
 
Jesta said:
Mine too, and that's why Bumper has slyly persuaded me to return through his unseen wisdom... Now every time something happens that will annoy me, I will crack a joke :D

BTW, I don't have low tolerance for believers, me and KingMikeJ were friends long before he became a doubter and I never pressured him to switch sides. I have low tolerance for those that have no interest in contributing to the debate and instead boasting about how their love of these songs is the foundation for their belief without saying why they like the songs and where they hear Michael and how.
Click to expand...

The wisdom that you are attributing to me, I call it the wisdom of idiots, cuz I am one of them :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top