Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

StellaJackson said:
On another matter. The female Spanish voice over at the beginning of Burn 2Nite. The female Spanish voice over at the beginning of Mamacita. Same person? Thoughts?
Click to expand...
For some reason I think it's Eddie's sister Marie Nicole on Burn Tonight (Burn 2 Nite).



On Jason's song Mamacita isn't the girl credited on his album ?
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
First of all I never said that Invincible is boring you might wanna go back and read those posts again.

And can you please show me where I called you a hater ?

I see
"He always got that kind of treatment he might be use to people hating on his art.

I'm glad this did not happen during his lifetime so he wouldn't have to see how many fans are not acepting/appreciating his work."
Click to expand...

YOU read the posts again...Lovey said ..'you don't have a problem with others calling Invincible boring....' ...
 
Arklove said:
YOU read the posts again...Lovey said ..'you don't have a problem with others calling Invincible boring....' ...
Click to expand...
This is what I said "Because he get's tired of some songs that makes him not a fan ? "

So yeah I read it.

I respect Invincible more than any other album.
 
Arklove said:
His work?? A posthumous release with the atrocious amount of copy/paste is not MJ's work...Once that kind of hack job is done on an artist's barely completed, hell, barely even started work, it becomes something else entirely...That's the issue you don't seem to be grasping, although our protests about this are found since the beginning and all throughout this thread. Even Hollywood Tonight, although no doubt Michael's voice, is someone else's work, ie: Teddy's Riley's rewritten bridge to make the song more 'positive' ...Teddy took liberties he shouldn't have...Michael had a great bridge written and it should have been used..
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Instead of bringing me joy, the Michael album reminds me of Michael's absence even more so. The album is very hard for me to listen to. I almost never touch it. I wish I could love Best of Joy more. But, it's too painful for me. Michael Jackson was a genius, a tremendously talented vocalist and a perfectionist. No one can replicate his magic. Hence, the posthumous release sounds lacking. When I listen to Michael, I look for more than a hook. Heck, there are many great hooks in today's music Justin Bieber's Baby and Lady Gaga's Edge of Glory have great hooks. The chorus of Baby sticks in my mind the whole day. I look for a connection with Michael emotionally when i listen to him. When I was 11 and barely spoke any English, I was able to understand BOW and HTW. Michael's gift is that he's able to connect with people all over the world with his VOICE. To top that gift, he was also a great lyricist. TDCAU is daring. TDCAU inspires me to read more about The Civil Right Movement. Speechless is poetic. Posthumous release can not be compared to Michael's legacy catalog. Posthumous release, by nature, is other's people work. They try to replicate Michael's magic. Some did okay. Some failed miserably. Saying the Cascio tracks among Michael's finest is like calling Free As A Bird John Lennon's best - something I am not able to comprehend. I accept the reality, but it doesn't mean I have to appreciate and like songs that don't speak to me.
 
Last edited:
Arklove said:
I have never, EVER heard a single Michael Jackson song that I didn't instantly recognize him..Ever...Now we have 12??? Come on.
Click to expand...
this.exactly. also, you cant have proof from something that never happened. So I wont be holding my breath. Even if Michael DID somehow personally tell me this was him I wouldn't believe him. Because its not. Like I cant even entertain the idea in a hypothetical situation, that's how impossible it is to me. At this point, absolutely nothing on earth could convince me that's Michael. And I have no problem admitting that.

And no, I don't WANT to believe these are Michael, as some have said. I wouldn't want to hear his voice on these tracks. I find these tracks to be completely lacking in any redeeming musical quality, period. Which is something I have never EVER thought about any of Michael's songs. This ain't him. Not from the music to the lyrics to the voice. Its like the opposite.
 
ADKIc3mAnX said:
-_-_____-_-
Click to expand...

Do you realize that none of your posts is about Michael's professionalism or perfectionism when talking about his songs? It all comes down to your personal liking of the Cascio songs without slightest questioning of his either vocals, lyrics or melody compared to all of his other songs.

With such arguments you can also say that Aqua has better songs than Michael Jackson, only because YOU like them (hypothetically speaking).

Where is the slightest critical opinion of yours other than "because I like it" or "because I don't like it"?

You like MJ's melodyned, autotuned, messed up vocals finished by other producers and supported by the vocals of amateurs such as James Porte singing nonsense lyrics, fine for you, it's your right to love it. But don't come around saying as a fact it's Michael's best work on that album, because it clearly isn't, as there are many things that lacks Michael's prints. Your posts sound as someone's who has just discovered Michael and has no clue about how hard he would prepare himself, how hard he had worked and what kind of lyrics he would sing.

Here, I have a "chef d'oeuvre" up to the Cascio standards you might like. At least no doubter doubts the vocals.

[youtube]KF8DAIi4YoA&feature=related[/youtube]

and a remix of it:

[youtube]ES3XSXQ0LSg&feature=related[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
Arklove said:
:doh:
Click to expand...

love is magical said:
IKR. :sigh:
Click to expand...

I second that :doh:
sigh.gif

.
 
ivy said:
Pentum, thank you for acknowledging the hacks and leaks are pre-mixes. Perhaps now Stella can accept it.
Click to expand...
I said IF someone has them, it's Eddie.

My point of view is that the "pre-mixes" are the ones Eddie submitted to Sony, so I still share the same thought as Stella.

The "raw-demos", I don't even know what this is or is suppose to be.
 
Pentum said:
I said IF someone has them, it's Eddie.

My point of view is that the "pre-mixes" are the ones Eddie submitted to Sony, so I still share the same thought as Stella.

The "raw-demos", I don't even know what this is or is suppose to be.
Click to expand...

No matter how we look at it, Eddie is the one that has all the initial recordings, no matter what state they're in.

But, reportedly Teddy spent on Breaking News not more than 5 hours. Which indicates that the song may have been pretty much not that different before he had started working on it.

And I still can't swallow, even less digest, what they told us when they streamed Breaking news: "we streamed the wrong mix!" What the hell, lol. Wrong mix probably not. Wrong vocals, hell yeah! Their second "version" of the mix wasn't any different vocally speaking.
 
Pentum said:
I said IF someone has them, it's Eddie.

My point of view is that the "pre-mixes" are the ones Eddie submitted to Sony, so I still share the same thought as Stella.

The "raw-demos", I don't even know what this is or is suppose to be.
Click to expand...

Nah.I don't think so.They already have the copy/pasted adlibs.
 
Pentum said:
I said IF someone has them, it's Eddie.

My point of view is that the "pre-mixes" are the ones Eddie submitted to Sony, so I still share the same thought as Stella.
Click to expand...

how do you know what Eddie submitted or not submitted? I understand the time puts the leaks pre - Teddy Riley but post Friedman mention / sales. Furthermore as far as I can see that the opinion is based on the songs from hacked server but how do you know that they aren't in another server or at a vault at Sony NY head quarters or at Branca's house for example?

The "raw-demos", I don't even know what this is or is suppose to be.
Click to expand...

let's say raw acapella or master recording. The vocal track with no production, mixing, mastering, added adlibs. "pre-mix" would be anything with any type of production, mix, mastering, pasted adlibs - but not final release. and then you would have the final release.

Why I can't understand this belief that Eddie gave Sony the pre-mixes is

1. Estate statement says that the tests are done on raw acapella's
2. Taryll said "I heard these "so-called" Michael Jackson songs raw and without the distraction of the well produced music by Teddy Riley. ". The leaks already has produced music and pasted adlibs.

So both sides acknowledge that there are "raw" versions of it and apparently sony/ estate has access to them as they can use them in tests and Taryll were able to listen to them.
 
He is a deputy sheriff... the raws vocals are safe at his house and in his throat.XDDThink about it... if you would be Mj or Jm you will want to have your own vocals with you.
 
Kapital77 said:
He is a deputy sheriff... the raws vocals are safe at his house.

XDD

Think about it... if you would be Mj or Jm you will want to have your own vocals with you.
Click to expand...

Not if I am credited as MJ though lol, I'd erase all evidence. Too risky. Eddie was right to erase all the evidence lol.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Not if I am credited as MJ though lol, I'd erase all evidence. Too risky. Eddie was right to erase all the evidence lol.
Click to expand...
Well Taryll said Eddie told him that he & "misterious" Porte erased everything because Mj ordered them to do it. Lol
 
Kapital77 said:
Well Taryll said Eddie told him that he & "misterious" Porte erased everything because Mj ordered them to do it. Lol
Click to expand...

And the rest was reportedly broken down.

How convenient.

In the meantime the fans can fight over what they hear and believe. How nice those Cascios are, really.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
And the rest was reportedly broken down.How convenient. In the meantime the fans can fight over what they hear and believe. How nice those Cascios are, really.
Click to expand...
Yeah...And they also had the incredible chance to work with Mj... and they keep in silence and waste a book without talking about music.They had a completed album, like Friedman said, but someone choosed to not create a complete album with them. They were the only producers who had 12 tracks of Mj with only 3 months of work. Amazing
 
Some believers are looking at audio forensics in awe and rely on what the Estate reported.

Here a little non-technical article to demistify audio forensic accuracy, not too difficult to read.

[h=1]Forensic Voice Identification[/h]By Karen Murdock, eHow Contributor



Forensic voice identification can reveal the identity of the speaker on a tape.
Whether a stalker leaves a threatening phone message or a terrorist disguises himself in a propaganda video, forensic voice identification can help identify the person behind the voice. It can also eliminate suspects or authenticate recordings. Bringing together the sciences of linguistics and acoustics, forensic audio examiners match recorded evidence to the voices of known speakers. However, their work also sparks legal and scientific controversy.Related Searches:​

  • [h=2]Features[/h]
    • Forensic voice identification relies on an instrument called the sound spectrograph. The sound spectrograph--available in both analog and digital versions--generates a visual representation of speech patterns known as a voiceprint, according to Richard Saferstein's 2004 textbook "Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science," 8th edition. The analog version converts voice frequencies into electrical signals and records them on paper using a stylus, notes Saferstein. The digital version works similarly, but without the stylus. Instead, voiceprints display on a computer screen.

    [h=2]Function[/h]
    • Identifying a speaker requires forensic audio examiners to conduct both an auditory and visual analysis. They listen to audio evidence to identify distinct or particularly clear portions of recordings, according to a 2009 article in "Signal Processing Magazine." Next, they meet with the suspect and have him speak the same words--with timing as close to the original recording as possible. This may take several attempts. The examiner creates spectrograms to visually compare the voiceprints and look for matches. For example, 20 matching sounds would result in a positive identification, while 15 matches would result in a "probable" identification, according to Saferstein.

    [h=2]History[/h]
    • Bell Telephone Laboratories conducted industry research that led to the creation of the sound spectrograph in 1941, says Saferstein. However, as Saferstein notes, it soon found its way into military intelligence when the U.S. military used it to identify German voices transmitted in enemy communications. Lawrence Kersta, an engineer for Bell South, later developed the concept that every human voice has its own voiceprint. Forensic applications followed.

    [h=2]Misconceptions[/h]
    • The word "voiceprint" conveys the impression that a spectrogram provides the same reliable identification as a DNA fingerprint. However, forensic voice identification lacks crucial data to make rock-solid conclusions. Even though no two speakers will produce identical voices, this does not mean that forensic audio examiners can identify speakers with certainty, explains "Signal Processing Magazine." Reliable identification must also demonstrate how typical a particular voiceprint is among the general population. Otherwise, a match means very little, since hundreds or thousands of other voices might also produce a similar voiceprint.

    [h=2]Considerations[/h]
    • "Signal Processing Magazine" indicates that courts may not admit forensic voice identification into evidence--largely due to the subjective nature of voiceprint analysis and the lack of quantitative studies demonstrating its reliability. Examiners may inadvertently allow bias to creep into results by "loosening" or "tightening" their criteria for positive identifications as a result of experiences with previous cases, cautions a 2005 paper by the Audio Forensics Center.

Sponsored Links

​
[h=2]References[/h]
[h=2]Resources[/h]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top